Ships humble question : would you change it?

[Godsailsaqueen]

Spoiler alert : massive train of thought here.
_________________________________________

I must reckon I love the feel of the asp scout. It has become my underdog of choice. I love the cockpit view and the sheer maneuverability of it, it makes for a good visual experience. But if I could throw a slice of common sense above it all...
I don't think it is a "logical" ship, and I don't know what the design team intended to do here. It can't be just a cockpit...
I'll see this as a long range bubble fighter, or an explorer.

In those two different cases, it is outclassed by the viper IV for bubble activities (better flexibility, speed, shields, same jump range and overall solidity, smaller PD). Some might prefer losing those things for such a maneuverability... But you become a slow, giant target. It's like FD diminished its combat capabilities (in game description) only to give it the queen of combat capabilities, its nimbleness. :S
In game description says it stands between the diamondback and the asp explorer. It seems well below the DBE as an explorer. 4 ly less at best (completely stripped), less fuel to work with. Finally, considering the hints at new dangers in the void, a DBE can be A-rated, armed and still jump 30 ly. The scout can't fight or even run from hypothetical aliens / threats in its light outfit.

And for high base price compared to its peers.
Does an explorer need more agility than jump range?
Can a lightly armed fighter be efficient with a large hull and no speed to get out of dirty situations?

Would you change it and how? Would a bigger FSD break it? a third medium hardpoint instead of the 2 small?

(for reference purposes only, just a little build I deemed sufficient to hunt for engineer materials. Shields are bi-weave, I know they're not in the game anymore, but I still hope it's a bug... http://coriolis.io/outfit/asp_scout...0003B3032929v6.AwRhrSs5iA==.AwiMIz0o?bn=tttbf )

 

[ratsidecar]

I quite like the asp scout, it has reasonable maneoveurability and is good fun with 2 plasma and 2 lasers although it does run quite warm with that loadout.

There are other better ships for specific purposes but I enjoy it because its fun and not used that often by most people. Same reason I also like the keelback.

I think it depends mostly on how you play the game. Some peope are out for maximum efficiency and find it lacking, for other people just playing the game and trying the different things out are where the thrills come from.

 

[Godsailsaqueen]

Yes, I agree with you on the feeling of it, I would have used the keelback as another reference - but the the keelback is going to have a major selling point when ship launched fighters arrive.

As it is, the asp scout has nothing special, and If I like flying the ship for the fun of it, that just does not seem quite right from a design point of view, as it badly serves the game in its current form (cargo for engineers if you're into it, solid explorers needed, small ships even faster making the medium ones even slower and fragile).
I have a hard time thinking that for its price, the team could say something like "hey, it's nothing special, not even a stepping stone, it's weaker than most, but it's fun, that will be enough."
Why would they scuttle it like that, and what could have been done better?

 

[RoninCahill]

needs to be faster, about 290/390 range. slightly more shields 300max range. that would make it worth the price over a viper.

 

[Godsailsaqueen]

needs to be faster, about 290/390 range. slightly more shields 300max range. that would make it worth the price over a viper.

Yes for shield capacity, or speed. Not both IMO. I like the shields idea. Remember when michael brookes said "I wouldn't go exploring without defensive capabilities". Shields go well with the advice...

 

[Kaybe]

Asp Scout would be fine if they made it fast, like the Diamondback Scout. Instead, they made it really very slow and it feels way too gimp for its price.

 

[Farran]

I definitely would like a faster Asp. Kick up the thrusters a level and it will be a beautiful thing. It also has a shortage of utility points. Even the Type-6 has three of them and the Asp Scout gets two.

I can vouch for the Asp Scout being really fun to fly. It certainly is that. It can dance around other ships, especially big ones. I got interdicted by a Clipper yesterday (because now just parking your heading on the escape vector is not enough, apparently), and it was only able to do so much because I could dodge pretty much all of its weapons. The plasma accelerators were set so far apart that they went around me if I rolled even a little. I think it had a gimbaled beam laser and that was all I ever really felt. It is only a big target if you are shooting directly from the top or bottom.

Unfortunately, while it is definitely fun, I am finding myself having a hard time justifying it over other things for most purposes. I might spend some time trying to engineer some improvements into it, but it is hard to say how much that will actually help, given that any other ship can also get those bonuses. And I am still having a hard time understanding why, with mostly the same frame as the Asp Explorer as per the game's description, it has so much less internal space.

 

[il-Vec]

I can accept the game's description as a cheaper alternative to the AspX: you can see its main thruster footprint is much smaller (makes sense then to have lower class thrusters), and it's not specifically focused on exploring (so loses the C5 FDS), along with the C5 PP and fuel tank (no longer necessary to keep all that running). On the other hand you get about the same armor with a much lighter hull, making it far more agile and partly counter-acting those two downgrades: if you equip both with C4A thrusters and FSD you'll see the Scout is comparable speed-wise and is then MUCH better jump-wise.
So you save 25% on buying price and get a nice gain in maneuverability, in exchange for a sacrifice on some of the core components. Its an acceptable compromise.

But then you look at internal compartments and utility slots and logic goes out the window. You have essentially the same hull size, with smaller main thrusters and FSD (so internal space 'should' increase) and yet you lose:
- the C5 and 6 slots, both downgraded to C4;
- one C3 slot;
- one C2 slot;
- two utility mounts;
- two small hard-points.
Seems a bit harsh, is all.

I say: let the Explorer keep the C5 FSD and thruster, the two extra small hard-points (maybe even let it have a large hard-point, like the DBX?), give it some more armor if you want.
It'll be the faster, better armed and armored ship of the two, while still being the explorer's choice (befitting of the name, of course).
But give the Scout some of the internals it's been deprived of: most, not all, of the utility mounts and internal slots. It will be the more agile choice (as a scout should be), but ultimately more fragile and overall less capable.

That should make it a valid choice in the Asp range (gains by "adding lightness", as Sir Colin Chapman would say), while still keeping with in-game descriptions: it will now sit clearly above the Diamondback range, and will still be essentially a cut down version of the AspX (less internals, jump range, speed, weapons and armor).

PS: Look at the Diamondback range for an example. The DBX seems to be the big brother of the two, but what actually happens is that they're just different and yet both get plenty use throughout the galaxy.

 

[Viscera]

If the asp scout stayed exactly as it is, with the single addition of a fighter hanger, then I suspect its use would expand exponetially.

 

[il-Vec]

If the asp scout stayed exactly as it is, with the single addition of a fighter hanger, then I suspect its use would expand exponetially.

I agree only in that it means an added internal slot, because I neither think it needs a SLF nor that it goes in line with the type/size of ships that hold fighter hangers (Keelback a notable exception to that rule). It's already a capable fighter, one of the most nimble of the lot no less.
But that added internal slot would at least make it a potential explorer alternative, 'cause as it is you have to choose one (two if you drop the shields) of the following 3: SLF, planetary vehicle or the single AFMU.

 

[Godsailsaqueen]

If the asp scout stayed exactly as it is, with the single addition of a fighter hanger, then I suspect its use would expand exponetially.

Oh yes, this would be very nice, plus it looks like it has enough room for it in this bulky hull... In a way, I'm more optimistic than before : the buffed the long-time underdogs keelback and t-7. The scout might be next... it deserves it, with such a lineage

 

[Ceekay]

I'd settle for a little more speed as even engineered it's no rocket ship , a bit more base shield capacity and a different weapon array either 4 x class 2 or 2 x class 2 + 1 x class 3 or 5 x class 1 that make for more interesting loadouts, but as is it's a sweet ship to fly.

 

[il-Vec]

I'd settle for a little more speed as even engineered it's no rocket ship , a bit more base shield capacity and a different weapon array either 4 x class 2 or 2 x class 2 + 1 x class 3 or 5 x class 1 that make for more interesting loadouts, but as is it's a sweet ship to fly.

But then it'd be stepping on the Explorer's toes, which is supposed to be the better ship. We all want the Scout to be its own ship, not a differently flavored Explorer.
Also shield power is calculated solely based on the equipped shield generator and the ship's hull mass, its not a ship characteristic. Class for class, the Scout will nearly always have the better shields. Its the fact that the Explorer can equip a much larger shield generator that makes it have stronger shields in stock layout, despite carrying nearly double the hull mass.

... In a way, I'm more optimistic than before : the buffed the long-time underdogs keelback and t-7. The scout might be next...

I'm thinking the same. Here's hoping...

 

[Chancer]

Also shield power is calculated solely based on the equipped shield generator and the ship's hull mass

Haha, no it's not. Example: Cobra MK3 versus the Viper MK4. FDL, vs Asp Explorer.

The AspS has less of a jump range than a DBX. Personally, I never saw a reason to use this thing. It's like the Keelback. Gimped in every way compared to its sister ship, for a few additional gimmicks...that not even an AspS has over the Keelback.

Honestly, the asp scout was a ship that IMHO, wasn't supposed to exist to begin with. It just artificially inflated the amount of ships we had, but it is the most expensive waste of money the game has to offer; you can jump farther for less money, fly faster for less, and carry more for less. Even the keelback is better than the Asp in terms of utility. Not to mention the AspS also has the most awful cookie cutter hardpoint and utility slot amount.

It needs to be remodeled aesthetically too. The back is nice, but the front looks god awful. It just adds basically nothing to the game except as a large hitbox moderate weapons platform? But then you could do the same in a DBX for a smaller hibox and faster speed at a lower price.

 

[Ceekay]

Perhaps rather than additional speed and offensive/defensive capability how about something like longer range sensors and lower sensor signature, it is after all it's meant to be a scout so perhaps extended range sensors (detection 15 km, targeting 12 km) and the ability to run silent for x minutes without heatsinks.

 

[Godsailsaqueen]

Perhaps rather than additional speed and offensive/defensive capability how about something like longer range sensors and lower sensor signature, it is after all it's meant to be a scout so perhaps extended range sensors (detection 15 km, targeting 12 km) and the ability to run silent for x minutes without heatsinks.

I'd be up for that as well. The game needs more "asymetrical" design regarding ships. The one-module-fits-all stance is kinda boring, I love the unique characteristics like orca and luxury cabins, keelback and fighter bay. Maybe they could enhance these differences, a true "scout" category with dedicated modules and missions would be a nice touch.

 

[Ceekay]

It'd be nice if we had scouting missions that spawned further related missions, eg a detailed surface scan leads to a base assault or a salvage mission or a planetary scan of a ringed gas giant links to a mining or BH mission at the RES sites, perhaps systems in a civil war state could generate CZ or deserter hunt missions.

 

[il-Vec]

...

We get it, you don't like the Asp Scout and you think its useless.
Everyone already knows how its worse than this, that and the other and that its as useless as the Keelback (coincidently two ships I own and love, PRECISELY because of how flawed and unloved they are).

But that's not what this thread is about, its about if/how you think it should be changed in some way. If as it is you never even consider it as an option whatever the role, WHAT would make you do so?

RE shield power you're right, I hadn't seen that. Just checked out the Courier and the Adder in coriolis, and with the same hull mass (less than a ton difference), overall dimensions and shield gen. the Courier's shields outpower the Adder's by a factor of 3 (!!). Don't quite get it, seems illogical to me but then again logic can be thin on the ground in some areas of the game.

 

[il-Vec]

Perhaps rather than additional speed and offensive/defensive capability how about something like longer range sensors and lower sensor signature, it is after all it's meant to be a scout so perhaps extended range sensors (detection 15 km, targeting 12 km) and the ability to run silent for x minutes without heatsinks.

I'd rock that. Though it is already quite capable heat management wise, that would make it unique (a quirky choice, but with unique qualities).
I'm equipping mine for exploration, so carrying a minimal loadout and it'll cruise at 22% heat and, at bare minimum services (thrusters, life support, sensors) it'll run silent for nearly 2min.

I'd be up for that as well. The game needs more "asymetrical" design regarding ships. The one-module-fits-all stance is kinda boring, I love the unique characteristics like orca and luxury cabins, keelback and fighter bay. Maybe they could enhance these differences, a true "scout" category with dedicated modules and missions would be a nice touch.

YES.

 

[Ceekay]

We get it, you don't like the Asp Scout and you think its useless.
Everyone already knows how its worse than this, that and the other and that its as useless as the Keelback (coincidently two ships I own and love, PRECISELY because of how flawed and unloved they are).

But that's not what this thread is about, its about if/how you think it should be changed in some way. If as it is you never even consider it as an option whatever the role, WHAT would make you do so?

RE shield power you're right, I hadn't seen that. Just checked out the Courier and the Adder in coriolis, and with the same hull mass (less than a ton difference), overall dimensions and shield gen. the Courier's shields outpower the Adder's by a factor of 3 (!!). Don't quite get it, seems illogical to me but then again logic can be thin on the ground in some areas of the game.

Agreed several ships get a lot of stick because they're not "perfect" in fact it's the flawed ones that I find more attractive as they require a bit more effort and engineering to fly and they add an element of risk to gameplay, eg an engineered Python is a monster but it get's a little tedious after a bit as there's not many ships can threaten it.

Some of my favourites are the of course the Asp Scout but the FDS, Viper 3, Cobra 4 and Keelback are more fun than a ship that doesn't have any major flaws.