This is only true if you're a tourist and call it "exploration". If you drop down into good scooping range while doing your initial system scan, then top up while popping open the system map to see what you found, the DBX is actually far superior to the Asp: Both ships will be finished scooping before you're finished reading the map, but the Asp might overheating as well.
DBX - exploration build now lacking 1 slot?
- Thread starter jacozilla
- Start date
This is only true if you're a tourist and call it "exploration". If you drop down into good scooping range while doing your initial system scan, then top up while popping open the system map to see what you found, the DBX is actually far superior to the Asp: Both ships will be finished scooping before you're finished reading the map, but the Asp might overheating as well.
Fair enough, the Asp is certainly rather ugly.
I actually added shields to my DBX for this most recent trip.
Not sure I'd fly without them these days.
Good to know landings are a bit smoother though.
Deleted member 38366
D
Basically both DiamondBacks began to lack 1 Internal Slot when Horizons was released.
The DBS : Can't even pack a Hangar in Exploration kit
The DBX : Can't pack an AFMU or Cargo Rack in Exploration kit
The AspS : Can't pack an AFMU or Cargo Rack in Exploration kit
Only the AspX has what the Deep-Space Explorer needs, when it comes to the dedicated Exploration Ships.
That condition has been noted towards Frontier - but so far to no effect.
The DBS : Can't even pack a Hangar in Exploration kit
The DBX : Can't pack an AFMU or Cargo Rack in Exploration kit
The AspS : Can't pack an AFMU or Cargo Rack in Exploration kit
Only the AspX has what the Deep-Space Explorer needs, when it comes to the dedicated Exploration Ships.
That condition has been noted towards Frontier - but so far to no effect.
Last edited by a moderator:
These points have already been addressed.
AFMU is not required on a DBX, you'll never take heat damage.
The DSS doesn't actually do anything important so it's not required.
Replace the DSS with the hangar and you're good for everything.
https://coriolis.io/outfit/diamondb...2v5022f.Iw1-kA==.Aw1-kA==?bn=DBX - Essentials
Factually, you are totally correct. AFMU not needed as in 'need = must have'
in no order of importance though, several reasons pop to mind:
1. The joy of exploring like an explorer of old - self sustained, live or die with what you brought. Some people explore for the belt notch of been there, done that. Some because we are weird an actually like spending weeks away 'out there' and enjoy exploring for the sake of it, not the bragging accomplishment.
for the former - the afmu is merely a tool, one perhaps they took as insurance on first noobie trip on whatever counts as a "long" trip. Then ditched because that tool is not needed to accomplish their goal, which was to get there and back.
For the latter, though - call it role play, call it extra ambiance, call it extra immersion, whatever. All I know is regardless of the weight, real mountain climbers carry 2nd propane kits. Despite the extra weight which Everest climbers will tell you in grams what they pack and don't. Because they know they are truly screwed if their one propane kit breaks or is lost.
now, we have zero consequence other than digital death if for lack of afmu it helped lead to our demise. But having one on board makes me "feel" like more of an Everest climber, an expedition to the North Pole pre- first flag landing. Hard to explain. You either understand or don't. Both are valid pov so no judging.
even if I never use it, I "feel" like it is more a true exploration voyage if I have one. Hence my reluctance to drop it out of my build.
2. Majority of players won't go farther than long range mission outposts outside the bubble, and the majority of explorers won't complete a sag A trip. I've tried twice and died - one I want to say wasn't my fault as I was testing how far pirates spawned in asteroid rings and died through experimentation. Other was my carelessness.
Point is there are a heck of lot more "junior" explorers than veteran ones who absolutely know the afmu is not needed vs junior explorers only "knowing". Until you have done it yourself, you don't really know it deep down in your gut, hence more people than not who post contemplating some build or another make afmu a "need" because logically, until prove to themselves - not just told - that afmu wasn't used to a deep trip, they will want to pack one.
3. Last - this one is just me. While I don't want something really major to happen, it makes my exploration trip a little more exciting if I actually had to use the afmu a bit. So I pack one. Hoping something minor but not deadly will happen. Again, makes exploration mor "fun" for me. So that is the last reason why for some th afmu is "needed" - because it is fun.
When horizons landed and i did prepare for checking barnard's loop and the witchhead for barnacles,
i thought the same way as you did.
The DBX lacked internal, switched to the keelback though and had my share of exploration.
i thought the same way as you did.
The DBX lacked internal, switched to the keelback though and had my share of exploration.
So is the Type 6 apparently. Comparable jump range, extra internals, less expensive than a DBX....
Fly the DBX your way, fine, but the way you explore shouldn't be the basis for how to build an exploration ship.
Let's say the DBX gets buffed with extra internals or something, would you suddenly stop flying it? All you could do is benefit from a buff.
And considering the buffs that the FDL got, which was already a great ship, at no extra cost...
I think there are actually only 2 absolute essentials:
- Fuel Scoop
- Discovery Scanner
- Planetary Hangar - optional for landing
- Shields - optional for protection
- AFMU - optional for repairs
- Surface Scanner - optional for extra info (cash)
- Cargo Rack - optional in case you find something
Ideally, you might want all of these but the DBX is still a low tier ship so 5 out of 7 is fine.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
I'm not telling anyone how to build anything - just saying the DBX is perfectly adequate.
An AspX costs more so you'd expect to be able to fit more stuff.
The DBX doesn't need a buff, if I want to take all the kit I have to fly a different ship.
That's part of the game.
- Fuel Scoop
- Discovery Scanner
- Planetary Hangar - optional for landing
- Shields - optional for protection
- AFMU - optional for repairs
- Surface Scanner - optional for extra info (cash)
- Cargo Rack - optional in case you find something
Ideally, you might want all of these but the DBX is still a low tier ship so 5 out of 7 is fine.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
I'm not telling anyone how to build anything - just saying the DBX is perfectly adequate.
An AspX costs more so you'd expect to be able to fit more stuff.
The DBX doesn't need a buff, if I want to take all the kit I have to fly a different ship.
That's part of the game.
Last edited:
Yeah you are. You have already said that the DSS isn't needed. You are currently saying the DBX as it is, is "perfectly adequate".
Which, by the way, I don't agree. Perfectly adequate, to me, is 6 internals minimum, 7 if they take exploration seriously. They could easily do it for the DBX, by splitting that useless size two internal into two size ones.
I never said the Asp wasn't expensive. In fact, I wasn't even talking about the Asp.
I was talking about the Type 6 transporter. Costs less than both the Asp and the Diamondback, and is an objectively better exploration ship than the DBX.
I'm really now starting to see where some of the criticism about "adding new features vs fixing/tweaking existing ones" are coming from. Soon enough another internal module will be added that is essential*, again, for exploration. It would only further cement the DBXs role as a museum piece.
*As in, you would be cutting yourself off from a portion of the new content without it.
Ruling out the DBX is your call - splitting an internal has been asked for by many, including me, but not going to happen.
Once you realize the DSS is just fluff, you get over it.
The T6 is a fine ship, but it does have heat issues. A major consideration for exploration.
Each to their own, but accepting the ships as they are and working within their limitations is part of the game.
Happy travels!
Once you realize the DSS is just fluff, you get over it.
The T6 is a fine ship, but it does have heat issues. A major consideration for exploration.
Each to their own, but accepting the ships as they are and working within their limitations is part of the game.
Happy travels!
Last edited:
Speaking of which why are AMFU massless
As new features are added, FD will keep adding mandatory modules to use them without adding slots on ships (except for planetary approach which was nice), so expect this to get worse.
I remember reading threads that the DBX was lacking a slot flr exploration long before Horizons, when the ship was added to the game.
I remember reading threads that the DBX was lacking a slot flr exploration long before Horizons, when the ship was added to the game.
that's my experience too. now my DBX is just an expensive taxi, and the boring old Asp has taken up the explo mantle once more
The DBX has been my token ship for what went wrong with internal modules post Horizons/engineers.
Don't forget that your SRV may find something super-cool / rare (like the first guy to find meta alloys)... so you need at a least *some* cargo hold.
If I assume that the ships were balanced pre-horizons; then anything calling itself an "exploration" vessel needs two more slots now than then (PVB / Cargo).
I love the DBX. I own a DBX. I never fly it because I cannot equip it as an exploration vessel.
Don't forget that your SRV may find something super-cool / rare (like the first guy to find meta alloys)... so you need at a least *some* cargo hold.
If I assume that the ships were balanced pre-horizons; then anything calling itself an "exploration" vessel needs two more slots now than then (PVB / Cargo).
I love the DBX. I own a DBX. I never fly it because I cannot equip it as an exploration vessel.
Complaining about the DBX on the forums is the only chance I have at getting it fixed*, so why would I stop?
I like the ship and still use it out of stubbornness.
*closer to the way I would like the ship.
I liked the flavor text it adds for planets, not so much the extra credits.Once you realize the DSS is just fluff, you get over it.
Also, first discovery has to be done with a DSS, IIRC. Which is a meta thing some people care about.
Which is something that can be compensated for by careful flying. There is no compensating for lacking internal modules.
Except, it seems that every other update the FDL gets it's limitations expanded.
If they can do that for the FDL, why not other ships?
Shame, because other ships have alternatives.
I wonder when the ASP will no longer be a viable exploration ship....
I created a thread around the time horizons was released: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-Horizons-and-future-things-that-add-to-ships
basically mentioning the release of extra internal and external equipment should come with all ships being upgraded to support an extra slot, there wasn't much interest but I see now you've discovered you now need an extra slot
kick up enough of a stink and get as many folks as possible to comment and maybe they'll add them. otherwise welcome to the dieing thread posts area.
Argo.
basically mentioning the release of extra internal and external equipment should come with all ships being upgraded to support an extra slot, there wasn't much interest but I see now you've discovered you now need an extra slot
kick up enough of a stink and get as many folks as possible to comment and maybe they'll add them. otherwise welcome to the dieing thread posts area.
Argo.
I must have missed it, because I remember fighting for the DBX during the beta for Horizons. Otherwise I would have been right there with you.
One thing that bothers me is the Cobra Mark 4. It has 8 internals, so it was clearly designed with horizons in mind.