Might be, yeah, but I don't see shape mattering much in space, so (at first glance at least, and barring a revolution) all that really leaves is materials/methodology used in construction (considering we can swap major internals like power and engines), which is exactly the sort of thing that a Mk II would address, right?
Suggestion: Combat Python
- Thread starter kafolarbear
- Start date
Might be, yeah, but I don't see shape mattering much in space, so (at first glance at least, and barring a revolution) all that really leaves is materials/methodology used in construction (considering we can swap major internals like power and engines), which is exactly the sort of thing that a Mk II would address, right?
A Mk II Python would only really make sense if it improved upon the original in every relevant way rather than producing a specialist version though. I personally think the Python is in a fairly good place (outside of PvP but that's a clusterfk at the moment) and a super combat version would be too close in functionality and price to the Anaconda to make sense.
Leave the Python be, but award it serving for a long time
as a multipurpose ship with additional modability.
Old and trusty ships can install lots of available modules,
shiny new ones not so much.
as a multipurpose ship with additional modability.
Old and trusty ships can install lots of available modules,
shiny new ones not so much.
Well as I was suggesting, in the 60-90 million price range, I believe that is a far cry from the 140 million or so Anaconda as far as price goes.
Hahaha, that is the best way to think of it, I guess.
-CMSR Kbear
![[DOOK] Droogie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/124/124078.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
The Clipper is a pretty nasty tank. Fully outfitted, it has better shields (though still meh) and higher armor than the FAS. Amazing pitch rate, too. Hard point placement makes pvp difficult, but I don't do that
Voted no.
Idea may be valid, it may be perfect but it's a big no from me for 1 reason which I've explained in many places many times before so I'll try to sum it up quickly:
Variants & balance changes are ok but FD have dug a pit opening discussion on all ships for variants. Instead of variants why not an entirely new ship, let's get away from the wedge designs or the same ship with a spoiler. Were in sci-fi and lets be fair some of the ships frontier have produced are awesome (capital ships are epic). Let's not stifle the creativity and developer time by asking for X ship Mk Y variant when the same specifications (internals etc) could be put on a whole new ship.
Edit: Had a closer look. From what I read give or take you are asking for an FDL with a few more weapons in a Python skin. <- I may be wrong but thats how it sounds from the OP. (No I didn't read the 5 pages, sadly I haven't got the time).
Idea may be valid, it may be perfect but it's a big no from me for 1 reason which I've explained in many places many times before so I'll try to sum it up quickly:
Variants & balance changes are ok but FD have dug a pit opening discussion on all ships for variants. Instead of variants why not an entirely new ship, let's get away from the wedge designs or the same ship with a spoiler. Were in sci-fi and lets be fair some of the ships frontier have produced are awesome (capital ships are epic). Let's not stifle the creativity and developer time by asking for X ship Mk Y variant when the same specifications (internals etc) could be put on a whole new ship.
Edit: Had a closer look. From what I read give or take you are asking for an FDL with a few more weapons in a Python skin. <- I may be wrong but thats how it sounds from the OP. (No I didn't read the 5 pages, sadly I haven't got the time).
Last edited:
Why not both? Seeing as we're talking hypotheticals, there's plenty of theoretical room for both new ships and updated variants of classic models.
In terms of the real world, it's not like FD is going to look at this poll and say "scratch that new ship design and put a spoiler on the Python, the people have spoken!". New designs will be coming, I'm sure, and it's unlikely variant models really hamper that process much (given proper management and priorities and all); variants are just an easy way to increase diversity more quickly that it would otherwise, they don't take the place of a non-variant.
You are kinda right. MMO's lifeblood is variety, I get that. Let me clarify a bit by saying I'm not against variants full stop although I feel that currently there's enough choice and for my money I'd vote for the 1 unique looking ship instead of (lets say) 3 variants.
If the developer time is limited (as it almost definitely is) then my money would go to -> Make something iconic and awe inspiring since currently we have a fair amount to be working with.
I mean lets look at 1.5, we had the Viper IV, the Asp Scout, the Keelback, the Cobra IV and the Cutter/Corvette.
Yes the Cutter/Corvette are the big ones but they are the ones that made waves and got positive attention. Ok the others stats did come up a little lackluster but I hope you can see what I'm driving at.
Also looking at the list thats 4 variants, add in the Imp Eagle and it means every 6th ship is a currently a variant.
I'm not counting the 3 Fed ships or the DBE/DBS since they are significantly different designs akin to the T6/T7/T9. <- I try to be fair
Arguably Keelback fits in but it's too much like a T6 imho.
Last edited:
That makes sense. Although I'd hope that at this point a new ship isn't so much a matter of needing a lot of a developer's time as it is art assets and putting stats into a database.
As a sort-of-developer myself (more consulting now), I default to zero understanding of an artist's process, and assume that to make a variant ship, they're just cutting and pasting spoilers and nacelles, then getting an intern to add a new database entry.
That makes sense. Although I'd hope that at this point a new ship isn't so much a matter of needing a lot of a developer's time as it is art assets and putting stats into a database.
As a sort-of-developer myself (more consulting now), I default to zero understanding of an artist's process, and assume that to make a variant ship, they're just cutting and pasting spoilers and nacelles, then getting an intern to add a new database entry.
That would explain the new Viper and Cobra
Yea I can understand why you think what you think. I respect that you would prefer a new ship and that's fine. What I want to clarify is that I was trying to build i slightly more maneuverable Python with slightly more weapons, shields, armor and utility points with a trade off of less internal space speed and jump range. I am not trying to make some OP death machine that beats the FDL every step of the way, the FDL would still have manueverbility, speed and arguable weapon advantage to the Python.
-CMDR Kbear
Hmm, new huge weapons would change things a little but let's look at the suggested changes one by one:
Firepower:
FDL - 4M, 1H. 6U
Python - 2M, 3L. 4U
Add in 2 more mediums and 2 more utility as suggested and it looks like this:
FDL - 4M, 1H. 6U
Python - 4M, 3L. 6U
Outcome: I'd trade 1 huge for 3 large any day of the week. Firepower it would absolutely kick the FDL's butt especially with a class 7 powerplant and distributor (both better than the FDL's 5 and 6 respectively).
Shields:
Since in your version they'd have the same utility I'm looking at pure shield value based on best shield available:
FDL - 5A, 468Mj
Python - 6A shields, 397Mj
Outcome: FDL wins by a decent amount especially when boosted 220% with 6 utilities (1,029 vs 872)
Armour:
Stock armour
FDL - 405
Python - 468
Outcome - Python wins, similar to shield value difference pre boosters.
Speed:
Lightest fit that allows boost:
http://coriolis.io/outfit/fer_de_lance/02D5A2D4D5D4D1C----------------.AwRhrSotho==.Aw18aQ==
http://coriolis.io/outfit/python/02A6A2D4D6D6D1C------------------.AwRj49RZckg=.Aw18eQ==
FDL - 302/406
Python - 267/349
Outcome: FDL wins significantly, proposed changes will increase the gap.
Overall summary of proposed ideas
Weapons are very OP on Pythons side.
A shield buff even by 30-40Mj will level the defence playing-field although it must be said most FDL users go for silent running builds these days.
Armour is already better than FDL, further buff widens gap making Python unquestionably better in defence.
Speed makes Python worse although given the current situation is so unbalanced a further drop shouldn't change anything.
Loss of internals does hurt but the FDL is already 70T vs 292T so even dropping 200T off the Pythons internal space and it still has the edge.
I think if you cut the weapon changes entirely it may be balanced. Even up the defence and manouvrability a bit and knock off the jump range.
Overall imo speed and jump range are the least important things in a fight so trying to argue them as an offset against the rest doesn't cut it for me personally. Internals does cut it but the FDL already suffers a lot compared with the Python. Speed is only needed to run and if you have the weapons and defence you suggest then you should not ever need to run.
Spent too much time here (work tomorrow
) and I feel like I've been a bit too negative. I hate knocking ideas without proposing alternatives but I honestly don't have the time to go into detail about the mid-high end ship I feel we need because you are 100% right there is a gap between the Python/FDL level and the Conda/Corvette/Cutter level that needs to be filled Edit: I also feel like a big part of the problem was the FDL's powerplant buff, allowed the FDL to run top shields, thrusters and weapons without issue whereas before it had a deficiency somewhere that Python pilots could exploit. Perhaps the problem isn't in the Python but in it's opposition.
Last edited:
Nice summary, Alex. (I can't rep you more, it seems)
I think when requesting weapons changes, people are far too quick to underestimate the strength of multiple smaller hardpoints over single larger ones. If a theoretical Mk II "combat" Python gained two medium hardpoints, it would probably have to lose a large, which would still be a net gain in firepower. The thing already hits like a dump truck, it doesn't need to hit harder.
I think when requesting weapons changes, people are far too quick to underestimate the strength of multiple smaller hardpoints over single larger ones. If a theoretical Mk II "combat" Python gained two medium hardpoints, it would probably have to lose a large, which would still be a net gain in firepower. The thing already hits like a dump truck, it doesn't need to hit harder.
Then I am happy to inform you that it's not only weapons.I am not confident that enineers can fix the problem, they are only there to modify weapons, right? However, if I can modify modules or the ship itself, I will be more than satisfied.
CMDR Kbear
Unless I have misunderstood something, everything internal can be tweaked by the Engineers.
How and how much, I don't know, of course.
But I think it will be pretty good.
I love the look of the Python, so as long as the Combat Python variant retained a similar look then it would be great for me. I am pretty flexible on what the internals and other stats of the ship could be.
Obviously the Combat Python does not need to haul 292 Tons of stuff and it does not really need 9 internal slots, so all that hauling capability can be redirected towards the things that make it a better combat ship.
Hmm, new huge weapons would change things a little but let's look at the suggested changes one by one:
Firepower:
FDL - 4M, 1H. 6U
Python - 2M, 3L. 4U
Add in 2 more mediums and 2 more utility as suggested and it looks like this:
FDL - 4M, 1H. 6U
Python - 4M, 3L. 6U
Outcome: I'd trade 1 huge for 3 large any day of the week. Firepower it would absolutely kick the FDL's butt especially with a class 7 powerplant and distributor (both better than the FDL's 5 and 6 respectively).
Shields:
Since in your version they'd have the same utility I'm looking at pure shield value based on best shield available:
FDL - 5A, 468Mj
Python - 6A shields, 397Mj
Outcome: FDL wins by a decent amount especially when boosted 220% with 6 utilities (1,029 vs 872)
Armour:
Stock armour
FDL - 405
Python - 468
Outcome - Python wins, similar to shield value difference pre boosters.
Speed:
Lightest fit that allows boost:
http://coriolis.io/outfit/fer_de_lance/02D5A2D4D5D4D1C----------------.AwRhrSotho==.Aw18aQ==
http://coriolis.io/outfit/python/02A6A2D4D6D6D1C------------------.AwRj49RZckg=.Aw18eQ==
FDL - 302/406
Python - 267/349
Outcome: FDL wins significantly, proposed changes will increase the gap.
Overall summary of proposed ideas
Weapons are very OP on Pythons side.
A shield buff even by 30-40Mj will level the defence playing-field although it must be said most FDL users go for silent running builds these days.
Armour is already better than FDL, further buff widens gap making Python unquestionably better in defence.
Speed makes Python worse although given the current situation is so unbalanced a further drop shouldn't change anything.
Loss of internals does hurt but the FDL is already 70T vs 292T so even dropping 200T off the Pythons internal space and it still has the edge.
I think if you cut the weapon changes entirely it may be balanced. Even up the defence and manouvrability a bit and knock off the jump range.
Overall imo speed and jump range are the least important things in a fight so trying to argue them as an offset against the rest doesn't cut it for me personally. Internals does cut it but the FDL already suffers a lot compared with the Python. Speed is only needed to run and if you have the weapons and defence you suggest then you should not ever need to run.
Spent too much time here (work tomorrow
Edit: I also feel like a big part of the problem was the FDL's powerplant buff, allowed the FDL to run top shields, thrusters and weapons without issue whereas before it had a deficiency somewhere that Python pilots could exploit. Perhaps the problem isn't in the Python but in it's opposition.
Excelent analysis! I genuinely appreciate it and apologize for making you spend so much time doing it
. What I proposed was just off the top of my head initially, so it was bound to be a bit unbalanced. What if instead of 2x s2, 2x s1 were added? I feel that the maneuverability and speed of the Python's competitors would really keep my proposed changes still quite balanced, if the changes I proposed were needed a bit. Is that a correct assumption in your opinion?-CMDR Kbear
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Then I am happy to inform you that it's not only weapons.
Unless I have misunderstood something, everything internal can be tweaked by the Engineers.
How and how much, I don't know, of course.
But I think it will be pretty good.
Awesome! Still want that combat Python, though!
The FDL has already sacrificed everything that it could for combat ability - Jump range, fuel tank size, internals class size, number of internals.
Forcing it to choose between weapons, shields, and thrusters because of an undersized PP would be downright criminal as far as design decisions go.
If an FDL has to be saddled with an undersized PP then the FAS should be nerfed and forced to use a Class 5 PP as well. Any reason that you can give for trying to force the FDL to use a class 5 PP would be twice as relevant for the FAS.
Let's Rock!Awesome! Still want that combat Python, though!
True although imho this build shouldn't be possible:
http://coriolis.io/outfit/fer_de_la...hihih0404040200004a2b2b2725.AwRj4yrI.Aw18aQ==
I mean look at it, 5A shields with boosters and enough hull to go silent running afterwards. Full rails + plasma and A grade thrusters and distributor. The FSD doesn't even need to turn off!
And it still hits just under 400m/s with boost!
For it's price it's very very OP. Although you are correct the FDL buff did come as a result of the FAS. I guess there's a bit of a rabbit burrow here where buffing/nerfing one ship leads to a chain reaction. Maybe balance as a whole needs another pass. Possibly Engineers will balance it but my fear is the above FDL build with a huge beam laser or other hit scan to go with it's rails!
Excelent analysis! I genuinely appreciate it and apologize for making you spend so much time doing it
-CMDR Kbear
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Awesome! Still want that combat Python, though!
Yeah, putting 2 smalls in may just about make it but manoeuvrability is a pretty odd subject since the numbers in ED don't always show the true story. Either way I've slept on it and had a think about it and I do believe the Python is a touch underpowered PvP but then again it is a multi-purpose. I thought about how now the Anaconda turns better than the Python...
If I had to re-balance it I'd leave everything as it is but give it slightly better turn rates, not as good as pre-nerf but better than current. This would allow it to have a better firepower and internals (more tanky) but still not as agile or fast as the FDL. With a bit of backwards/FA-off it should then be able to give an FDL/FAS a decent battle.
Have thought of this just yesterday.