Ships Alliance Challenger, The more rounded, refined choice.

So we now have the Alliance Challenger to play with..

Chieftan Pros:

Very much faster than its new sister

Faster Pitch rates

Has a better Hardpoint vs Distributor ratio

Challenger Pros:

Much more resilliant

Very much smoother to fly, with less twitch

More (potential) DPS

These were the first direct comparisons I've been able to make after my limited time in the ship, However after a little more flying I noticed that the lateral thrust is'nt quite as powerful on the challenger, not hugely different, but less so than its sister ship. Also that the drag from the DD5 on the Chieftan is very much drawn out as opposed to the super nimble Challenger. The Challenger suffers from a rare issue of too small a Distributor, most noticable when using high draw weapons such as Plasma Accelerators, In this respect I feel like the Chieftan outperforms it in Applied DPS and potentially in hardpoint versitility due to the lower draw weapon set. The Chieftan also has a significant advantage when using Bi-Weave shields because of this. Less Distributor draw - More time for Pips in Shields.

However that being said it feels as though it is easier to apply the DPS in the Challenger due to less boost lag and more responsive aft and rear thrusters. Or potentially down to the lower top speed. Much closer to the sweet spot than the Chieftan who's speed in dogfights can be a liability leaving you strung out and drifting waiing for the trust to kick in properly, That effect seems to be lessened in the Challenger, not hugely, but enough to make the difference.

Overall I'd not say the Challenger is a straight upgrade to the Chieftan, but it is a very valid and fun sidegrade. Smoother handling with a good hardpoint layout, a propensity to last longer in fights and maybe also deal out more damage with the right loadout, A classier alternative to the sometimes awkward slide-rocket that is the Chieftan.

Over and out. o7
 
Last edited:
I'm using mine for everything now. It's got enough utility to be a very solid naval support vessel, both operating as a combat operation vehicle and logistics.
 
Furthermore, this is the first ship that I've built specifically to operate with a crew of two. With a crew member, I, the pilot, am relieved of control over SCB, seeker missiles & turrets.

The turrets are also a big deal when flying solo. They are fantastic against the smallest ships such as Eagles or the like.

All in all this ship is much better than a Cobra for combat, and, with a 64t cargo hold, can move twice the cargo. It's basically a straight upgrade in every respect except straight line speed and jump range.
 
It’s a pretty great ship - a bit more fleksible than the chieftain in my experience so far.

Have transfered modules from my chief to make direct comparison.
It seems like differences are centered around the 10% figure.
Challenger is 10% slower, less pitch and less jumprange.
But have about 10% higher dps (with same wepon types), 10% higher shield strength and hulls.

I really like how the challenger flies/handles, even better than the chieftain IMO. The optional modules are better for my setups and while I mourn the loss of one large weapon hardpoint, the 3 mediums are much more flexible, especially if you want to go thargoid scout hunting.

When comparing looks, I personally prefer the challenger also, the chief is too big (I don’t really like medium/large ships). The challenger seems more compact without the wing engines. It’s small enough that I’m not put off the ship.

So... I’ve tried it in HAZRES and nonhuman signal sources (‘goid scouts) and it performs great. It’s a very coolruning ship and with a vented beam heat isn’t an issue.

Compared to my favorite ship the vulture, it flies like a larger version of that, the lower shieldstrength of the challenger is compensated by the higher damageoutput and in worst case scenario, the pretty high base hull strength.
This ship takes any beating.

I have sold all my other ships and will try to love this ship for a while.
 
Have anyone also noticed that the pitchrate almost doesn’t seem to be influenced by pips to ENG?

I noticed this in a few fights where I had forgotten to recmanage the pips from last fight.

I did som rudimentary tests, and my heavy challenger with drag drives DDT’s did a full 360 degree turn in about 7,4 s with 4 PIPs ton ENG and only 7,9s with 0 PIPs!
Just like the chieftain, boosting in combat isn’t the best choice unless your target tries to run and put distance between you, so speed while turning isn’t that important.
The Challenger also doesn’t lose speed while doing tight turns unlike the Chieftain, just as long you keep thrusters in the blue.

This basically means you can do a tight turning fight with a single PIP to ENG, and distribute the rest to your pleasure, which makes this ship even better.

Example of how great this ship is in combat.
Last night I was intercepted by a master python while hunting an elite bounty, just after I had begun the fight, the primary target (which turned out to be an elite corvette :eek:) jumped in and joined the fight.
I kept only 1 PIP to ENG! 1½ to shields and the rest to weapons.
Eventually to Corvette managed to bring my shields down with a couple of well placed plasma bolts, but I actually managed to kill both ships and got out with 89% hull!
This ship will get you home in one piece for sure.
 
I have noticed a few issues going on with it though it must be said.

The lower class hardpoints actually equate to such a piddly increase in DPS after hardness values are applied that its not worth loosing the speed over.
I also found too many hardpoints for the distributor and a relatively low Hardness.

That being said the versatility is nice with c2's as are the engine dynamics, and in terms of handling I'd say the vulture is the only better one. And despite the fairly low hardness it is very capable of soaking up some fire, but just like the Chief the module strength is very weak.

I just think considering the literally insignificant DPS change the speed loss is'nt warranted. If any Devs are reading this please consider a buff. Not a huge one, but maybe an extra 20mps just to make it a little more competative.
 
Personally I think the challenger is a total waste of time, it is practically the chieftain, with engines on a spoiler, I feel Frontier are becoming properly lazy with ship design and rehashing of ships should stop.
T9, T10, Diamondback Scout,Exp, Viper Mk3 Mk4, Cobra Mk3, mk4, Fed assault, dropship, gunship, the list goes on. Frontier is better and creating the original ships, and not side drifting to make ships esp: rehashes just for thargoid incursions, this is forcing gameplay, in my opinion.

Their are many players saying the same with many videos stating there is hardly any difference at all between challenger and Chieftain aside some cosmetics and camera angles. Poor show Frontier.

I think you should concentrate on the following:

in game bug fixes
in game mechanics
immersion

before moving on to anything else.

Check out the local stats speak for itself how many players are flying challengers currently over the long awaited Krait.
 
I am very happy with my Challenger. It's my go-to mining ship now, handles the job beautifully and far more efficiently than I'd expected.

Can more than handle itself in a fight too, and is just a joy to fly.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
I like the Chieftain and the challenger, with one exception. When you get really close to a target, the Challenger has difficulty keeping the primary fire group all firing. My primary fire group is two efficient beams one with thermal vent, and two over charged pulse oversized, three rail guns on secondary, both long range oversized. The Chieftain may have less hardpoints, but they are better placed for close in sustained fire. I have them both set up for 3 0 3 pips, and the Chieftain actually has higher DPS due to time on target with all primary weapons firing without the ships hull blocking some weapons. Both are great though.
 
The challenger feels wayyy too similar to the federal ships for me to fly it, it's just been done a lot already. Maneuverable ship with high hull, low shield and a lot of medium/small hardpoints........
 
The Swagenger is the wet piracy dream come true for me.
Ample speed, good resilience due to mil-slots, a lot of internals
to be flexible, great hardpoints to equip tools, yes TOOLS not DPS.

The hardpoints are so well placed you can find use for a lot of tools
making piracy a joy.
 
The challenger feels wayyy too similar to the federal ships for me to fly it, it's just been done a lot already. Maneuverable ship with high hull, low shield and a lot of medium/small hardpoints........
Somewhat agree but;

Challenger is better looking (my opinion).

Challenger has better dps, optional armor and shields, albeit by a small magin compared to the fed’s.

The fgs has small fighter for fun, the challenger is more fun (manouverable) to fly
 
Somewhat agree but;

Challenger is better looking (my opinion).

Challenger has better dps, optional armor and shields, albeit by a small magin compared to the fed’s.

The fgs has small fighter for fun, the challenger is more fun (manouverable) to fly
Yeah to be frank it's better than the FGS in every way IMO, the on paper DPS is less, but the Applicable DPS is amongst the highest in the ship size class, arguably the highest actually (Don't know how the FDL stacks up, would think its pretty close too).

No matter how often i fly it, having a medium ship with such little drift is bloody amazing, it's like a FAS, but a FAS without worms as to not feel the need to drag itself around by the rear end lol.
 
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 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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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. :)
 
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.
 
Top Bottom