Page 2 of 2 First 12
Results 16 to 20 of 20

Thread: Alliance Challenger, The more rounded, refined choice.

  1. #16
    You can put 64t of cargo on it, a size 3 collector, size 1 hatch breaker and size 1 recon limpet controller on it and you're good to go for megaships and installations. As you can't do well with the remaining slots for an armor tank, simply support the 6C bi-weave with three Guardian shield reinforcements in the military slots. Even has room for a small fuel scoop to help getting around. And with all that you still don't lose any of the damage potential.

  2. #17
    Originally Posted by Arkadi View Post (Source)
    I was thinking to purchase a Challenger but then I realized it is nearly the same as the Federal Gunship with a bit better shields and a bit worse hull, with better boost but worse base speed and a little less firepower and a little less internal space for a bit less in the price.

    Coriolis shows way better pitch and roll values for the challenger and only a slight edge in yaw for the FGS. Does anyone has made actual in game experiences comparing these two ships?

    I don't know what I should think about the slower base speed of the challenger combined with the overall better agility.

    Generally it seems the Challenger trades some weapon power in favor of better handling and faster boost in relation to the FGS. The slower base speed might be neglectable, I hope?

    EDIT: now I realize the Challenger has NO FIGHTER HANGAR! Why that? It really should have. Without Fighter Hangar it really falls behind the FGS.
    As a fan of more agile ships I can only say I like the Challenger and sold my FGS. Yes, the fighter is great supplemental DPS but the helm experience is far superior to me in the challenger while still having a good hardpoint configuration to play with.

    Even if I needed a fighter, I'd still take a krait II over an FGS for largely the same reason.

  3. #18
    They need to bump the Challenger's thrusters up to Size 7's. Then it'll be great. Otherwise there's nothing it does the Krait doesn't do better once they're both engineered when it comes to actual combat.

  4. #19
    Originally Posted by TheGrimCorsair View Post (Source)
    It plays second fiddle to the Chieftain as a PvP duelling ship, and is better at pretty much any other role. I'm quite enjoying it.

    It also looks better than the Chieftain by a mile, though if they'd level the spine off and carried the T-tail back a bit past where it currently end it'd be perfect.
    You think so? Personally i got better results out the Challenger (though stuff does tend to run away) than the Chieftan, but each to thier own i guess.

  5. #20
    Originally Posted by TheMegaTurnip View Post (Source)
    You think so? Personally i got better results out the Challenger (though stuff does tend to run away) than the Chieftan, but each to thier own i guess.
    Very much a personal preference thing. So far I like the Chieftan better for anything related to combat. I get better mileage from two large hardpoints than adding more mediums, but I can see where a person that uses the medium weapons that perform in that category(PA's, Rails, even Frags) would move toward the Challenger. I also like the way the Chieftan feels "lighter" and is more able to be tossed into a slide to move around larger ships.

    And yes....I like how it looks better too. I do like the rear on the Challenger, but I actually want those side nacelles from the Chieftan. Challenger does have a better optional module loadout though, and I keep trying it for precisely this reason.

Page 2 of 2 First 12