[DW3] Distant Worlds 3 Website & Roster Signups

Lysander666

Lysander666
Freyar said:
I got curious as to what I could take Rawrunning this expedition while meeting jump requirements so I spent a lunch doing the following:
Rawrunner STOCK Challenge

  • S: no Synthesis (materials/engineering)
  • T: no Thargoid or Guardian modules
  • O: no Optimisation tools (Spansh, etc.)
  • C: no Changing components after departure
  • K: no neutron star Kickstarts

Requirements
----
Min 33.5Ly
Requires 1 Fuel Scoop (Tests completed w/Best possible scoop)
----
Disclaimer
Yes, you're probably better at theorycrafting than I am, and this list was compiled during a 1-hour lunch as I was eating a chicken pot pie. Mmm.. pie.

This is no frills, no extras. Only optional is a fuel scoop. Have scoop, will travel. Everything else is paid with ZaonceCard.
View attachment 434580
----

Adder: Possible (34.03)
Alliance Challenger: Not Possible (26.52)
Alliance Chieftan: Not Possible (29.51)
Alliance Crusader: Not Possible (23.81)
Anaconda: Possible (42.54)
Asp Explorer: Possible (41.63)
Asp Scout: Possible (36.11)
Beluga Liner: Not Possible (32.41)
Cobra MK III: Not Possible (31.42)
Cobra MK IV: Not Possible (27.35)
Cobra MK V: Possible (36.77)
Corsair: Possible (41.09)
Diamondback Explorer: Possible (45.56)
Diamondback Scout: Not Possible (33.33)
Dolphin: Possible (38.54)
Eagle: Not Possible (27.22)
Federal Assault Ship: Not Possible (25.14)
Federal Corvette: Not Possible (22.65)
Federal Dropship: Not Possible (21.27)
Federal Gunship: Not Possible (21.14)
Fer-de-Lance: Not Possible (22.32)
Hauler: Possible (40.70)
Imperial Clipper: Not Possible (29.26)
Imperial Courier: Possible (35.79)
Imperial Cutter: Not Possible (28.82)
Imperial Eagle: Not Possible (27.56)
Keelback: Not Possible (31.64)
Krait MK II: Possible (35.71)
Krait Phantom: Possible (41.37)
Mamba: Not Possible (22.73)
Mandalay: Possible (49.20)
Orca: Possible (39.14)
Python: Not Possible (32.17)
Python MKII: Not Possible (26.72)
Sidewinder: Not Possible (27.15)
Type-6 Transporter: Possible (36.23)
Type-7 Transporter: Possible (34.93)
Type-8 Transporter: Not Possible (30.78)
Type-9 Heavy: Not Possible (25.45)
Type-10 Defender: Not Possible (27.82)
]Viper: Not Possible (26.67)
Viper MK IV: Not Possible (30.10)
Vulture: Not Possible (24.67)
Click to expand...

This is insanely impressive work!! Some of these are much larger that I would have thought!

What were your builds for, say, the DBX and the Mandalay? And the AspX?

I've never had a chicken pot pie though, sadz :(

EDIT: looking up chicken pot pie recipes, brb
 

Freyar

Freyar
Lysander666 said:
This is insanely impressive work!! Some of these are much larger that I would have thought!

What were your builds for, say, the DBX and the Mandalay? And the AspX?

I've never had a chicken pot pie though, sadz :(

EDIT: looking up chicken pot pie recipes, brb
Click to expand...
Quite literally, as undersized as possible on absolutely everything while still managing to fit the largest A-rated fuel scoop.
Only one ship had to bump up it's power generator to accommodate. So those numbers are the absolute maximum my flippant bout of [REALLY INTENSE FOCUS] found. No doubt there are small tweaks, but I can say taking a Krait MK II is going to be a bit boring as there's no planetary hangar. Hell, there's not even a surface scanner accounted for in that list.

Remember that Fuel Scoops have no tonnage, just power requirements.
 

Lysander666

Lysander666
Freyar said:
Quite literally, as undersized as possible on absolutely everything while still managing to fit the largest A-rated fuel scoop.
Only one ship had to bump up it's power generator to accommodate. So those numbers are the absolute maximum my flippant bout of [REALLY INTENSE FOCUS] found. No doubt there are small tweaks, but I can say taking a Krait MK II is going to be a bit boring as there's no planetary hangar. Hell, there's not even a surface scanner accounted for in that list.

Remember that Fuel Scoops have no tonnage, just power requirements.
Click to expand...

Ah I see now, and we're looking at Max and scaling the fuel tank down as small as possible too. These are VERY interesting numbers, and some of these are far more or far less than I would have expected.

I mean, that is some extreme Rawrunning there if someone were to fly an e.g, DBX with no shields and a 2C fuel tank!

I mean, you COULD use a fuel scoop as you point out, and an AMFU, since the AMFU would give no weight. So there is some protection there.

What is interesting about this is that you get Max 49 ly out of the Mandalay! Sure, you get a 24T LOSS of fuel there if going with 3C, but you get 4 extra ly jump range.

It's very interesting theoretical stuff here.
 

Freyar

Freyar
Fully fueled, naturally it's an issue on the largest jump in the itinerary. I didn't scale down the tanks in my evaluation since I was looking at theoretical maximums. Maybe I ought to and focused on laden instead. Either way, it at least culls ships that have no chance.
 

Lysander666

Lysander666
Freyar said:
Fully fueled, naturally it's an issue on the largest jump in the itinerary. I didn't scale down the tanks in my evaluation since I was looking at theoretical maximums. Maybe I ought to and focused on laden instead. Either way, it at least culls ships that have no chance.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, that would be interesting, if you were able to. And yes, it totally culls the ships which are not able to make the minimum for DW3.

What's interesting is that e.g. 3D shields are so light, 2T, and only shave off like 0.3 ly that it's really difficult to argue for leaving them out. However, if one were counting the decimals and going for an extreme Rawrunning build, then I imagine it would be done.
 

Freyar

Freyar
If I don't have redundant AMFUs and a RLC, I'm not likely to go out in the black without a shield. I typically would set them up with hi-cap, but that's not relevant for Rawrunning.
 

Freyar

Freyar
Lysander666 said:
Oh yes, that would be interesting, if you were able to. And yes, it totally culls the ships which are not able to make the minimum for DW3.

What's interesting is that e.g. 3D shields are so light, 2T, and only shave off like 0.3 ly that it's really difficult to argue for leaving them out. However, if one were counting the decimals and going for an extreme Rawrunning build, then I imagine it would be done.
Click to expand...
I'll probably redo the theorycrafting again, focusing on laden jump ranges (or add that to existing data) after work.
 

Lysander666

Lysander666
Freyar said:
I'll probably redo the theorycrafting again, focusing on laden jump ranges (or add that to existing data) after work.
Click to expand...

Yes, that would be fascinating! And I totally concur about not leaving out the shields, esp when the jump range difference is so small.

But someone may go without them if they wanted to push things to the max. I wouldn't myself!
 

Gnauty

Gnauty
Major Klutz said:
Is there a role for Documentarian or "Press"?
In past expeditions I've taken screenshots and video at waypoint meetups to share online. I'll probably end up doing that again.
www.youtube.com

Major Klutz

My Gaming Videos
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com
Click to expand...
Yes, I'll be editing a semi-weekly newsletter featuring community-sourced images and stories from the expedition. Details to follow in FleetComm Discord later this Summer.
 

DjVortex

DjVortex
Qohen Leth said:
This role will be displayed on your Roster entry. You can input a secondary and a tertiary role as well. It is thus highly recommended to read about the projects and events before signing up.
Click to expand...
I tried to find this information on the website, but couldn't find it. As in, what does each role entail and describe, and how do I choose one or more roles?
 

Major Klutz

Major Klutz
Freyar said:
If I don't have redundant AMFUs and a RLC, I'm not likely to go out in the black without a shield. I typically would set them up with hi-cap, but that's not relevant for Rawrunning.
Click to expand...
I've spent A LOT of time in the black and I have carried redundant AFMUs, but I've concluded that it's not really necessary.
In this case for DW3, since we'll have carriers nearby, you probably won't need an AFMU or RLC at all.

I always run with shields on too, even though I know they are just wasting power and heat. They don't offer much if any protection from hard landings and zero protection for exclusion zone drops. Still, it's good to have them when you return to the bubble. I get used to not seeing any NPC pirates when I'm out in the black so they usually catch me by surprise when I get close to the bubble.

As for the AFMU, Heat damage is rare and when it does happen you lose a few percentage points on your AFMU but it's very unlikely that your AFMU will accumulate enough damage over the trip that it will stop working reliably.
I know some people have OCD and can't stand to have a module sitting at 98% but your power plant can't be repaired either so you'll have at least one module accumulating damage anyway. I don't repair life support either. I'm ok with them being at 98 or 96% until I return to a station.
On DW2 and BPE I never got below 96% on any modules.

I usually carry an RLC too but again hull damage is rare and almost always minor. Still hard landings on high gravity planets and exclusion zone drops can accumulate but we'll have carriers nearby.
 

Lysander666

Lysander666
Major Klutz said:
I've spent A LOT of time in the black and I have carried redundant AFMUs, but I've concluded that it's not really necessary.
In this case for DW3, since we'll have carriers nearby, you probably won't need an AFMU or RLC at all.

I always run with shields on too, even though I know they are just wasting power and heat. They don't offer much if any protection from hard landings and zero protection for exclusion zone drops. Still, it's good to have them when you return to the bubble. I get used to not seeing any NPC pirates when I'm out in the black so they usually catch me by surprise when I get close to the bubble.

As for the AFMU, Heat damage is rare and when it does happen you lose a few percentage points on your AFMU but it's very unlikely that your AFMU will accumulate enough damage over the trip that it will stop working reliably.
I know some people have OCD and can't stand to have a module sitting at 98% but your power plant can't be repaired either so you'll have at least one module accumulating damage anyway. I don't repair life support either. I'm ok with them being at 98 or 96% until I return to a station.
On DW2 and BPE I never got below 96% on any modules.

I usually carry an RLC too but again hull damage is rare and almost always minor. Still hard landings on high gravity planets and exclusion zone drops can accumulate but we'll have carriers nearby.
Click to expand...

I think this is a really interesting topic and just today I was wondering about how much use shields actually were in exploration. A lot of it does come down to pilot type, but if you are a careful flyer I think their usage can be largely academic.

I used to have "AFMU OCD" * and everything [bar power plant] had to be at 100%, but now I figure that as long as said modules are above, e.g. 85%, it's fine. I did fly thousands of light years without an AFMU and never noticed.

Some people do treat their ships like dodgems and they are more likely to need AFMUs and shields - especially if they like canyon running - but for me an AFMU is a luxury, a shield may be as well in the long run.

That said, the weight that shields bring to the table can be so small as to be almost trace. The only time I would remove them would be if I were trying an extreme Rawrunning build and trying to get the highest jump range even to the second decimal place.

I do hear that people 'bump into each other' a lot in these DW events, so there's another argument for shields, and potentially an AFMU.

*I do have OCD myself so I feel it's OK to make this reference!
 

Edelgard von Rhein

E
If you are doing a lot of neutron boosting, then AFMUs are essential. If not, then the main causes of module damage when exploring are misjudging the dropout when doing a planetary landing (very small moons need a bit more care) and mishaps/tiredness when fuel scooping or boosting on high-g worlds with high surface temperatures. Tiredness is the big killer out in the black but some ships make it easier to recover from an error of judgment - the AspX is quite drifty with weak thrusters and the DBX a little too. Shields protect you from minor errors of judgment, can give you a chance of surviving greater ones but mostly just stop you losing 1% hull each time you try to land and there's a pebble there.
I think we will have the Hull Seals with us if you need a ship with RLCs when away from the carrier.
 

Major Klutz

Major Klutz
DjVortex said:
Yes, that's exactly where it says "It is thus highly recommended to read about the projects and events before signing up."
Click to expand...
Ahh, but the planned project and events have not been published yet. Probably because they are still planning them.
You can change your selected roles any time.
 
Last edited:

Major Klutz

Major Klutz
Lysander666 said:
I do hear that people 'bump into each other' a lot in these DW events, so there's another argument for shields, and potentially an AFMU.

*I do have OCD myself so I feel it's OK to make this reference!
Click to expand...
Ahh yes, I have witnessed plenty of "horseplay" during expedition meetups and yeah, some players just don't care much about bumping into things.
Example SWE3 - Shenanigans
Example SWE3 Launch
Example DW2 Launch
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom