Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 56

Thread: Thrusters explained in one simple table (Rating and Mass)

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Thrusters explained in one simple table (Rating and Mass)

    Hi CMDRs

    First off thanks to the contributors to these threads for inspiration and data:
    https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=164451
    https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=139844

    EDIT: also for Taleden's excellent research and a handy graph: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showth...=1#post2804064

    From my previous thruster research (link at end) I noticed that all ships seemed to have the same ratio improvement in speed and turn time for A rated thrusters at 50% optimum mass, and the same held at other mass thruster combinations I had tested. So I decided to test a few ships across thruster grades A-E at optimum mass ratios of 90-50% (in 10% incriments). The following table summarises the improvements in performance over a ship operating at optimum mass (All thruster ratings have equal performance at their optimum mass)

    Mass/Optimum E D C B A
    90.00% 0.50% 1.00% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%
    80.00% 1.50% 2.50% 4.00% 4.50% 4.50%
    70.00% 2.00% 3.80% 6.00% 7.00% 8.00%
    60.00% 2.50% 4.50% 8.00% 10.00% 12.00%
    50.00% 3.00% 6.00% 10.00% 13.00% 16.00%
    Speed increases by the % shown. Turn time changes by [Turn time/(1+improvement%)]

    The ships used for testing were: Hauler, Vulture, Clipper, ASP; not all ships were tested for all combinations but there was plenty of overlap.

    The A(50%) figure has also been tested on Cobra, sidewinder and DBS as well as the above ships.

    Note there is a degree of smoothing in the above table due to the limitations of measurement (speedometer only shows nearest m/s, turn rate is average of 10 rotations)

    For the new High performance Thrusters see this Graph:

    http://imgur.com/0SfMTVc

    %change vs mass

    Note that the speed and agility bonus have been decoupled unlike for the standard A-E thrusters.

    For Ships base speeds and rotation speeds see my other thread:

    https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=182465


    Understanding Thrusters in 2.1 outfitting screen:

    With the new outfitting screens you can see better what thrusters do.

    There are six thruster stats to consider. Minimum mass, optimum mass and maximum mass. Maximum multiplier, optimum multiplier and minimum multiplayer.

    When your ship is at minimum mass you get the maximum multiplier applied to your speed and turn speed.

    When your ship is at optimum mass you get the optimum multiplier.

    As you get heavier you approach the minimum multiplier (not tested where this is may be maximum mass but that's very hard to reach).

    The Engineer upgrade multiplies all three multipliers up b the same amount. so if you roll a +25%, a standard A rated drive will apply 1.125 minimum multiplier, 1.25 optimum multiplier and 1.45 maximum multiplier. (original values .90,1.00,1.16)

    They seem to follow the same curves as the previous calculations so it's just a straight % boost to speed, acceleration and pitch.

  2. #2
    This data proves what I felt while flying the Clipper. Despite its agility rating of 2 (?), the Clipper is one of the most agile ships in the game, and surely by far the most agile of the "big ships".

    Can't understand where its agility 2 rating comes from. When I "upgraded" from the Clipper to the Python I was shocked by how cumbersome and sluggish the Python is for an agility 6 (?) rated ship.

  3. #3
    Originally Posted by askavir View Post (Source)
    This data proves what I felt while flying the Clipper. Despite its agility rating of 2 (?), the Clipper is one of the most agile ships in the game, and surely by far the most agile of the "big ships".

    Can't understand where its agility 2 rating comes from. When I "upgraded" from the Clipper to the Python I was shocked by how cumbersome and sluggish the Python is for an agility 6 (?) rated ship.

    That rating 6 for the Python is still the pre-nerf rating, and it was quite right back then. The nerf turned the Python into a brick, but the rating wasn't changed to reflect that.

  4. #4
    Originally Posted by TargetLost View Post (Source)
    ~

    While you can outturn smaller ships with an anaconda C drive with 0 thrust the same is impossible with a phyton and an A Drive!
    The only useable fight speed with the phyton is the blue Range and that makes it inferior to fight with. Pilot skill can compensate that but only to a certain degree,
    I've yet to get a conda (can afford the hull now just need credits for upgrades) but this just seems wrong from a design perspective. that said I'm unlikely to complain when I get it.

    Originally Posted by Banzz View Post (Source)
    Ultimately, only the dev can put his exact thought on the subject with the words they used.

    I guess it is just a term to say : "hey, you have a ship with this mass so these thrusters are fine to use with"

    Also, higher rating/class thrusters have their pros (integrity, maneuverability, max speed, ...) but they also have cons (weight, price, power draw, etc.). Flight model is only one parameter among others
    Yeah the choice of the word optimum is an odd one, unless they do mean it in the most favourable term, as in it's the point where you recieve diminishing returns for Credits/powerdraw/utility etc

  5. #5
    assuming the base speed is exactly 180 that gives 16.11% and 11.66'% so in line with the table, good to know.

    +Rep

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by Cmdr. Numa View Post (Source)
    That rating 6 for the Python is still the pre-nerf rating, and it was quite right back then. The nerf turned the Python into a brick, but the rating wasn't changed to reflect that.
    This is nonsense, the Python is far from being a 'brick' unless you fail to use directional thrusters. By comparison I also fly FDL, Vulture, DBS, Viper and recently Clipper on a regular basis. While the Python requires good pips management and thruster use it is more than capable of bringing fixed weapons to bear.

    On that note, and with respect to the OP; any maneuverability test which ignores directional thrusters is pretty meaningless.

  7. #7
    Originally Posted by Renegade Roach View Post (Source)
    This is nonsense, the Python is far from being a 'brick' unless you fail to use directional thrusters. By comparison I also fly FDL, Vulture, DBS, Viper and recently Clipper on a regular basis. While the Python requires good pips management and thruster use it is more than capable of bringing fixed weapons to bear.

    On that note, and with respect to the OP; any maneuverability test which ignores directional thrusters is pretty meaningless.
    Agreed, the directional thrusters still pack a punch, which makes the ship feel wrong even more, because those same thrusters govern pitch, and that has become horrible. Still, with directional thrust to evade and turrets to deliver it's still a potent ship.

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by Renegade Roach View Post (Source)
    This is nonsense, the Python is far from being a 'brick' unless you fail to use directional thrusters. By comparison I also fly FDL, Vulture, DBS, Viper and recently Clipper on a regular basis. While the Python requires good pips management and thruster use it is more than capable of bringing fixed weapons to bear.

    On that note, and with respect to the OP; any maneuverability test which ignores directional thrusters is pretty meaningless.
    Suggestion noted, the next bit of research I'm planning to do is on the acceleration characteristics of various ships and thrusters. The problem of this though is that the only meaningful test is an acceleration test and that is very susceptable to error, i.e I'll have to do a lot of runs.

    In the meantime in my original thread (link at bottom of OP) there is some Lateral and acceleration data, generally better thrusters / weight give better acceleration.

  9. #9
    Originally Posted by askavir View Post (Source)
    This data proves what I felt while flying the Clipper. Despite its agility rating of 2 (?), the Clipper is one of the most agile ships in the game, and surely by far the most agile of the "big ships".

    Can't understand where its agility 2 rating comes from. When I "upgraded" from the Clipper to the Python I was shocked by how cumbersome and sluggish the Python is for an agility 6 (?) rated ship.
    I think that might just be a case of FDEV forgetting to alter the ship description blurb after the early python nerf (where they were comically agile)

  10. #10
    Originally Posted by askavir View Post (Source)
    This data proves what I felt while flying the Clipper. Despite its agility rating of 2 (?), the Clipper is one of the most agile ships in the game, and surely by far the most agile of the "big ships".

    Can't understand where its agility 2 rating comes from. When I "upgraded" from the Clipper to the Python I was shocked by how cumbersome and sluggish the Python is for an agility 6 (?) rated ship.
    Python used to be a good maneuverable ship but then it took a big nerf and they likely did not change the numbers in description. not sure about the clippers 2 unless they buffed it since its creation

  11. #11
    Originally Posted by taleden View Post (Source)
    So, the graph of Enhanced Thruster performance is great, but has anyone worked out the actual formula that yields that curve? I'd rather not have to hard-code every pair of mass/optimal ratio vs speed multiplier, but the (approximate) formula I worked out for regular thruster doesn't seem to apply very well for Enhanced Thrusters, so I'm hoping someone will be able to figure out a new formula that predicts both kinds of thrusters.
    I've got a lot of data points (did it 1t at a time) so can try some curve fitting, alternatively could send you the data if you want.?


    Originally Posted by Lucifer Hate View Post (Source)
    Python used to be a good maneuverable ship but then it took a big nerf and they likely did not change the numbers in description. not sure about the clippers 2 unless they buffed it since its creation
    Mostly that (the nerf) partly the fact that the clipper has pretty pants lateral thrusters so while it can pivot well it doesn't change direction. I certainly find i crash less in my python. Still 2 seems silly rating for clipper should be at least a 4 if not a 6.

  12. #12
    Why is this in the general discussion? It should be conserved in the archives and daily praise be sung unto the people who tried to figure this out. Please move this thread into the outfitting screen.

  13. #13
    Originally Posted by Cliffson View Post (Source)
    I've got a lot of data points (did it 1t at a time) so can try some curve fitting, alternatively could send you the data if you want.?




    Mostly that (the nerf) partly the fact that the clipper has pretty pants lateral thrusters so while it can pivot well it doesn't change direction. I certainly find i crash less in my python. Still 2 seems silly rating for clipper should be at least a 4 if not a 6.
    Clipper also drifts like crazy.

  14. #14
    Originally Posted by Cliffson View Post (Source)
    I've got a lot of data points (did it 1t at a time) so can try some curve fitting, alternatively could send you the data if you want.?
    I don't suppose your data is for the class 2? If so I'd love to have a copy; I gathered data in 1T increments for the class 3 but didn't get to the class 2 before they shut down the beta.

  15. #15
    July last year:
    Originally Posted by Don Alvarez View Post (Source)
    War!
    Huh!
    Good God, Yaw..
    What is it good for?
    Absolutely nuthin.
    Say it again.....
    June this year:
    Originally Posted by Don Alvarez View Post (Source)
    War!
    Huh!
    Git gud, Yaw..
    What is it good for?
    Absolutely nuthin.
    Say it again.....

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast