Ships Asp 'Interceptor' Mk IV

[OZYMANDlUS]

Asp "Interceptor" Mk IV

'The Asp Interceptor is designed for long range engagements. It's role is to be the first to the front line. This ship is anything but pretty, but packs enough firepower to devastate wings of small craft. It is far from being the heaviest shielded or armored ship out there, but she definately is capable of spearheading the charge.'

price: ~ 15 mil cr.
Dimensions: 64.5 L x 46.8 W x 16.8 H
Maneuverability: 7
Top Speed: 276
Boost speed: 354
Shields: 249
Armor: 432
Hull Mass: 320
Cargo Capacity: 20t
Fuel Capacity: 32t
Unladen Range: 10.76
Pad size: Medium
Hardpoints:
1x Large Hard Point
2x Medium Hard Points
2x Small Hard Points
3x Utility Hard Points
Internals:
1x size 6 compartment
2x size 5 compartments
1x size 3 compartment
1x size 2 compartment

Outfitting -
Bulkheads: size 8 - Lightweight Alloy
Reactor Bay: size 6 - E6
Thruster Mounting: size 6 - E6
Frame Shift Drive: size 5 - E5
Enviromental Control: size 4 - E4
Power Coupling: size 6 - E6
Sensor suite: size 5 - E5
Fuel Storage: size 5 - 32t tank
Internal Compartment: size 6 - shield gen E6
Internal Compartment: size 5 - cargo rack size 4 (16t)
Internal Compartment: size 5 - empty
Internal Compartment: size 3 - cargo rack size 2 (4t)
Internal Compartment: size 2 - basic discovery scanner

The Asp interceptor appears very similar to the Asp Explorer. Instead of a lower canopy area there is a large hardpoint underneath the cockpit slightly back. The. 2 medium hardpoints are located on the upper forward surface of the ship. One each directly on either side of the cockpit. The 2 small hardpoints are located on the upper surface of the ship midway back on either side of the spine. These 2 hardpoints are ideal for turrets. There is 1 utility hardpoint located behind the cockpit on top. The last 2 utility hardpoints are forward of each stabilizer wing on the underside of the frame.

Renderings were done by CMDR BlackHogg. I take no credit for them. Here is the thread were they are found:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=166968

 

[Strychnine]

I like it! I'm in an Asp Explorer right now and I love it! This would be great addition to the Lakon family! The entire premise reminds me of this...

[video=youtube;GZZqrg50rYs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZZqrg50rYs[/video]

Breach the defenses and hold the line!

 

[Psycho Romeo]

Ugh. Another overpowered ship suggestion.

You've suggested a 15m ship with:
1) A rough hardpoint value of 9. From the asp, two smalls have been traded for a large.
2) Very nice internal compartments. From the asp, a consolidation into larger compartments.
3) Better everything internal modules.
3a) Better jump range - base 1, plus a hole module size.
3b) Better distributor - by two whole sizes
3c) Better power plant - can't have power limiting a combat ship huh? Lunacy.
3d) But the same sensors and life support. Gotta give somewhere right?

And average speed with below average shielding.

This ship isn't very far from the FDL yet it's so unreasonably priced...

 

[despiser]

Perfect. Give up one utility but the hardpoints make up for it. Coming in 1.4? Now I have to decide between this and a federal assault

 

[Ceekay]

Perfect. Give up one utility but the hardpoints make up for it. Coming in 1.4? Now I have to decide between this and a federal assault

No you don't as the FAS is balanced and available, good agility but medium speed, good armour but average shields, good weapon fit and location but adequate PD (better than an Asp though), decent sized fuel tank but poor-average jump range and average cargo, utility slots.

I reckon the FAS is right of the edge of it's balance range another 5% increase in speed, power, shields etc would have pushed it into OP territory, I'd suggest aspiring ship designers use it as a template for ships in the 20 - 30 mil range in the same way as the Python's abilities are as good as you're gonna get in the 50 - 70 price range

 

[Poseidal]

Ugh. Another overpowered ship suggestion.

You've suggested a 15m ship with:
1) A rough hardpoint value of 9. From the asp, two smalls have been traded for a large.
2) Very nice internal compartments. From the asp, a consolidation into larger compartments.
3) Better everything internal modules.
3a) Better jump range - base 1, plus a hole module size.
3b) Better distributor - by two whole sizes
3c) Better power plant - can't have power limiting a combat ship huh? Lunacy.
3d) But the same sensors and life support. Gotta give somewhere right?

And average speed with below average shielding.

This ship isn't very far from the FDL yet it's so unreasonably priced...

Yep, just an Asp +1

To make a 'combat' or 'interceptor' Asp, it needs the same (or worse) FSD, and stripping out of most of the internal bays for the better distributor.

Also, armour might be a bit high, but I don't recall the original values.

I would re-work the entire concept I'm afraid. The model is good, but these stats are crazy.

 

[goemon]

op, it's op! reasons above. also, with that hullmass and class 5 thrusters it will boost to 400+ fully upgraded...

 

[Sendraks]

As others have said, this is just an "and win" version for the Asp, basically and Asp+ FDL performance at a fraction of the price.

Hugely unimaginative to take pretty much every module slot and increase it by a value of one. Its like a five year old doing "ship balancing."

The overall concept is sound though, and the model for the ship is very nice. If its an interceptor, then it needs to be lighter, not heavier. So less armour for a start. The starting point for modules should be the same as the Asp, although the higher class sensors makes a lot of sense. I'd keep the handling the same as well, its an interceptor, not a dogfighter so it shouldn't be more maneuverable than the original Asp. Larger thrusters and larger distributor make sense. From a game balance point of view, the powerplant needs to stay the same.

Hardpoints I would say should be x4 small and x1 large.

 

[Ceekay]

I think the problem we have in ED ship design is trying to assign present day fighter terminology to spaceships and more importantly spaceships in staggeringly vast battlespace.
For example what do we want to intercept with our "interceptor" the present day role is to destroy incoming fighter and/or bombers from engaging a fixed or slow moving target like an airbase or aircraft carrier here in ED that'd be a station/outpost or perhaps a convoy or capital ship, trouble is these are rare scenarios in ED appearing as CG's or player generated content.

The game ATM has three ship categories combat, multirole and transport, however they're not very distinct so you can use a multirole ship for combat and cargo transport, I suppose the closest we have to interceptors currently are the Viper, Cobra and FDL from Fedland and the Courier, Clipper and iEagle fro the other baddies .
Perhaps with ground installation in Horizons interceptors will become a "thing" but for me I currently struggle to see a role for them, perhaps a dedicated Interdictor range of ships might be worth considering possibly unarmed with heavy shields and armour winged up with dedicated fighters i.e. no interdictor just max offensive and defensive loadouts.

 

[OZYMANDlUS]

Ugh. Another overpowered ship suggestion.

You've suggested a 15m ship with:
1) A rough hardpoint value of 9. From the asp, two smalls have been traded for a large.
2) Very nice internal compartments. From the asp, a consolidation into larger compartments.
3) Better everything internal modules.
3a) Better jump range - base 1, plus a hole module size.
3b) Better distributor - by two whole sizes
3c) Better power plant - can't have power limiting a combat ship huh? Lunacy.
3d) But the same sensors and life support. Gotta give somewhere right?

And average speed with below average shielding.

This ship isn't very far from the FDL yet it's so unreasonably priced...

Only 3 internals were raised. Powerplant by 1, thrusters by 1 and distributor by 2. Jump range is less than an Asp because it is heaver. It is exact same FSD as a regular Asp. You flown an Asp before, right? Yep 2 small traded for a large, but price point is 2.5 X the amount of base Asp. If you are thinking OP, check out the Clipper, nearly the exact same standard internals. 7 mil more, but a whole crap load of more internal compartment. I firmly believe this is a very balanced ship.

- - - Updated - - -

op, it's op! reasons above. also, with that hullmass and class 5 thrusters it will boost to 400+ fully upgraded...

I guess you think the clipper is OP as well? This ship is slower than the clipper and smaller.


I built this ship to between an Asp & a clipper. Less multipurpose, more combat oriented. At 2.5x the price of the Asp and only 7 mil less than a clipper! Let's be honest 7 mil isn't even a module.

 

[OZYMANDlUS]

As others have said, this is just an "and win" version for the Asp, basically and Asp+ FDL performance at a fraction of the price.

Hugely unimaginative to take pretty much every module slot and increase it by a value of one. Its like a five year old doing "ship balancing."

The overall concept is sound though, and the model for the ship is very nice. If its an interceptor, then it needs to be lighter, not heavier. So less armour for a start. The starting point for modules should be the same as the Asp, although the higher class sensors makes a lot of sense. I'd keep the handling the same as well, its an interceptor, not a dogfighter so it shouldn't be more maneuverable than the original Asp. Larger thrusters and larger distributor make sense. From a game balance point of view, the powerplant needs to stay the same.

Hardpoints I would say should be x4 small and x1 large.

There are not bombers in this game. I chose the word interceptor, for no other reason than to get people thinking the right direction. Fast, front line fighter. I designed it to be able to handle most combat ships. Im more than sure a FDL, Python, Annie will still smoke it no problem. I basically had in mind to take on wings of smaller craft. Wings of Eagles, Vipers, a Vulture or 2.

 

[OZYMANDlUS]

Yep, just an Asp +1

To make a 'combat' or 'interceptor' Asp, it needs the same (or worse) FSD, and stripping out of most of the internal bays for the better distributor.

Also, armour might be a bit high, but I don't recall the original values.

I would re-work the entire concept I'm afraid. The model is good, but these stats are crazy.

Bring up an Asp template, bring up a Imp Clipper, compare them two to this design. I built a ship firmly in between the 2 with a price point in between. I find it funny, people are willing to quickly shout OP, just because a player created the concept. I actually checked stats, i ran numbers again and again to check concepts. Yes, it will have very little in the way of power issues. Unless you are trying to get the best of every power hungry weapon. With a normal loadout, you should end up with your power in the mid 90s. Tbh, i was thinking 4 med hardpoints. I changed to 2 medium & 2 small because after thought it would of been a little OP for the price.

 

[OZYMANDlUS]

I am loathe to do this. But, just to get people thinking the right direction..
Asp Explorer
Type: Multipurpose
Cost: 6,661,153 CR
Top Speed:254 m/s
Boost Speed:345 m/s
Manoeuvrability: 6
Shields: 152 MJ (note: Asp with E6 shield gen: 178 MJ)
Armour:378
Hull Mass:280 t
Cargo Capacity:38 t
Fuel Capacity: 32 t
Unladen Jump Range:13.12 ly
Landing Pad Size: Medium
Hardpoints:
4x Utility Mounts
4x Small Hardpoints
2x Medium Hardpoints
Internals:
2x Size 2 Compartments
3x Size 3 Compartments
1x Size 5 Compartment
1x Size 6 Compartment

Imperial Clipper
Dimensions: 106.7L - 103.7W - 24.8H
Type: Heavy Multipurpose
Cost: 22,295,860 CR
Top Speed: 306 m/s
Boost Speed: 388 m/s
Manoeuvrability: 2
Shields: 186 MJ
Armour: 486
Hull Mass: 400 t
Cargo Capacity: 74 t
Fuel Capacity: 16 t
Unladen Jump Range: 8.98 ly
Landing Pad Size: Large
Hardpoints:
4x Utility Mounts
2x Medium Hardpoints
2x Large Hardpoints
Internals:
2x Size 2 Compartments
2x Size 3 Compartments
2x Size 4 Compartments
1x Size 6 Compartment
1x Size 7completektnt

Asp 'Interceptor' MkIV
Type: Combat
price: ~ 15 mil cr.
Dimensions: 64.5 L x 46.8 W x 16.8 H
Maneuverability: 7
Top Speed: 264 m/s
Boost speed: 348 m/s
Shields: 249 MJ
Armor: 392
Hull Mass: 320t
Cargo Capacity: 20t
Fuel Capacity: 32t
Unladen Range: 10.76 ly
Pad size: Medium
Hardpoints: 2x Medium Hard Points
2x Small Hard Points
1x Large Hard Point
3x Utility Hard Points
Internals: 1x size 6 compartment
2x size 5 compartments
1x size 3 compartment
1x size 2 compartment

As far as shields go i figured shields for my interceptor based on Asp shield with 2x A boosters. End result, once completely A rated it will have a shield strength of on 1 more A booster than the standard Asp can achieve. Not that much more potent. Especially compared to than the MASSIVE skewing of shields that a Python receives. Python base shields for an E6 shield gen is 292 MJ. Max possible shield for interceptor is 505 MJ. (6A shield gen & 3x A boosters). Max possible for a Python: 715 MJ (6A shield gen & 4x A boosters). Max shields for a Clipper 550 MJ (7A shield gen & 4x A boosters). Threw clipper in to demonstrate price point.

 

[goemon]

I guess you think the clipper is OP as well? This ship is slower than the clipper and smaller.


I built this ship to between an Asp & a clipper. Less multipurpose, more combat oriented. At 2.5x the price of the Asp and only 7 mil less than a clipper! Let's be honest 7 mil isn't even a module.

a) the clipper need rank. i can't see a rank needed in your proposal.
b) the clipper has a great straight line speed, but, through it's dimensions, it's not a dogfighter (at all)
c) the clipper has a nice balancing by missing a class 5 slot. your proposal has 2 class 5 internals.
d) the clipper has a good balancing by having not well placed hardpoints. an asp has superb hardpoint placements.
e) the clipper can't land on outposts

you look for an combat Asp. i got that. i recommend studying the DBS - how balancing is done there (from my perspective mainly by a fewer number of internal moduls, which restricts it use against a cobra, viper, courier). a "better fighter" with "amazing jumprange" and "still good cargo" would make your ship the only valid powerplay ship.

 

[Ceekay]

Don't get me wrong I'm all for more and varied ships and in theory your Asp Interceptor is a great concept, adding a bit more speed, shields and armour, however the balance trades you're using aren't that important in a focused combat ship i.e.range and cargo capacity, after all FDL's aren't usually bought for trading or exploring so something else needs a little nerfing.

The biggest problem is upping the PD compartment size to class 6 (the power plant and thrusters I don't have much of an issue with) is that this allows for a potential 60% increase in weapon capacitor storage that would be a real game changer in a Asp class ship, I reckon a class 5 would be better suited to this class of ship although that has a 30% bump in storage.

 

[Sendraks]

Bring up an Asp template, bring up a Imp Clipper, compare them two to this design. I built a ship firmly in between the 2 with a price point in between.

Yes, but you've not created something midway between the two, you've created a version of the Asp that is just a superior version of the Asp in every way. That's bad design. There's no tradeoffs at all. You've simply just taken the basic Asp, boosted all its fittings by one class, optimised its internals, slapped some additional credits on and you're done. This isn't a combat craft. This is an uber multi-role craft. On steroids.

I find it funny, people are willing to quickly shout OP, just because a player created the concept.

No, people are shouting because the design is bad. The concept is fine. However, you're looking to blame others for the flaws in your design, rather than blame yourself. The concept of the Asp Interceptor is great. The proposed stats for it are totally out of whack.

I actually checked stats, i ran numbers again and again to check concepts. Yes, it will have very little in the way of power issues.

Given all the combat craft in the game have power management issues, this might be your first clue that something is awry with your design.

I changed to 2 medium & 2 small because after thought it would of been a little OP for the price.

It'd be OP at any price. Price is not a balancing factor in this game.

Also, in terms of balance, the Python is a bad, baaaaaaad, craft to balance your ship against, given how imbalanced the Python still is.

Start again, with your concept of an interceptor. Which is great.
What does the interceptor need to do?
1 - Capable of long jump range, to get to problem situations quickly.
2 - Be fast, so it can, you know, intercept.

 

[OZYMANDlUS]

a) the clipper need rank. i can't see a rank needed in your proposal.
b) the clipper has a great straight line speed, but, through it's dimensions, it's not a dogfighter (at all)
c) the clipper has a nice balancing by missing a class 5 slot. your proposal has 2 class 5 internals.
d) the clipper has a good balancing by having not well placed hardpoints. an asp has superb hardpoint placements.
e) the clipper can't land on outposts

you look for an combat Asp. i got that. i recommend studying the DBS - how balancing is done there (from my perspective mainly by a fewer number of internal moduls, which restricts it use against a cobra, viper, courier). a "better fighter" with "amazing jumprange" and "still good cargo" would make your ship the only valid powerplay ship.

Clipper has a class 7 slot. Worth 2 class 6's. So what is the argument over a slot. It doesn't make sense. If you read, you would have to choose either the mediums or the large for fixed. The other would have to be gimballed to get any kind of converging fire. The smalls are moved on top and back. There only usefulness is as turrets to cover some of the previous huge blind spot that the Asp has. Your point about rank.. If someone really wants a clipper, it is easy to get the rank. Landing at outposts or not... Not much overall loss unless you plan on doing trading of certain goods (metals & minerals) or you are into mining. I just don't see the validity of your arguments. Any of the so called detriments the courier has easily overcomed.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, but you've not created something midway between the two, you've created a version of the Asp that is just a superior version of the Asp in every way. That's bad design. There's no tradeoffs at all. You've simply just taken the basic Asp, boosted all its fittings by one class, optimised its internals, slapped some additional credits on and you're done. This isn't a combat craft. This is an uber multi-role craft. On steroids.


No, people are shouting because the design is bad. The concept is fine. However, you're looking to blame others for the flaws in your design, rather than blame yourself. The concept of the Asp Interceptor is great. The proposed stats for it are totally out of whack.


Given all the combat craft in the game have power management issues, this might be your first clue that something is awry with your design.



It'd be OP at any price. Price is not a balancing factor in this game.

Also, in terms of balance, the Python is a bad, baaaaaaad, craft to balance your ship against, given how imbalanced the Python still is.

Start again, with your concept of an interceptor. Which is great.
What does the interceptor need to do?
1 - Capable of long jump range, to get to problem situations quickly.
2 - Be fast, so it can, you know, intercept.

Ok mr. Whiz.. Fix it. Without turning into something that is not Asp like. Think of the things an Asp does. Make it for combat, without destroying what an Asp is. Btw, the uber multirole craft on steroids is the python. Or even the anaconda. This design wouldn't hold a candle to.. Also by your argument by just improving what is already there and making it better, means it is OP. I guess the imperial eagle is OP.

 

[goemon]

i think you like your idea. carry on.

(if you ever flown a ship that can't land on outposts, you'd know what that means for mission gameplay... and a class 7 internal is NOT worth two class 6 two internals. with the clipper, you have to decide whether you want to outfit it as a trader, which it is supposed to be, with weak shields (because it can than only fit a class 4 shield), or if you sacrife those big slots for a decent shield. and concerning rank, i suggest doing a forum search on "fast ranking". and for your argument "without loosing what an Asp is": the thing is, the Asp is balanced, if you think about a combat Asp, you'd have to trade something in. but what you want, is an upgrade. enjoy.)

 

[OZYMANDlUS]

I have had 1 person actually give constructive criticism. That is with the Power Distributor. I will give it to that induvidual. A valid argument was made. For the rest im still waiting for a valid argument. Or better yet. Give an example of what you would change and why. That simple. To jump up and down and say it is OP because is a better Asp. It is twice the prics of an Asp. It better be an improvement. People say it is OP because i really didn't take a lot away. I give you the Imperial Eagle <tada>. I see it as progress. Improving on something without handicapping what it was. If everything had to be 1 step forward, 2 steps back; we would still be living in caves and swinging clubs. I do not mind constructive criticism. Just make it constructive with valid points.

- - - Updated - - -

i think you like your idea. carry on.

(if you ever flown a ship that can't land on outposts, you'd know what that means for mission gameplay... and a class 7 internal is NOT worth two class 6 two internals. with the clipper, you have to decide whether you want to outfit it as a trader, which it is supposed to be, with weak shields (because it can than only fit a class 4 shield), or if you sacrife those big slots for a decent shield. and concerning rank, i suggest doing a forum search on "fast ranking". and for your argument "without loosing what an Asp is": the thing is, the Asp is balanced, if you think about a combat Asp, you'd have to trade something in. but what you want, is an upgrade. enjoy.)

The clipper has a class 7 & 6 slot. You can throw a class 6 shield and still run with 128t of cargo spacd from the class 7.

 

[OZYMANDlUS]

Don't get me wrong I'm all for more and varied ships and in theory your Asp Interceptor is a great concept, adding a bit more speed, shields and armour, however the balance trades you're using aren't that important in a focused combat ship i.e.range and cargo capacity, after all FDL's aren't usually bought for trading or exploring so something else needs a little nerfing.

The biggest problem is upping the PD compartment size to class 6 (the power plant and thrusters I don't have much of an issue with) is that this allows for a potential 60% increase in weapon capacitor storage that would be a real game changer in a Asp class ship, I reckon a class 5 would be better suited to this class of ship although that has a 30% bump in storage.

I can see your point with the class 6 distributor. I looked at a class 5 powerplant. Even with basic weapons, once you put A class shield & boosters it would run over 100% and not even have 1 SCB. Class 6 was the only viable option. Unless i wanted to completely skew the shield generators like every other combat ship so i could lower its internal compartment size. Every combat ship has a 2x or better modifier to its shield output for a given class over a non combat ship. I didn't want to do that. I thought a 1.2 bonus over what could be achieved in a base Asp was more than fair.