Python or gunship?

[RidingTheFlow]

Do you mind if I don't swap the thrusters? The python has 137% and the FGS 134%, and I still intend to show better agility of the FGS. kk?

Sorry but I do mind. Optimal mass is very important for agility "feel" and I want to be sure its exactly the same.

Multiplier mainly affects the "inbuilt limiter", allowing higher velocities (since in fact ship in space can eventually build very high rotation/speed even with low power thrusters and ED artificially limits it). Optimal mass affects actual *power* and *acceleration*. Having high multiplier but low optimal mass is what leads to stall - since ship allowed to rotate quickly but thrusters not powerful enough to maintain speed vector.

Also I like how all people who claim FGS is better say "on paper (e.g. hard numerical proof) is not but its really is" - so there is no actual hard proof, just how they feel about it and we just have to trust them

 

[StiTch]

Multiplier mainly affects the "inbuilt limiter", allowing higher velocities (since in fact ship in space can eventually build very high rotation/speed even with low power thrusters and ED artificially limits it). Optimal mass affects actual *power* and *acceleration*. Having high multiplier but low optimal mass is what leads to stall - since ship allowed to rotate quickly but thrusters not powerful enough to maintain speed vector.

This is news to me; I've seen no info in the past indicating optimal mass affects anything more than the rate mass cripples your speed. Do you have some source info I could read please?

Also I like how all people who claim FGS is better say "on paper (e.g. hard numerical proof) is not but its really is" - so there is no actual hard proof, just how they feel about it and we just have to trust them

The numerical proof would be there if we had access to such data. If you're willing to quantify the ease of hitting modules, or the agility of a ship at different throttle settings, or inertia control then I would be most appreciative - and we'd have that hard proof.

 

[Aashenfox]

Sorry but I do mind. Optimal mass is very important for agility "feel" and I want to be sure its exactly the same.

Multiplier mainly affects the "inbuilt limiter", allowing higher velocities (since in fact ship in space can eventually build very high rotation/speed even with low power thrusters and ED artificially limits it). Optimal mass affects actual *power* and *acceleration*. Having high multiplier but low optimal mass is what leads to stall - since ship allowed to rotate quickly but thrusters not powerful enough to maintain speed vector.

Also I like how all people who claim FGS is better say "on paper (e.g. hard numerical proof) is not but its really is" - so there is no actual hard proof, just how they feel about it and we just have to trust them

Alright, fair enough. Also, thanks for articulating the difference between optimal mass and optimal multiplier, very useful nuggets!

 

[RidingTheFlow]

This is news to me; I've seen no info in the past indicating optimal mass affects anything more than the rate mass cripples your speed. Do you have some source info I could read please?

I have no source since its based on hearsay speaking to some FDev people familiar with how flight model works. In short - its complicated and not quite possible to properly quantify without providing full flight model computer algorithm - which FDev obviously have no intention of doing.
What I said was a somewhat simplification which should apply in this case (why Python can "feel" less agile than FGS).

 

[StiTch]

Also I like how all people who claim FGS is better say "on paper (e.g. hard numerical proof) is not but its really is" - so there is no actual hard proof, just how they feel about it and we just have to trust them

I have no source since its based on hearsay speaking to some FDev people familiar with how flight model works. In short - its complicated and not quite possible to properly quantify without providing full flight model computer algorithm - which FDev obviously have no intention of doing.

A moment ago you were mocking FGS fans because they couldn't put quantifiable evidence forward.

No further comment.

 

[RidingTheFlow]

A moment ago you were mocking FGS fans because they couldn't put quantifiable evidence forward.

No further comment.

You also can see that I am open to video evidence - as long as thruster module is the same.

But you should be easily able to open coriolis and see that Python gets more rotational speed.

 

[hypervoodoo77]

Silly question the python is so very OP that the answer to any comparison with it means the answer is the python.
The only reason not to get it is if you are not a let's say audi/volkswagen driver and want to own a ship that is not the same as everybody else's ship

 

[Aashenfox]

You also can see that I am open to video evidence - as long as thruster module is the same.

But you should be easily able to open coriolis and see that Python gets more rotational speed.

To be fair, Coriolis is not that reliable when it comes to the nuts and bolts. I know for a fact its resistance calculations are wrong, other stuff might be too. And as threeofseven said earlier (and I value his opinion), he believes the FGS might have been stealth buffed, as it pitches faster than it did when last he tested, without any mention in patch notes that I am aware of.

Silly question the python is so very OP that the answer to any comparison with it means the answer is the python.
The only reason not to get it is if you are not a let's say audi/volkswagen driver and want to own a ship that is not the same as everybody else's ship

He said pure combat, the FGS is far superior in this role. FAR superior, it's not even a contest, even without the fighter bay it would still be better.

 

[StiTch]

You also can see that I am open to video evidence - as long as thruster module is the same.

But you should be easily able to open coriolis and see that Python gets more rotational speed.

True, but rotational speed isn't the final word in agility.

It's not that the Python is bad; it feels sluggish but has disturbing firepower and good PvE survivability. If you can control it effectively there's very little better for PvE. Against enemies that can actually challenge you it does bring a couple of flaws to the table though.

 

[RidingTheFlow]

*shrugs* unless it was stealth buffed in past 3 weeks since I've last seen it...
Not very convinced of mysterious stealth buffs either.

True, but rotational speed isn't the final word in agility.

Well, here you have it. Everyone will have own definition of "agility" so I guess its pointless argument.

 

[Aashenfox]

*shrugs* unless it was stealth buffed in past 3 weeks since I've last seen it...
Not very convinced of mysterious stealth buffs either.

Your state of convinced-ness isn't really relevant, nobody is sure what's going on right now, ont he one hand you've got lots of experienced pilots saying 'hang on, the FGS is more agile, wth?' and on the other you've got someone saying some arbitrary math on a third party site is what is actually the case. I'm not insinuating anything, just saying that I don't think anyone is truly convinced of what they're saying right now (if you are, then you are very brave to fly in the face of what has been stated by some very good pilots, without HARD evidence).

Video evidence is needed!

 

[Stealthie]

For combat, FGS all the way.

It's like a cheap, miniature, Corvette, Cutter or Anaconda; load it up with weapons, HRPs, MRPs, SCBs, SLFs, a honking great shield and a piddly fuel scoop to avoid getting stranded and you're all set.

I don't say this glibly.
You'll find that there's a big difference between combat in a little ship and in a big ship.
With little ships it's just a case of "fit weapons, shoot stuff and don't die".
With big ships you get to monkey around with SCBs, heat sinks and SLFs as a regular part of combat and the FGS will be the cheapest way to get a taste of "big ship combat".
IMO, everybody should get themselves an FGS and learn what it's capable of before they fly any of the big 3.

 

[[VR] optimal_909]

Gunship has 7 hardpoints, huge distributor, SLF and a hull that can be as hard as granite with appropriate modules.

As a combat ship, I think the Gunship is second to none in its class. Sure, the FDL is the ultimate fighter, but unless you are a PvP demi-god, you are better off with the Gunship. I don't think the Python is in the same ballpark.

 

[Aashenfox]

*shrugs* unless it was stealth buffed in past 3 weeks since I've last seen it...
Not very convinced of mysterious stealth buffs either.


Well, here you have it. Everyone will have own definition of "agility" so I guess its pointless argument.

On the definition, personally, I think of it like a wild west duel, assuming 2 ships, back to back, 500m from each other, which one can bring its guns to bear on the other first. It's that simple.

When I test I will simply be comparing rotatoinal speeds of pitch, yaw and roll, under similar criteria (throttle value, pips, FA off/on).

 

[RidingTheFlow]

Anybody care to share their best FGS loadout on coriolis? Interested to see if there are one with tops my Python one in situational DPS.

 

[Aashenfox]

For combat, FGS all the way.

It's like a cheap, miniature, Corvette, Cutter or Anaconda; load it up with weapons, HRPs, MRPs, SCBs, SLFs, a honking great shield and a piddly fuel scoop to avoid getting stranded and you're all set.

I don't say this glibly.
You'll find that there's a big difference between combat in a little ship and in a big ship.
With little ships it's just a case of "fit weapons, shoot stuff and don't die".
With big ships you get to monkey around with SCBs, heat sinks and SLFs as a regular part of combat and the FGS will be the cheapest way to get a taste of "big ship combat".
IMO, everybody should get themselves an FGS and learn what it's capable of before they fly any of the big 3.

All of this! But use a biweave, not a honker. The FGS has the fastest shield recharge of any ship I've flown to date, using a big shield negates that advantage. It;s like a 300hp heal every 30 secs.

Anybody care to share their best FGS loadout on coriolis? Interested to see if there are one with tops my Python one in situational DPS.

Gimme a minute to update it and I will. I should point out though, I use two different weapon loadouts situationally (that's what the 7 hardpoints are for, I thought!), so you'll see my PAs and rails for anything Vulture or bigger, and long range beam and seekers for anything smaller.

 

[StiTch]

Well, here you have it. Everyone will have own definition of "agility" so I guess its pointless argument.

Not entirely sure that's how it is, but everyone will have nuances in handling I guess. The main aspects of agility that stand out to me are lateral/vertical thrust and inertia control. Yaw does help, though in our environment with toned down yaw ability, strong yaw isn't imperative at all times in combat.

 

[Aashenfox]

Not entirely sure that's how it is, but everyone will have nuances in handling I guess. The main aspects of agility that stand out to me are lateral/vertical thrust and inertia control. Yaw does help, though in our environment with toned down yaw ability, strong yaw isn't imperative at all times in combat.

I do agree with this, but I'm a heavy yaw user, so for me personally, it plays a huge role in which ship I would choose. In any case, the FGS strongly wins in this area anyway, no need for vid or discussoin for that!

 

[Aashenfox]

K, here's my current PvE gunship build. I left a utility slot empty, cos it changes day to day. The engineering isn't 100% accurate, but it is close enough (I haven't adjusted debuffs from default 'best' values, but primary buffing stats are correct). Actually, now that I think about it, I have more armor than Coriolis shows, all my HRPs have more than default 'best' armor rolls.

https://eddp.co/u/Pup8bqAK

edit: The weapons special effects...

Rack 1 (small ships)
1 Large beam - G5 Long Range (will go down to G3 soon) with thermal cascade (this is in case of random PvP, it doesn't seem to do much against NPCs)
2 Medium Seekers - G5 increased ammo, no special.

Rack 2 (medium and large ships)
2 Medium Plasma Accelerators - G5 Focused with Target Lock Breaker (again special effect chosen for random PvP rather than PvE)
2 Small Railguns - G1 long range, one with super pen, the other with feedback cascade.

 

[RidingTheFlow]

K, here's my current PvE gunship build. I left a utility slot empty, cos it changes day to day. The engineering isn't 100% accurate, but it is close enough (I haven't adjusted debuffs from default 'best' values, but primary buffing stats are correct).

https://eddp.co/u/Pup8bqAK

Wouldn't this require to switch loadouts? Maybe I am missing something, but I can't see how you can use all of these weapons at same time - and that's what I after since it helps dealing fast with shieldcell-using enemies.