Nah, those guys chose the small FSDs because of the lower weight ... eg on the iCourier for even better speed and maneuverability.
Guardian FSD booster question
- Thread starter Skye A.
- Start date
Nah, those guys chose the small FSDs because of the lower weight ... eg on the iCourier for even better speed and maneuverability.
Vetoed
.I want that for my T-9. Lots of internal compartments (that size 5 doesn't do much for cargo as opposed to the two size 8s), definitely a shortage on utility mounts (could use a couple more PDs - no, the T-10 is not an option, not enough cargo). And that fixed 10 ly boost, independent of ship/cargo mass? Beautiful.
The other one would go on my Vulture. I never know what to do with that class 4 internal anyway, this would be somewhat useful.
Yay... More ship upgrades... Yet still nothing new and interesting to do with the upgraded ship. So much lost potential when it comes to ED.
Last edited:
Yeah that's one of the main problems, since engineers came in the main focus of the game seems to be to just further and further pimp your ship...
It's not meant for explorers (not primarily at least)... explorers already have great jumprange. Combat ships like the Federal Corvette on the other hand can spare an internal compartment much more easily than a utility slot. This module might finally make travelling in a Vette bearable.
Last edited:
What you call interesting I call frustrating. Making the best booster a C5 module only serves to further cement the Asp and Anaconda as the best exploration ships while pushing the rest of the fleet even further behind than they already were for exploration. It particularly hurts the DBX which most players already ignore due to it having the slowest scoop in the game. The game needs more ship diversity for exploration, NOT less. If these had been utility modules then that would have helped the diversity, making them internals hurts it.
Maybe a flat increase in optimal mass could be helpful to level of the field. That way smaller ships get a bigger increase while suffering from their lack of module space.
It'll serve both.
I don't get it. Since the buff in 2.3 the DBX had the second highest jump range, had only one module less than the AspX and all of that for less than a third the price of the AspX, besides, it has been shown that both travel at very similar speeds as its extra jump range compensates for its slow scooping range.
With all in consideration, you can fit in the booster in size 4 while having anything I'd consider essential like SRV, ADS, DSS, shields and keep its size 4 fuel scoop. The AFMU might only come in handy if you wish to travel more than 100 Kly without touching a station so it's not a big deal.
Explorers typically carry six modules at a minimum:
ADS - scanning
DSS - extra credits, gives material details for planets
SRV - to drive around planets and collect jump mats
shield - saves hull when landing, saves ship during interdictions when returning to bubble
scoop - need to refuel
AFMU - allows neutron boosts and repairs mistakes
The DBX only has six internals, so all are accounted for. Now in order to fit a booster you'd need to give up one of the above. For extended deep space exploring, giving up any of these is not a good idea. The AFMU is the first choice most likely but then neutron boosting is wonderful for breaking up the monotony of jonking. I personally will never fly a ship again without an AFMU because I neutron boost at every opportunity, not for the speed increase but just for the fun of it because lets be real, exploration can get very tedious and boring without neutron jumps.
All of this while the utility slots sit empty in the majority of exploration ships. Not to mention all of the small and medium ships in the game which will have similar space issues. It's idiotic shortsighted design IMHO, unless boosters are only intended to help Cutter and Corvette pilots and make the Anaconda even more unbalanced, in which case they work very well.
Last edited:
So where to find this FSD-Booster? I only have the 2 new shard cannons and the Power distributor available. No FSD Booster on my tech-broker at Jameson.
Last edited:
I acknowledge my proposal does nothing for the shorter range big ships, such as Type 9 and Corvette. It was an attempt to work around the horribly unbalanced mass of the Anaconda; alas, there is no perfect solution there.Vetoed
I want that for my T-9. Lots of internal compartments (that size 5 doesn't do much for cargo as opposed to the two size 8s), definitely a shortage on utility mounts (could use a couple more PDs - no, the T-10 is not an option, not enough cargo). And that fixed 10 ly boost, independent of ship/cargo mass? Beautiful.
The other one would go on my Vulture. I never know what to do with that class 4 internal anyway, this would be somewhat useful.
I’d love to buff the Corvette but it’s impossible to do it with an additional module without buffing Anaconda as well.
Speaking theoretically, Anaconda is so unbalanced it needs to be smacked into the middle of next week with the nerf bat. Speaking realistically, this will never ever ever happen, so the only thing they can do is buff the other ships around it. There have been steps in the right direction, such as the Type 9s extra C8 slot making it the premier trader.
Personally I don’t travel in my Corvette - if there’s any moving around to be done I get Galactic Logistics to handle it. My Thargoid bashing more than covers my expenses
Don't forget the heatsink!
In a more serious tone, I want to emphatize that the AFMU isn't particularly useful. As you said it's main use falls in the usage of neutron highways which I'll talk about right below.
So you are telling me you do neutron boosts to break the monotony? Great, then you clearly don't need more jump range as you care more about the quality of your voyage rather than its speed.
In case you need to go to a fringe system, the DBX has got you covered with its max jump range of around 65 LY with the slight buff to FSDs with the new engineers. The only stars that I know of who need even more than that are close to the core so you could always give a visit to uncle Jaques and swap the AFMU for the booster and then return.
I agree we should have more modules for the utility slots but as I've said many times, small ships should have their compromises. I don't get why you insist spare change ships should perform as well as billionare* ships.
*I really meant it, the big three cost not much less than a billion credits when A rated.
Exactly, and I have nothing against for Conda to be buffed also. If negative effects are well ballanced only few people will choose 65ly instead 55ly as it is plenty for most things for like 90% players.
One internal slot less or longer scooping times is not something that I would choose at least, as 55ly is still perfectly fine for me.
This slots are imho ment for ships that have short jump ranges, and I would gladly put them in my Vette, FDL, and even Python.
Oh, so everything is as usual.
I outfit for jump range because I need it to reach fringe systems, which is where I do the majority of my exploring. It's my #1 priority when designing an exploration ship.
With that in mind, both my DBX and Asp X are engineered to the hilt for low mass and high jump range, and both carry the six modules I won't fly without: ADS, DSS, SRV, scoop, shield, and AFMU. My DBX jumps 62.3ly fueled up, I can't get that number any higher with the modules I'm carrying. My Asp jumps a bit less at 57.9ly. While the DBX has range the Asp scoops faster and has a slightly better view, yet I've been flying my DBX ever since 2.3 and I've loved the ship despite it's terribly slow fuel scooping. There is a trade off between the two ships which allow for a good choice depending on priorities, and it's worked great since 2.3.
Now factor in the Guardian FSD booster. My DBX has no free slots, it can't carry one, yet my Asp can easily fit in the 5H booster and gain that extra +10lys of range. SO, after 3.1, my Asp will jump more than 5lys further than my DBX, AND it will scoop fuel literally twice as fast. The wonderful tradeoff between the two ships which 2.3 put into place is about to be annihilated by update 3.1, and from my perspective the DBX is about to become a pointless ship once again.
And yes, this makes me sad, because had Frontier simply made these fracking boosters utility modules then ALL ships could equally enjoy them. Now, only certain ships with the space to fit them in will be able to. From a game design point of view this just seems utterly silly to me, dividing the fleet of ship choices up arbitrarily like that. It's only serving to make some ships a lot less appealing in general than ships with more internal space, and IMHO Elite needs more diversity in ship choices, not less, especially when it comes to jump ranges.
Note that we have a Galnet article talking about the release of the FSD booster. https://community.elitedangerous.com/en/galnet/uid/5ac6393b5f314a6a0f15ca55
The article is dated one day AFTER the item was removed from the game.
Most amusing.
The article is dated one day AFTER the item was removed from the game.
Most amusing.
So do I but I'll reiterate. Beyond 60 Lys of jump range there are very very few systems out of reach and those that are, are located in or nearby the core as the highest or lowest systems. Anything beyond that is pretty much conveniance.
If you get a 55% increase in optimal mass and a 10% increase in max fuel per jump you can get 64.36 Lys.
http://www.edshipyard.com/#/L=B0i0,..._w00M201IM07Q4Go52y006u00AwPcIlhXKqpD2UI02jw0
Well, the trade still works. Both ships have been shown to travel at almost identical speeds, go and ask buckyballers. Plus the DBX gets the upper hand in fringe systems.
If you don't want to substitute an AFMU for the booster is your decision and your preference. An explorer can easily live without an AFMU or a SRV on which case you can stack up materials before departure.
On another note, the DBX didn't lose anything. It'll do exactly what it could do since 2.4.
Really man? I'd say right now it is the moment with the most ship variety we have ever had. Jump ranges have been inflating since the game was released which has consistently made more and more ships viable to explore.
I do not know if 125% fuel consumption was a bug, but IMO specifically this way, with huge fuel consumption increase, this module looks like something interesting to play with, but not simply another "must have one". With 25% there will be no reason not to add one to most ships, apart from specific situations when free internal is more valuable.
As for making it utility... IMO terrible idea and makes no sense too. Sure explorers want more things to become utilities, like DSS/ADS and now fsd booster, the reason is simple - apart from single HSL utilities are not that useful for explorers. But for everyone else utilities are far more valuable than internals, making it utility will basically make it explorer-only module, and judging by flat range increase instead of percent-based one it is exactly the opposite of what they tried to do with it.
Also, i do not get the idea that every exploration ship, no matter the size, should be able to carry every theoretically useful thing in existence. It makes outfitting dull and irrelevant as you just put in everything you may need, without any choice or compromises.
As for making it utility... IMO terrible idea and makes no sense too. Sure explorers want more things to become utilities, like DSS/ADS and now fsd booster, the reason is simple - apart from single HSL utilities are not that useful for explorers. But for everyone else utilities are far more valuable than internals, making it utility will basically make it explorer-only module, and judging by flat range increase instead of percent-based one it is exactly the opposite of what they tried to do with it.
Also, i do not get the idea that every exploration ship, no matter the size, should be able to carry every theoretically useful thing in existence. It makes outfitting dull and irrelevant as you just put in everything you may need, without any choice or compromises.