Ship Builds & Load Outs Diamondback explorer in horizons

[Kenneth McGrew]

Xbox player here but as soon as horizons hits us (finally yay!) i would like to know what equipment to take with me as i restock with an SRV.

i like the DBX for exploration but i can't fit everything id like in there.

its either no AMFU or No Shields and take a AMFU, as i want a SRV slot too...

shields will be nice for landings but do i really need them??

again AMFU have served me well in the past for little mishaps, and i'd feel better with one some 50kly out

this is where i currently am with a build

http://coriolis.io/outfit/diamondba...32f2i.AwRj4lm1yA==.AwhMIkEZPEg=?bn=explorer 4

i added a larger beam laser as FD tell us we might need to be armed too? so shields would be better right?

or do i just need to take an Asp Ex i rather not though, if you PC folk could share some long range exploration builds i would appreciate it, preferably DBx as i intend on spending months out in the black with multiple landings.

 

[Major Klutz]

Here's My DBX Build.
http://coriolis.io/outfit/diamondba...i2f.Iw1-kA==.MwBhCYy63YEYxA==?bn=DBE Explorer

To be fair, I have not used this on a very long duration expedition, but on the few short duration trips I've taken, I returned home with zero damage. Even with a large number of planetary landings.
I'm careful on planetary approach speed and angle and I configured an analog control for my vertical thrusters so I can descend very slowly.

Even so, I would not feel comfortable going without shields. AFMU can't repair hull damage and mistakes can happen on landings.

IMO, You don't need A rated thrusters. I've seen some research that shows that better thrusters only affect your top speed and not acceleration. So landing on a high G planet should be the same with any thrusters.
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=218171
Better to configure an analog control for your vertical thrusters so you don't have to thrust down at full speed. And watch your attitude since side and reverse thrusters are not as powerful as the vertical and forward thrusters.
Banking sideways on a high G planet will make you drop like a rock even with A rated thrusters.

IMO, You don't need two heat sink launchers. The DBX has the best heat management of any ship so overheating is not very likely even under the worst conditions.

I would not bother taking any weapons.

 

[Alex Brentnall]

Ok currently:

2.0 - I'd say shield because even the slightest tap = hull damage. Even a perfect 1m/s anaconda landing took 3% off my hull last time I tested it. Currently I had one time I forgot to

2.1 - They have sorta fixed it, you can land without damage if you are very very careful. I'd say take an AFMU instead and make sure your tip top on landing and don't try world of 2G or more.

For me take off 1 heat sink, replace with chaff. Remove the laser unless you really want weapons, you'll be running from everything anyway so I'd leave weapons behind. Keep 4A thrusters if you remove shield, I do believe acceleration does change with thruster class: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=159475

So something like this I'd say:
http://coriolis.io/outfit/diamondba...i2f2i.AwRj4lm1yA==.AwhMIkEZPEg=?bn=explorer 4

 

[Major Klutz]

This thread shows data for landings under different gravity levels.
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=218171
It's a few months old but still seems to be correct.

According to that thread, anything over 0.68G and all thrusters are the same.

 

[Kenneth McGrew]

I added the laser as I heard explorers might need to be armed in future , also my reasoning to take a class thrusters for abetter top speed i.e run away! maybe its a red herring

Thanks for the builds very useful, glad to know others didn't need the afmu

 

[Alaska Wolf]

With so many NPCs now packing missiles, point defense would be a good choice as well.

 

[puca]

i like the DBX for exploration but i can't fit everything id like in there.

Yup. I spent a long time arguing with people when the diamondbacks were released that they were garbage ships for exploration. A lot of people were arguing for the sake of arguing back then. Now reality has set in. The best thing to do is to get the asp. If you are dead set on the DBX and you want to land, I would say the best thing to abandon is the AFMU. DBX runs very cool and you are unlikely to take a ton of heat damage in it. And a shield will protect you when you land if you are cautious and slow.

Scoop, SRV, shield, and sensors are not really negotiable.

---

The other thing to keep in mind about the DBX is that if you like to travel while scanning the main star, your scoop is adequate, but if you want to speed-travel without scanning, the DBX has an undersized scoop that will slow you down.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

My advice is to not bother with the AMFU. In my current excursion with my DBX I left out the DSS and the AMFU and had a cargo rack instead, just in case I found something I wanted to bring back. I am on my way back now and all my modules are still at 100%.

 

[Harper Lewis]

I enjoy the DBX for what I do with it, which is for the most part exploring. I don't run with Field Maintenance Unit as well or even Cargo Racks, I suppose I could even ditch the weapons since one of DBX's problems is that it is super squishy in combat, and not really that maneuverable. When trouble hits, I simply "leg it", which is pretty do-able since the ship cools quickly and I can make it jump 30 ly just through outfitting. Still, lately I've been considering trading it for an Asp, just to get that fighting chance if I get interdicted.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Been looking at the DBX weight and it just doesn't make any sense. It weighs more than an AspX. The DBX can't carry as much cargo and in general has smaller sized modules, has less armour and is roughly half the size then the AspX. I wish FDev would use a bit more sense when designing thier ships.

 

[blmcquig]

Been looking at the DBX weight and it just doesn't make any sense. It weighs more than an AspX. The DBX can't carry as much cargo and in general has smaller sized modules, has less armour and is roughly half the size then the AspX. I wish FDev would use a bit more sense when designing thier ships.

I personally think it makes sense. It is cheaper, after all. Just like real life automobiles, aluminium (for weight savings) costs a lot more.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I personally think it makes sense. It is cheaper, after all. Just like real life automobiles, aluminium (for weight savings) costs a lot more.

Then the DBX should be built like a tank then. But the armour value is less then the AspX.

Give the DBX better armour, like around the 430 mark so at least you can see where the weight is.

Also gives it a slightly different role to the AspX. AspX has more range and better flexibility, but the DBX will last longer in a fight with its stronger more armoured hull.

 

[Med_Man555]

Build looks good, the only thing I could suggest is swapping places with your vehicle bay and your detailed surface scanner. You don't really need the larger vehicle bay, and the class 2G vehicle bay will add a little to your overall FDL jump range.

 

[Alex Brentnall]

Build looks good, the only thing I could suggest is swapping places with your vehicle bay and your detailed surface scanner. You don't really need the larger vehicle bay, and the class 2G vehicle bay will add a little to your overall FDL jump range.

You seem fairly new here so I'll just say you may want to check the top left of posts for their date. The first post of this thread started in May and so the OP has probably already done the trip and returned

 

[Kenneth McGrew]

You seem fairly new here so I'll just say you may want to check the top left of posts for their date. The first post of this thread started in May and so the OP has probably already done the trip and returned

aye yes, but still flying the DBx some 60kly later - i do indeed fly with 1 srv now after realising i dont need 2 of them and i can now jump 50ly on fumes!