Asp Scout: why not give it 11 internals?

[Nadreck]

There have been various proposals to improve the unloved Asp Scout, most of which involve turning it into a better warship (by improving its speed, for instance). It's already agile for a Medium ship, but there's no good reason not to use a Small ship instead (typically also agile, but also faster, with similar firepower, and presenting a smaller target).

But don't we have enough Medium warships already? Why not give it a genuinely unique non-combat-focused feature instead?

This is a ship that is almost as big as the Asp Explorer, but all core systems except the power distributor are one size smaller. The two largest internal bays are also one size smaller, and there are fewer of them overall:

Asp X: 6 5 3 3 3 2 2 1
Asp S: 5 4 3 3 2 2 1

...So, despite it being a slightly smaller ship, it's reasonable to assume there's some spare internal space that isn't being used.

But suppose it had these internals:

Asp S: 5 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1

This would give it one more internal slot than the Python (albeit smaller ones), and one more than the Cobra IV:

Python: 6 6 6 5 5 4 3 3 2 1
Cobra IV: 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1

It would become the "Swiss Army knife" of Medium ships, with more limpet controllers and other smallish gadgets packed into it. But still with a lower cargo capacity than the Asp X (up from 74t to 90t, versus 130t for the Asp X). It would still carry slightly less than the Cobra IV (92t), and have fewer internals than the Anaconda or Beluga.

It would become a versatile multirole ship, or Carrier-based explorer (where it wouldn't need the Asp X jumprange). Perhaps also a decent light core miner.

 

[Northpin]

There have been various proposals to improve the unloved Asp Scout, most of which involve turning it into a better warship (by improving its speed, for instance). It's already agile for a Medium ship, but there's no good reason not to use a Small ship instead (typically also agile, but also faster, with similar firepower, and presenting a smaller target).

It's the Most Agile ship from the mediums by Far.
And it's more agile than many small ships too. Only the Eagle is sensibly more maneuverable, with Sidewinder and Vulture slightly above the AspS

Also it is one of the most maneuverable ships in SuperCruise. IIRC is in top 3.

Giving it that many slots would make it a monster with stacked HRP/MRP...

 

[Nadreck]

Well, it could be toned down a bit in other areas. Somewhat heavier and less agile.

 

[Factabulous]

Well, it could be toned down a bit in other areas. Somewhat heavier and less agile.

So you want to take away two of the few good aspects ... riiiight

 

[Rubbernuke]

Lower the cost significantly- at least 1/3 to 1/4 of what it is now - it has to be cheaper than a Keelback but more expensive than a CM 3 and DB S (and on par with DB E)

Up its speed (+ 50 m/s faster cruise, 100 m/s boost) - still slightly slower than a Cobra Mk 3 but has better utility (see below)

Base range upped slightly (so its slightly better than a DB Scout, but more expensive) but below a DB E.

Add a size 1 2 and 3 slot (so superior to CM3 but inferior to T-6 / Keelback)

Add 2 more utility slots (so its back to the 4 the Explorer has) - this is a direct upgrade to the CM3 and the 3 utils on T-6, Keelback - is on par with DB S and X

-------

In essence make it a halfway house between a T-6 / Keelback and Cobra Mk 3- a fast, roomy ship thats an alternative to the CM3, has decent range and utility.

 

[Northpin]

Up its speed (+ 50 m/s faster cruise, 100 m/s boost) - still slightly slower than a Cobra Mk 3 but has better utility (see below)

Add a size 1 2 and 3 slot (so superior to CM3 but inferior to T-6 / Keelback)

Add 2 more utility slots (so its back to the 4 the Explorer has) - this is a direct upgrade to the CM3 and the 3 utils on T-6, Keelback - is on par with DB S and X

Those 3 improvements will make the Asp Scout better than a Vulture while still having better general utility / multipurpose value than a C3

But, meh
It will be in line with FD over-the-board ship adjustments - latest one being the Dolphin IIRC

 

[Rubbernuke]

Those 3 improvements will make the Asp Scout better than a Vulture while still having better general utility / multipurpose value than a C3

But, meh
It will be in line with FD over-the-board ship adjustments - latest one being the Dolphin IIRC

How did the Vulture come into this? This is not over the top at all, just repositioning the Scout as a smaller all purpose brother to the Explorer and alternative to a few ships. You also forget that the Asp Scout is a massive dinner plate and an easy target, while the Vulture is not being so compact. The Vulture will also still have the two L points and a better attacking ship- the main reason for the Vultures existence.

A Scout should be better than a CM3 because of its cost- the Scout should be seen as a bridge between the CM3, Keelback / T-6 as posted.

 

[Northpin]

How did the Vulture come into this?

Well, the upgraded AspS will be faster than a Vulture, as maneuverable, armed about the same (2 large vs 2m + 2s) - maybe with a better degree of variance, with potentially better shielding and better hull (3 more slots - more guardian shield boosters, more hrp/mrp), way better jump range and way better multipurpose utility
All those with a single draw back - being a larger target than a Vulture.

Edit: tbfh, it will suddenly become my ship of choice for the bubble taxi, mat gathering and any other job that doesnt require more than 50t of cargo

 

[Rubbernuke]

Well, the upgraded AspS will be faster than a Vulture

By about 10 m/s, but much slower if stuffed full of cargo or HRPs.

as maneuverable

In Coriolis at 4 pips with everything at max the Scout is less maneuverable than a Vulture.

armed about the same (2 large vs 2m + 2s) - maybe with a better degree of variance

Which offers flexibility but at the expense of attacking larger ships with no penalties.

with potentially better shielding and better hull (3 more slots - more guardian shield boosters, more hrp/mrp),

Vulture- 5 5 4 2 1 1 1 1

Asp Scout (new) 5 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1

Shield wise the Scout base shield is still weaker, and how would you power all those shield boosters since the powerplant has not changed?

If you made all the new slots HRPs with HD and DP you'd add 800 more HP, but at a giant agility cost. The Vulture at max HRPs would be 3350 ish with a shield v 4200 with the Scout in the same layout.

way better jump range and way better multipurpose utility

Well, it is a Scout after all- not a heavy fighter like the Vulture.

All those with a single draw back - being a larger target than a Vulture.

The Scout has to power those two new utilities as well (as well as any Guardian stuff), remember. Plus, the Vulture has a higher hardness, with the Scout inferior again.

 

[Northpin]

By about 10 m/s, but much slower if stuffed full of cargo or HRPs.



In Coriolis at 4 pips with everything at max the Scout is less maneuverable than a Vulture.



Which offers flexibility but at the expense of attacking larger ships with no penalties.



Vulture- 5 5 4 2 1 1 1 1

Asp Scout (new) 5 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1

Shield wise the Scout base shield is still weaker, and how would you power all those shield boosters since the powerplant has not changed?

If you made all the new slots HRPs with HD and DP you'd add 800 more HP, but at a giant agility cost. The Vulture at max HRPs would be 3350 ish with a shield v 4200 with the Scout in the same layout.



Well, it is a Scout after all- not a heavy fighter like the Vulture.



The Scout has to power those two new utilities as well (as well as any Guardian stuff), remember. Plus, the Vulture has a higher hardness, with the Scout inferior again.

Well, if you put a size 3 + size 2 GShield boosters, you get better shields than a vulture (with a 5c Bi-weave, thermal engineered, plus 2 resistance shield boosters)
If you setup the rest of the slots as a vulture (5 hrp + 2 mrp) you get about 1300 more hull after resists (700 absolute)

PP? Same size 4 on both, but AspS has smaller internals than Vulture so less power used by those internals - so in the end it will have about the same power left feed the weapons, even with 2 guardian shield boosters.
Vulture will do have a size 5 PD - but that matters only on power hungry weapon sets - for example - a full frag setup has better dps on AspS than on Vulture and it has the potential to compensate for lower piercing due to lower sized frags.
Better range means the AspS can afford to run a shielded FSD and still have decent range for a combat ship


AS i said, i would really love to have an AspS improved according to your proposal

 

[Rubbernuke]

Well, if you put a size 3 + size 2 GShield boosters, you get better shields than a vulture (with a 5c Bi-weave, thermal engineered, plus 2 resistance shield boosters)
If you setup the rest of the slots as a vulture (5 hrp + 2 mrp) you get about 1300 more hull after resists (700 absolute)

As it should be- the Scout is far larger in volume than the Vulture, why should it have similar internals when the Vulture is meant to be compact and built around its weapons and engines? Plus, you are losing agility (and speed) in doing so, one of the Scouts biggest strengths- without it, a Scout is a very easy target to hit.

PP? Same size 4 on both, but AspS has smaller internals than Vulture so less power used by those internals - so in the end it will have about the same power left feed the weapons, even with 2 guardian shield boosters.

The newer Scout could not use power hungry internals for everything- if it did it would have to heavily compromise elsewhere. With high load modules you can already put it in the red- having 2 new utilities and 3 internal slots would not make that better.

Vulture will do have a size 5 PD - but that matters only on power hungry weapon sets - for example - a full frag setup has better dps on AspS than on Vulture and it has the potential to compensate for lower piercing due to lower sized frags.

But its not universally better, just more flexible (as it should be).

Better range means the AspS can afford to run a shielded FSD and still have decent range for a combat ship

Where it sits now is not exactly scout like- it needs to have an inherent good range.

 

[Deleted member 121570]

I agree the AspS could use some love, especially as it's so insanely slow. It's quite a fun ship to fly, but I'd support the position it could be speed buffed and have a better internal configuration for general purpose multi-role activity.

This'd keep it in a Lakon niche out of direct competition with the AspX with range.

It's the Most Agile ship from the mediums by Far.
And it's more agile than many small ships too. Only the Eagle is sensibly more maneuverable, with Sidewinder and Vulture slightly above the AspS

That's completely bonkers tho. Sidey, Vulture, Courier and both Vipers comfortably leave it failing around with its relatively weak vert/lat thrust capabilities. It's nowhere even near an FDL either. Don't mistake rotational speeds for agility.

 

[Ganogati]

A Scout should be better than a CM3 because of its cost- the Scout should be seen as a bridge between the CM3, Keelback / T-6 as posted.

If that bad boy had 11 optional internals, it would absolutely not be the bridge between the CM3 and the Keelback/T-6. It would be leagues ahead of all 3 lol.

If we do this, the keelback and T6 really need some internal love.

 

[Northpin]

That's completely bonkers tho. Sidey, Vulture, Courier and both Vipers comfortably leave it failing around with its relatively weak vert/lat thrust capabilities. It's nowhere even near an FDL either. Don't mistake rotational speeds for agility.

Rotational speeds matter too - and the discussion was about an improved Scout:

• One that has +50 m/s cruise speed and +100 m/s boost speed (i would assume that includes upping the laterals too)
• One that has +1 +2 +3 sized optional internals (10 internals in total)
• and + 2 utility slots (4 in total)

 

[Nadreck]

If that bad boy had 11 optional internals, it would absolutely not be the bridge between the CM3 and the Keelback/T-6. It would be leagues ahead of all 3 lol.

If we do this, the keelback and T6 really need some internal love.

I've noticed that Rubbernuke's suggestion is very similar to mine with regard to the number of internals (mine has one more size 1: his has more speed, a lower cost, and 2 more utilities).

I haven't done enough combat to comment on that aspect of it. But as for internals, we have:

Cobra III: 4 4 4 2 2 2 1 1 (8 internals, 64t cargo)
Type 6: 5 5 4 4 3 2 2 1 (8 internals, 114t cargo)
Keelback: 5 5 4 3 2 2 1 (7 internals, 98t cargo)

The current Asp S has: 5 4 3 3 2 2 1 (7 internals, 74t cargo). This would go up to 88 or 90 tons. And as the T6 is a freighter, total capacity is more important than the number of internals it has. As the Asp S is currently more expensive than any of these, but currently has fewer internals and barely more cargo than the cheapest/smallest one, it's "in a bad place" presently.

 

[Ganogati]

I've noticed that Rubbernuke's suggestion is very similar to mine with regard to the number of internals (mine has one more size 1: his has more speed, a lower cost, and 2 more utilities).

I haven't done enough combat to comment on that aspect of it. But as for internals, we have:

Cobra III: 4 4 4 2 2 2 1 1 (8 internals, 64t cargo)
Type 6: 5 5 4 4 3 2 2 1 (8 internals, 114t cargo)
Keelback: 5 5 4 3 2 2 1 (7 internals, 98t cargo)

The current Asp S has: 5 4 3 3 2 2 1 (7 internals, 74t cargo). This would go up to 88 or 90 tons. And as the T6 is a freighter, total capacity is more important than the number of internals it has. As the Asp S is currently more expensive than any of these, but currently has fewer internals and barely more cargo than the cheapest/smallest one, it's "in a bad place" presently.

My concern is that if we add yet another combat ship that can out-haul the only haulers in its class range (the T6 and the Keelback are literally supposed to be haulers) then at that point we really don't have any use left for them.

I would say instead that the scout should embrace it's combat role and be given an additional M weapon slot as well as 2 additional utility slots.

 

[Rubbernuke]

If that bad boy had 11 optional internals, it would absolutely not be the bridge between the CM3 and the Keelback/T-6. It would be leagues ahead of all 3 lol.

If we do this, the keelback and T6 really need some internal love.

It needs to be a progression from the CM3 (which currently has no immediate superior- i.e. there is a gap), a faster CM4 (but less armed but actually available) and comparible to a T-6 / KeelB for cargo.

In reality T series ships should be cheaper to repair and buy but you can't balance the ships via money any more, especially small ships. Also the Keelback can launch an SLF, which none of these others can do.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Rotational speeds matter too - and the discussion was about an improved Scout:

• One that has +50 m/s cruise speed and +100 m/s boost speed (i would assume that includes upping the laterals too)
• One that has +1 +2 +3 sized optional internals (10 internals in total)
• and + 2 utility slots (4 in total)

I did not intend any uprating of its lateral speeds, just giving the Asp Scout a flat speed increase if possible. If it was any better it would rival Eagles and Vultures which would be wrong.

 

[Ganogati]

It needs to be a progression from the CM3 (which currently has no immediate superior- i.e. there is a gap), a faster CM4 (but less armed but actually available) and comparible to a T-6 / KeelB for cargo.

In reality T series ships should be cheaper to repair and buy but you can't balance the ships via money any more, especially small ships. Also the Keelback can launch an SLF, which none of these others can do.

I can't see a reason why a non-hauler combat ship should be comparable with a hauler of the same class in terms of hauling tonnage. At that point, what's the point of having haulers anymore? I mean, I'm all for just turning every ship in the game into a multi-purpose; in fact, I might have made a suggestion thread about that very thing a long time ago. But for as long as FDev is insistent that we should have ships fit into specific niches, then I'd like to not see them further eradicate the hauler niche by doing to the T6 and Keelback what they did to the T7 with the Python.

 

[Nadreck]

I can't see a reason why a non-hauler combat ship should be comparable with a hauler of the same class in terms of hauling tonnage. At that point, what's the point of having haulers anymore? I mean, I'm all for just turning every ship in the game into a multi-purpose; in fact, I might have made a suggestion thread about that very thing a long time ago. But for as long as FDev is insistent that we should have ships fit into specific niches, then I'd like to not see them further eradicate the hauler niche by doing to the T6 and Keelback what they did to the T7 with the Python.

But it still wouldn't out-haul them though. Especially not the T6.

Meanwhile the AspS' s niche is... what?