Submit, high wake.
Low wake, even. The few ships that can mass lock a Python are generally slower anyways.
Low wake, even. The few ships that can mass lock a Python are generally slower anyways.
Please give traders a fighting chance: Sheild booster for Python
- Thread starter Silaz
- Start date
Fed Corvettes can, as I found out on Friday..
I was faster than him, granted, but not by much. My thrusters are only lightly engineered though (G3 I think)
Cmdr GreyAreaUK, assuming the ship in your signature is what you fly, I would like to compliment you on your choice of colour. But please don't park next to me, it doesn't take a lot for me to get confused. [big grin]
I wish my vulture wasn't starved for power or had a canopy the size of a semi-truck. Given the booster meta it would be nice to get better shield generators and more utility slots in my FAS.
To request these changes would be unreasonable though because these ships are quite good despite their weaknesses. It's not that the weaknesses keep them from being viable it's that it keeps them from being perfect. What makes the python any different?
The Python doesn't need a boost you need to get gud at you brave Sir Robin techniques.
There's many good videos on evading and running, Rinzlero7o7 has the best (language warning) this one is very good as well.
[video=youtube;_QCWTDpFChk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QCWTDpFChk[/video]
There's many good videos on evading and running, Rinzlero7o7 has the best (language warning) this one is very good as well.
[video=youtube;_QCWTDpFChk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QCWTDpFChk[/video]
On the general topic, something I'm just musing about is: is there enough difference between a combat build for hunting traders, and a combat build for fighting their peers?
Imagine if it was a bit more rock-paper-scissors, for example by:
1. Adding (more) modules that are really genuinely helpful at escaping a fight, one way or another,
2. Then adding modules that help counteract them.
Traders would pack the first sort, and they'd need to be balanced to really only benefit people who are trying to escape. Pirates (particularly PvP ones) would start needing to sacrifice utility mounts and optional internals in order to up their chances against those traders. In doing so, they'd be meaningfully disadvantaged against police / bounty hunters with more pure combat builds.
Imagine if it was a bit more rock-paper-scissors, for example by:
1. Adding (more) modules that are really genuinely helpful at escaping a fight, one way or another,
2. Then adding modules that help counteract them.
Traders would pack the first sort, and they'd need to be balanced to really only benefit people who are trying to escape. Pirates (particularly PvP ones) would start needing to sacrifice utility mounts and optional internals in order to up their chances against those traders. In doing so, they'd be meaningfully disadvantaged against police / bounty hunters with more pure combat builds.
Pirates will typically be more combat built as they need less cargo, but to be honest, a well-constructed trade/combat Python should be able to stand up to many smaller pirate builds even as stands currently.
I would guess it will take you some flight development, engineering and loadout consideration, but there's nothing stopping the Python doing it at present. As I reference above, it has huge firepower for a med ship.
Not just Python utilities necessarily...
In this context, you're equating utility slots with raw shield strength, but that isn't true. Utility slots, as suggested, bring a huge level of utility to a ship, and are utterly essential to most combat builds.
The FDL has many advantages but being the only viable med combat ship with 6 puts it on its own level before you even discuss anything else. Being able to bring 4 x resistant shield boosters AND double chaff to the party, or heat sinks, or even 6x heat sink for SR builds, basically gives it more substantial survivability in ANY kind of combat build.
Last edited:
Python is not a trade ship and is one of the best medium multiroles out there,
I do think that T9, 7, 6 needs some defensive buff, and blueprints
I do think that T9, 7, 6 needs some defensive buff, and blueprints
Last edited:
First, PLEASE don't put .BMP images like... ANYWHERE
Second I kinda agree with you if something is done against the python becoming way to powerfull.. maybe a nerf on the speed? so it becomes a slow sturdy ship?
Unless something got toned down i disagree with you... cause this will mean another giga shield ship cause the nerf is no longer valid and tihs would mean
another medium ship with 2.200 MJ shields when modded... And that's not even putting the prismatic shield...
So... unless something get nerfed for the extra shield i think this is a bad idea.
If you feel like you need 3x shield boosters, just drop the heatsink. The minor module damage from firing off a shield cell without one won't make or break you as a trader. If you work on getting the "Specialized" engineer mod for it, and work at making sure you ship runs cool, you might not even take any module damage at all.
Ships need these sort of tradeoffs, especially the "basically the King of everything" Python.
Last edited:
This is a big part of the point i was trying to make.
Add the fact that is is the only medium ship with a huge hardpoint and you can see why the stagnation is unavoidable
I still fly a Python for PvP and as long as the opposing wing does not have cascade rails, i can tank for a good while, much to my opponents surprise. I'd be happy to have a pew pew to demonstrate.
Add another utility mount so the Python can painlessly mount 4 shield boosters? Is no one going to point out that half of this Beta was geared towards stopping that kind of behavior? Throwing more shields at ships is not the best way to balance this game, even ignoring all the advantages the Python has. And it has a lot. As I've posted about a dozen times before, I'm thoroughly disgusted by how multi-role ships are better cargo-haulers than dedicated traders. It's infuriating that the T-6 and T-7 were made under a meter too tall for small and medium size pads, respectively. And the only response to the T-ships' multiple disadvantages and problems is just banal: the python and 'conda cost more.
It sounds like the OP was having trouble an trade CG in OPEN. As others have said, the critical eye should be pointed towards the interdicting ships: I'm guessing a 70/30% split of FDL's (with 6 SB's) and all other ships.
It sounds like the OP was having trouble an trade CG in OPEN. As others have said, the critical eye should be pointed towards the interdicting ships: I'm guessing a 70/30% split of FDL's (with 6 SB's) and all other ships.
The python is not a trading ship.
It's a multi-role ship.
If you can't do "it" in a python, "it" is not something you should do.
The Lakon Type-9 Heavy is a trading ship.
I don't recommend it for long-range exploration or combat.
But if you need a warehouse that flies, the Type-9 is it.
The Type-6 and Type-7 are also trading ships.
They're ideally suited to load with cargo racks and big thrusters to move large amounts of goods from one place to another.
The "misuse" of ships for things they were not built to do leads to a lot of misunderstandings like this.
- - - Updated - - -
And here it was because I thought PVP players focused on the Pythons to eliminate the greatest threat first... but then, I don't have much regard for PvP anyways.
It's a multi-role ship.
If you can't do "it" in a python, "it" is not something you should do.
The Lakon Type-9 Heavy is a trading ship.
I don't recommend it for long-range exploration or combat.
But if you need a warehouse that flies, the Type-9 is it.
The Type-6 and Type-7 are also trading ships.
They're ideally suited to load with cargo racks and big thrusters to move large amounts of goods from one place to another.
The "misuse" of ships for things they were not built to do leads to a lot of misunderstandings like this.
- - - Updated - - -
And here it was because I thought PVP players focused on the Pythons to eliminate the greatest threat first... but then, I don't have much regard for PvP anyways.
Powderpanic
Banned
Le sigh.. Science Time.
Right... Firstly if you count a ship as PVP viable because it can tank long enough to high wake, you have instantly made most ships PVP viable. Hurray! Job Done.
If you count a ship PVP viable, if it can stay in a wing fight and return enough damage to make bringing it worth while, before its either exploded or has to run away.
You are in a very different limited group of ships.
I should start with I love my Python, which is why I know its not PVP viable.. because I have tried and with god roll engineering.
The build that makes the most sense is a thermal shield, 3 Heavy Duty boosters and a Heat Sink.
With god rolls you will have ok but not great resistance and about 1200MJ of shields, then lets assume you double bank the 2 x 6A's or if you are able/brave you could triple bank with 5B.
You have a much larger, slower profile than FDL's, less shielding than the Big three and unlikely to be turn enough to keep guns on a boost splurging FAS. ( All while being lock broken to heck )
So while you do have a decent amount of damage you can put out via the strong set of hard points, you need to keep them on target with no pips to engines.
As soon as a Python starts to bank, its done.
Cascade rails will reduce the 740MJ of available charge ( assuming you double bank, triple banking is either a risk or a waste because its nearly your entire shields worth of charge. So if you bank early you waste charge, bank late and you risk early death )
That is when it gets its 4 charges that you can cool with your engineered heat sink, 5 charge and things get interesting in a PVP situation.
If you are truly insane you could even try switching cells stacks and triple banking the C5s and C4, while you ship dies from the inside.
Having 6 Utilities still probably wouldn't make it a strong choice but it would shorten the gap a little.
Shields down, it has one of the easiest powerplants to kill of all the ships.
Right... Firstly if you count a ship as PVP viable because it can tank long enough to high wake, you have instantly made most ships PVP viable. Hurray! Job Done.
If you count a ship PVP viable, if it can stay in a wing fight and return enough damage to make bringing it worth while, before its either exploded or has to run away.
You are in a very different limited group of ships.
I should start with I love my Python, which is why I know its not PVP viable.. because I have tried and with god roll engineering.
The build that makes the most sense is a thermal shield, 3 Heavy Duty boosters and a Heat Sink.
With god rolls you will have ok but not great resistance and about 1200MJ of shields, then lets assume you double bank the 2 x 6A's or if you are able/brave you could triple bank with 5B.
You have a much larger, slower profile than FDL's, less shielding than the Big three and unlikely to be turn enough to keep guns on a boost splurging FAS. ( All while being lock broken to heck )
So while you do have a decent amount of damage you can put out via the strong set of hard points, you need to keep them on target with no pips to engines.
As soon as a Python starts to bank, its done.
Cascade rails will reduce the 740MJ of available charge ( assuming you double bank, triple banking is either a risk or a waste because its nearly your entire shields worth of charge. So if you bank early you waste charge, bank late and you risk early death )
That is when it gets its 4 charges that you can cool with your engineered heat sink, 5 charge and things get interesting in a PVP situation.
If you are truly insane you could even try switching cells stacks and triple banking the C5s and C4, while you ship dies from the inside.
Having 6 Utilities still probably wouldn't make it a strong choice but it would shorten the gap a little.
Shields down, it has one of the easiest powerplants to kill of all the ships.
Last edited:
You must be talking about PVP, right? I've never "accepted" a PVE Interdiction in which I didn't want to participate. Is the difficulty of the interdiction mini-game different (harder) in PVP?
from my experience I may say, yes it is.
I don't know how this thread derailed to PvP Python vs FDL but the Python fitted as a tradeship is ought to perform worse than a pirate/ combat build in a 1:1 fight... It's good enough to run away tho
Change you loadout to 2 efficient PAs (lock breaker and dispersal), 1 OC MC (Emmisive), and 2 packhounds ammo mod (drag + thermal) and you can fly 411 most of the time. As with the Python since day one (and i flew one since before the Nerf), aggressive pip management and FA/Off is vital.
And as for the FAS analogy, stick 4 pips to ENG, use your PAs to take out their biweave and take out all his guns with you Packhounds.
You should also have over 3000 armour for ramming.
Flying a meta FdL or the big 3 is tedium incarnate for me.
Last edited: