This chart is a simple list of vessels that contains a bunch of calculated numbers. The goal is to produce just two sets of numbers that can be used to quickly and easily see what vessels are best at completing company contracts efficiently. They also happen to correlate much more loosely to those vessels that can most easily make a profit.

The first set of numbers are the performance ratings. In every case a higher number is better. Those that seem the most out of place to their nearest peers are either exceptional performers or exceptionally poor.

The second number is the range ratings. Once again higher is better. For reference a range rating of 550 is enough to get from anywhere to anywhere non-stop at full speed. 1000 is enough to go all the way around the world on the equator ignoring geography.

The upgraded values assume both engines and hull are fully upgraded.

The chart more or less speaks for itself however if you want details on how everything is calculated then the last section in this guide is for you. If you don't care about the details you can just skip it.

The Notes section contains information on why select ships underperform.

Light Carrier F: Scores poorly primarily because it has a low tonnage limit. (3500) For heavy cargos it doesn't do much better than Speed Veessel 6-50 (3000) and is much worse than Medium Feeder 100/15. (4500) It doesn't help that the ship is the slowest of the three and has the least range. While the ship is viable, I don't recomend it.

CV Slow, Bulky 120/20: These ships are the least maneuverable ships in the game and should be avoided if you like to manually dock.

High-Speed MX: Performs poorly due to fuel consumption. Basically it makes less money in the same trip. It is still quite viable though so if you don't care about money it works well.

Low Range 8/2: Performs poorly due to slow speed and poor tonnage. Simply put, it can't keep up throughput on company contracts. If you are not using it for company contracts its profitability is just fine.

HFC Slow: Has the worst fuel rating per TUE in the game by a large amount. It has the second worst absolute fuel rating after the largest ULCV. The fuel rating is so out of place that I think it is a typo the devs just didn't fix. In addition to that it is slow and has a poor tonnage rating. This ship is not worth the money at easy level and not viable at hard. Avoid it like the plague.

Small-Scale Slow D: Rates a low score only due to speed limiting its throughput. The ship does have the best tonnage rating in its class so it is just fine for smaller company contracts and regular contracts.

ULCV's: Suck. The smaller two (UL Vessel AVG, S-Scale Speed) are the only ones worth buying. The other two are only good for ego trophies. Most of the time I just get more New Panamax's.

This section is all about the nuts and bolts of how the numbers are derrived and can be skipped if you don't care.

Performance Rating.

Simply put the performance number takes into account the capacity, speed, tonnage and fuel consumption of the vessel.

Formula: (( TEU * Speed * ( Tonnage / TEU )) / Fuel Consumption ) / 100

Explanation:

First we multiply the capacity of the vessel by its speed. This gives us a number that scales nicely with the overall throughput of the vessel. If you have half the capacity but twice the speed you get the same number.

Second we multiply that result with the tonnage per TEU capacity of the vessil. The higher this number, the heavier the cargos the vessel can handle. This results in a better overall score.

Third we devide the product of the previous two steps by its fuel consumption. This number is the reported number for non-upgraded vessels and a calculated number from upgraded vessels. Both engine upgrades and hull upgrades improve this number.

Finally we devide by 100 in order to produce smaller easier numbers.

I wasn't going to include fuel consumption in this calculation at first but some of the ships have severely handicaped numbers and really can't compete. (HFC Slow!)

Range Rating.

Formula: Endurance * Speed

Explanation:

Well the formula is quite simple and it gives a number that exactly correlates to relative range. Multiply this number by 24 and get the real world range in nautical miles.

The endurace part of the formula is NOT the reported endurance. When entering the data into my spread sheet I find that the reported numbers seem to be rounded down from actual performance. The hidden assumption is that the reported fuel ussage is correct. If this assumption is false it shouldn't significantly alter the results.