I wonder what a pirate can take away from an explorer ?
She's a beauty! (New ship revealed--Mandalay)
- Thread starter Shurimal
- Start date
salt
Valid point about staying within the medium ship class for comparison, but I was thinking of the possibly smaller landing footprint, if true. This would be of great importance to me. Also in regards to jump range since they made it such a strong point, DBX would be the nearest dedicated exploration ship.I would say that if you're putting a new Medium Exploration ship into the game then the benchmark should be the other medium exploration ship the Asp Explorer. Why would we want to choose this over the Asp. Obviously we need more details on this, but the cockpit alone is concerning. A long jump range and better manoeuvrability on atmospheric planets isn't going to cut it, as manageability means nothing if you can't see where you're aiming to land
I completely agree that the Anaconda is not the benchmark, and hearing that the thinking was this way saddened me quite a lot. Jump Range is probably the least important consideration if you're going to do an exploration trip.
Interesting...
It has taken them almost 10 years to realise that in order to continue developing a game indefinitely that it needs financing. This move should have happened around the time EDO released, so better late than no game, I suppose.
Until an 'attitude' perception can be proven... But I am fine with you having your own perception, it is like opinion, isn't it?
No worries, it wil meet the same counter argument, if not from me then by another enlightened soul.
would you prefer they had slid gracefully into bankruptcy instead?
The T-8 only has a single seat, which I though odd...
It does?
I never even checked. Anyways, what I use it for it doesn't matter, but for an explorer ship, having that extra seat for friends to ride along would be nice.
Let's not forget the ships given as CG rewards.
I believe I have T6, a Dolphin, an Orca and another iCourier to add to that list.
Armour is definitely a concern. Otherwise there is no room for mistakes or uncertainties with gravity. Alternatively raw shield strength, but hull is preferred.
That is so unfair!
I could have even more fun with a zero rebuy Orca and a bunch of Imperial passengers...
I prefer shield, then hull. Reason being that shield regenerates for free, but to repair hull you either need limpets (costs added mass and synth materials) or to visit a carrier (costs a detour).
Also, if the hull is thin even after engineering it, one class 1 HRP engineered to heavy duty, deep plating will add, depending on ship, 30% to 100% hull strength for just 1.4 extra tons. Most of my travel ships have one, the only exception is my exobiology Viper IV which is a tank as-is
Are FDev saying traders are antisocial?It does?
Ha! No I mean to jump easier across the bubble to reach far away trading routes
Then there's getting the stuff to a black market that's paying a decent amount for it.Ha! No I mean to jump easier across the bubble to reach far away trading routes
This is true of course, I expressed it badly. What I meant was it shouldn't be an either-or thing, ideally you should have both. But a paper ship out of the box doesn't make a robust explorer to begin with. Of course you can, but it's always a compromise.I prefer shield, then hull. Reason being that shield regenerates for free, but to repair hull you either need limpets (costs added mass and synth materials) or to visit a carrier (costs a detour).
Also, if the hull is thin even after engineering it, one class 1 HRP engineered to heavy duty, deep plating will add, depending on ship, 30% to 100% hull strength for just 1.4 extra tons. Most of my travel ships have one, the only exception is my exobiology Viper IV which is a tank as-is
If it is a single seater, the cockpit may be copied from the Mamba, but much smaller, which would change the scale of the ship a little.
After all, explorers tend to go alone, don't they?
So, folding wing design then?
Retractable or foldable wings will be a thing here.
Although it would be a laugh if FDev just said they were just going to have it noclip through the docking bay.
Does anyone else just think this when reading the name?
EDIT: Yes, I know it's Spanish "andale!", but I can't help but read "Mandalay" in the voice
EDIT: Yes, I know it's Spanish "andale!", but I can't help but read "Mandalay" in the voice
Last edited:
I'm not convinced by its looks.
It looks very unspaceshippy (it's a real term!) and too much like a flying bird from the OP image, and yet from the underside it's much more a collection of hard-edge boxes, so overall I'm not yet feeling that it's coherent. Compare it with the Eagle.
It will also interesting to see what field of view the slightly sunk-beneath-shoulders cockpit affords you, especially while landing. I still rate the T6 for landing-approach visibility and situational awareness when touching down.
Early days I know, so.... it's back to the T8 for me.
What I find of more interest is the comment that it has improved atmospheric flight characteristics..... making me wonder what else is up FDev's sleeves....
...squee!?
It looks very unspaceshippy (it's a real term!) and too much like a flying bird from the OP image, and yet from the underside it's much more a collection of hard-edge boxes, so overall I'm not yet feeling that it's coherent. Compare it with the Eagle.
It will also interesting to see what field of view the slightly sunk-beneath-shoulders cockpit affords you, especially while landing. I still rate the T6 for landing-approach visibility and situational awareness when touching down.
Early days I know, so.... it's back to the T8 for me.
What I find of more interest is the comment that it has improved atmospheric flight characteristics..... making me wonder what else is up FDev's sleeves....
...squee!?