Ship Builds & Load Outs Coriolis Comparison for Exploration

[Major Klutz]

I created a comparison in Coriolis for exploration outfitted ships.
https://eddp.co/u/PSvSlBHM
Update: Updated the comparison again with alternate builds for some ships.

This is the list of ships that I might consider taking on an Exploration expedition, Outfitted and Engineered the way I might configure them for an Expedition with other players rather than solo.
These include the new 61.2% increase to optimal mass from the upcoming engineering changes but none of the engineering changes are in Coriolis yet so these numbers will surely change.
You will probably have different requirements or opinions. You can import this list and customize the builds or add additional ships as you see fit.

I was surprised that a link that short could contain all of the builds included in the comparison.
You can sort by Jump Range, Speed, Cost, Hull Strength, Agility, etc...
Click through the ship name to see the actual build.

Not surprisingly, the Anaconda is the only ship (that I considered) that can carry ALL of the optional accessories that one might want on an expedition.
The basics like scanners, shields, AFM and SRV. A second AFM and a fighter bay. Repair and Fuel limpet controllers with cargo space to use them.
No matter how I tried, I could not fit all of that on any other ship. Not even a Cutter.

Let me know any constructive critiques you may have on any of the builds or alternative builds that might be better on an Expedition with other players rather than solo exploration.

 

[baqar79]

I think it's good the work you put in here; a nice quick easy reference comparing the maximum jump distances in the upcoming 3.0 version of all ships with a standard exploration kit.

The mass penalty on the new 61.2% FSD drives is +30% with the beta (+20% is the best roll possible in live). There are however a few mass reduction buffs you can use to help offset this (although they could change from the beta):
-G5 "Enhanced low power" shields has had the mass reduction buffed from -40% -> -50%, in addition you can buff this further with a secondary to -55%.
-Power plant, thrusters and distributor all have the option of a secondary effect called "stripped down" giving a mass reduction of -10%.
-Utilities like the Heatsink launcher have had the mass reduction bonus increased from -80% -> -85%

I'm a little surprised at how great the jump range is on the Python (didn't expect it to beat the Type-6); 6th best jump range overall (Anaconda > DBX > AspX > Orca > Dolphin > Python > Type-6).

 

[ChiefRedCloud]

Nice work here ... I've saved it .... thank you ...

Chief

 

[Zenith]

Thank you for the comparison chart.
You've shown that while jump range is a strong factor, it isn't everything. You also don't have to load up a large ship with everything + the kitchen sink!

I've started on my ship for DW2 and decided early on for a Cutter. I've already bought and generally fitted the ship and engineered the main modules to G5 in an attempt to use grandfathering to cut down on the number of rolls. Sure, it's going to spend most of the year berthed up after it's been "finally" engineered, but how many people take a combined exploration/mining Cutter on a deep space expedition?

 

[Major Klutz]

...

The mass penalty on the new 61.2% FSD drives is +30% with the beta (+20% is the best roll possible in live). There are however a few mass reduction buffs you can use to help offset this (although they could change from the beta):
-G5 "Enhanced low power" shields has had the mass reduction buffed from -40% -> -50%, in addition you can buff this further with a secondary to -55%.
-Power plant, thrusters and distributor all have the option of a secondary effect called "stripped down" giving a mass reduction of -10%.
-Utilities like the Heatsink launcher have had the mass reduction bonus increased from -80% -> -85%

...

Thanks for that. I knew there would be some mass changes in live, but I made the assumption that all things being equal, it wouldn't affect the comparison. I'll probably go in and tweak the builds with the mass changes above, or hopefully Coriolis will update with the new numbers soon. beta.coriolis.edcd.io doesn't appear to be any different from coriolis.edcd.io

Update: I put these numbers into a few builds so far and they don't make a significant difference, even on a smaller ship. The net effect seems to be a slight reduction in jump range.
Example, the Cobra Mk3 dropped from 41.11ly on a full tank to 41.08ly, the Python went from 44.35 to 44.31, the Cutter went from 37.21 to 37.10 and the Anaconda dropped from 61.07 to 60.89.

P.S. The Python and Type-6 are neck-and-neck. There's a lightweight variant of the Python that just beats the heavy build of the Type-6. The Type-6 pulls ahead slightly if you lighten it to a 2G PVH instead of a 4G as I did with the lightweight Python.

I did this comparison for DW2 so I tried to bring extra SRVs if possible. In my experience, on an expedition, when you're meeting up with other players, there's a high probability of losing your SRV to shenanigans. So there are some builds with 6G or 4G SRV hangars and some lightweight variants with 2G hangars.

I'm leaning heavily toward a ship with a Size 5 FSD. A 5A FSD is interchangeable between a wide range of medium ships that would be good for exploration.
The Clipper and the Python primarily. The Clipper handles well and can cruise at 400m/s. The Python isn't that fast but it can carry more goodies and jump farther.

 

[marx]

Quite handy, and a lot of work done. Thanks!

About the Imperial Courier: you should include a light version of that too. I'd recommend this.
Also, how about adding an Adder there?

As for the Clipper and Python: personally, I'd say go with the Clipper, for its excellent supercruise handling (see here) and oversized fuel scoop. That's what it does better than other ships (in its FSD category), and considerably so. The Python, on the other hand, is decent overall, but doesn't really shine in anything. Except that it can land on medium landing pads.

 

[Major Klutz]

The Clipper's speed and maneuverability give it a big fun advantage on an expedition.

I couldn't lighten the Courier any more. I'd never go anywhere without an SRV, especially on an Expedition.
Swapping out the enhanced thrusters takes away the Courier's main advantage over other ships. A Diamondback beats the Courier hands down except for the speed fun factor.

 

[marx]

I couldn't lighten the Courier any more. I'd never go anywhere without an SRV, especially on an Expedition.

I mentioned this for the Courier because several of your small ship light build templates don't have an SRV bay fitted either.

Personally, I like flying a Courier for also the cockpit view and the small ship feel. It's a great little ship for screenshots, especially since the pilot in the seat is quite easy to make out.

Swapping out the enhanced thrusters takes away the Courier's main advantage over other ships.

For a lighter build, 2A Enhanced Thrusters are also an option worth considering. They weigh considerably less (than the 3A), while still giving you plenty of speed.

 

[Major Klutz]

The other small ships that I did a light build for was because for those ships, you have to choose between an SRV or Shields, you can't have both.
I personally would never consider taking one of those small ships myself but if I did, I would take the SRV over the shields.
I'll probably throw some other lighter and perhaps heavier builds in there soon. I figure Coriolis won't update it's numbers until after the release so they can see what the new numbers actually are.

Having been flying a Courier in the bubble for a couple of weeks. I'm reminded of how painful fuel scooping is in a smaller ship like that. The shorter jump range coupled with the small tank, slow scooping rate and tenancy to overheat while scooping has ruled that ship out as a possibility (for me) to take on DW2. It'll be at least 2000 jumps to get to Beagle Point and another 2000 to get back which will make a smaller ship that much more tedious while traveling, despite that fact that it will be much more fun at meetups.

So my new criteria for choosing a ship are ...
Size 5 fuel scoop or larger ...
35 ly range or better ... (for the sake of travel time and sanity)
At least six internals for a minimum loadout that includes Fuel Scoop, Scanners, Shields, SRV and at least one AFMU

 

[marx]

Ah, right. So those ships are basically there for the sake of comparison only.
Having flown a Courier to Semotus Beacon (so beyond Beagle Point), I found fuel scooping less annoying than I did in a DBX. Mind you, it's not just the maximum size of the scoop, but the scoop size / fuel tank size ratio. In my opinion, the Courier's default 8T fuel tank is too large, and you'll note that in my previous build, I linked it with a 4T one. Even that can store almost three jumps, which is plenty enough. (Or just adequate for traveling via neutron stars.)
Take a look at a slightly modified light build for the Courier: here: 45 ly full tank range (or 40.66 ly if you include an SRV bay), 431/585 m/s forward speed, and 0:22 to scoop to full. No need to sit long close to the star and let your ship overheat much then.
In summary, compared to the larger explorer ships, the Courier is finicky and somewhat difficult to get right, but it can be done.