Diamondback Gunship concept Re-Post (Read please? ♥)

So, I've now been playing ED on the Xbox One for about a year now. I'm quite pleased to see 2 new ships finally be added, the Chieftain and the Defender. I quite enjoy both, especially since the AC gives an alternative to the Python, but....It feels a little....Off, agile-wise. Like, it's really mobile, and can really move, but I can't quite explain how poor it seems to handle. The Defender is pretty kickass, I was enjoying the Type-9 as a Gunboat model, although it didn't pack enough power for that role. Got to try again though!~ Works well enough.

Anyways. I posted this idea forever ago when I was only a week into the game. Seeing new ships get added motivates me to try again, so, tell me your thoughts and any ideas and if ya like the concept, vote it up please! Thanks!


Diamondback Gunship ship variant concept. Basic role - Military Hunter-Killer/Hazard Zone Scout


Alright, let's get to it. I propose a 'Gunship' variant based along the Explorer hull. 4x Medium hardpoints and 1x large, 2x mediums on the sides below the cockpit, the other 2x back on the top of the 'side wings' for excellent front/side/rear/top turret coverage, and then the large in the same spot as the Explorer, right on the underside of the nose, as far front on the bottom of the ship as can be. The cockpit needs to be stretched back a bit to allow the gunner seat, which will take the position of the pilot's, with the pilot's being raised and pushed back behind the gunner seat, so it sees over it clearly, almost like the Federal Dropship's, except in a line. The basic cockpit design will simulate that of an Apache, pretty much. It should receive a military internal compartment and a C6 FSD for excellent warp. I think the default hull should be about...680, with shields at 210 by default. Optional slots, I think, should be a total of 8 excluding the military. 1 class 7 slot, 1 class 6, 3 class 5s, 1 class 4, a class 3, and a class 1.


Any thoughts, questions, suggestions?


(I swear that the Diamondback Scout's engines STILL sound like a Republic LAAT Gunship's to me.)
 
So, I've now been playing ED on the Xbox One for about a year now. I'm quite pleased to see 2 new ships finally be added, the Chieftain and the Defender. I quite enjoy both, especially since the AC gives an alternative to the Python, but....It feels a little....Off, agile-wise. Like, it's really mobile, and can really move, but I can't quite explain how poor it seems to handle. The Defender is pretty kickass, I was enjoying the Type-9 as a Gunboat model, although it didn't pack enough power for that role. Got to try again though!~ Works well enough.

Anyways. I posted this idea forever ago when I was only a week into the game. Seeing new ships get added motivates me to try again, so, tell me your thoughts and any ideas and if ya like the concept, vote it up please! Thanks!


Diamondback Gunship ship variant concept. Basic role - Military Hunter-Killer/Hazard Zone Scout


Alright, let's get to it. I propose a 'Gunship' variant based along the Explorer hull. 4x Medium hardpoints and 1x large, 2x mediums on the sides below the cockpit, the other 2x back on the top of the 'side wings' for excellent front/side/rear/top turret coverage, and then the large in the same spot as the Explorer, right on the underside of the nose, as far front on the bottom of the ship as can be. The cockpit needs to be stretched back a bit to allow the gunner seat, which will take the position of the pilot's, with the pilot's being raised and pushed back behind the gunner seat, so it sees over it clearly, almost like the Federal Dropship's, except in a line. The basic cockpit design will simulate that of an Apache, pretty much. It should receive a military internal compartment and a C6 FSD for excellent warp. I think the default hull should be about...680, with shields at 210 by default. Optional slots, I think, should be a total of 8 excluding the military. 1 class 7 slot, 1 class 6, 3 class 5s, 1 class 4, a class 3, and a class 1.


Any thoughts, questions, suggestions?


(I swear that the Diamondback Scout's engines STILL sound like a Republic LAAT Gunship's to me.)
With a class 6 FSD a DBE sized ship is going to outjump anything in the game. The internals are perfect for exploration too.

Nobody is a going to use it as a gunship.
 
With a class 6 FSD a DBE sized ship is going to outjump anything in the game. The internals are perfect for exploration too.

Nobody is a going to use it as a gunship.
You might be pleasantly surprised!~ Me and my mates used to use the DBE and DBS quite a bit in our wings, 'specially cooperative bounty hunting. We've seen rival DBE wings on Xboner too, they can be pretty vicious!~ Usually we used to do staged strafes on larger targets, Anacondas mostly. Pythons we usually tried to avoid, they're still the most dominant ship in the game. But we usually shrapnelized anything bigger, in fact we ruined a 'Conda CMDR the other day that was picking on another player, after deciding to do a DBE/DBS run like we used to.

^ Obviously if you kit it out right, they're quite the honeybadger, but they're still out-classed by other ships. That's the reason for this.~ A Gunship model would be quite effective as a Fast Strike Ship. Lower shields and less firepower compared to other BH ships, but with heavier armor and the mobility to really run when the time's right.

Doesn't quite hurt to try and see if the community agrees, does it?~ What do you think would need to be changed for other people to see it as an actual gunship?
 
You might be pleasantly surprised!~ Me and my mates used to use the DBE and DBS quite a bit in our wings, 'specially cooperative bounty hunting. We've seen rival DBE wings on Xboner too, they can be pretty vicious!~ Usually we used to do staged strafes on larger targets, Anacondas mostly. Pythons we usually tried to avoid, they're still the most dominant ship in the game. But we usually shrapnelized anything bigger, in fact we ruined a 'Conda CMDR the other day that was picking on another player, after deciding to do a DBE/DBS run like we used to.

^ Obviously if you kit it out right, they're quite the honeybadger, but they're still out-classed by other ships. That's the reason for this.~ A Gunship model would be quite effective as a Fast Strike Ship. Lower shields and less firepower compared to other BH ships, but with heavier armor and the mobility to really run when the time's right.

Doesn't quite hurt to try and see if the community agrees, does it?~ What do you think would need to be changed for other people to see it as an actual gunship?
I totally agree that DBEs are excellent combat ships and I should have been clearer that I agreed with the general concept - my only problem is with the FSD. Make that a class 4 (same as the DBE) or maybe a class 3, depending on the hull weight, so it has an unmodified jump range of around 20 LY - you can still use it as a fast strike ship, but it stays a combat ship, not an explorer.
 
That sounds like a nice alternative to Vulture and I like the sound of it. Though I'd keep size 5 FSD and for optionals I'd go for 5, 5 military, 4, 3, 2, 2. 4 Utility Mounts, 1 Large, 4 Medium as suggested or the current DBX layout. Not sure if the Power Plant and distributor would be able to provide enough juice to keep the lights on though. Looking at possible layout of current DBX on Coriolis suggests that DB Gunship would be quite power hungry.

Although, in all honesty, I think the Chieftain is already doing quite well as a gunboat and I don't see any handling issues with it.
 
That sounds like a nice alternative to Vulture and I like the sound of it. Though I'd keep size 5 FSD and for optionals I'd go for 5, 5 military, 4, 3, 2, 2. 4 Utility Mounts, 1 Large, 4 Medium as suggested or the current DBX layout. Not sure if the Power Plant and distributor would be able to provide enough juice to keep the lights on though. Looking at possible layout of current DBX on Coriolis suggests that DB Gunship would be quite power hungry.

Although, in all honesty, I think the Chieftain is already doing quite well as a gunboat and I don't see any handling issues with it.
Actually, cutting the internals might make it more true to the 'less shields, more armor' thing I mentioned. I do like the sound of a Class 5 M though, sounds like some thick steel there. ♥ I'm sure if engineered right, it wouldn't be that much of a power hog. Could just propose a boost to the PowGen though, right? I think a C5 would be rather reasonable, and on the topic of core, I think a C6 Thrust would just be perfect.~ Although that might be a bit....fantastical.


Edit: You haven't noticed the AC seems to be a bit sluggish? Feels a bit like a Conda sometimes.
 
Last edited:
Edit: You haven't noticed the AC seems to be a bit sluggish? Feels a bit like a Conda sometimes.
I fully engineered mine before I did anything with it. It has G5 Clean Drives, so that perhaps affects my perception of the ship. It could easily keep up with everything when bounty hunting. I still prefer the Python for its versatility and jump range, but for combat I think AC is a very good (and much cheaper) alternative to it as well as to FAS or Clipper. However, AC's don't seem to be very tough as opponents and it seems they are easier to catch up with using corvette (with FA Off) than, say FAS, FGS & Clippers.
 
The setup you proposed is rather interesting.

For the weapons, 2 mediums fixed beams with 1 large and 2 medium gimbaled multis have a combined sustained distributor draw of about 9.2 MW. Naturally, this means that a size 4 distributor with its 3.5 MW wep recharge would be woefully under powered, even with engineering. A size 6 distributor would probably work quite well for the ship.

For the optional internals, generally when making a combat you will put a shield generator in your largest optional internal. Naturally, this means that the Diamondback Gunship (DBG) would probably end up with a 7A or bi-weave shield generator. After that, the most likely module to appear in the size 6 slot would be a 6A or 6B SCB. The rest of the optional internals would likely be HRPs and MRPs, although an interdictor or a fuel scoop would also be likely candidates. The modules wouldn't really require much power to operate and would have negligible mass when compared to the rest of the build, so they really wouldn't have much of an effect on the demands placed on the core internals.

Speaking of the core internals, we have already determined that the DBG would need a size 6 distributor. Combine this with the size 6 FSD that was in the original setup, and we now have a ship that has a total mass that exceeds the maximum mass of 4A thrusters. Therefore, an increase in thruster size is in order. Size 5 thrusters should be more than adequate for the ship. Of course, with all of the power draw from the larger modules on the ship, the power plant can no longer keep up, and needs to be upgraded. A size 5 power distributor can just about handle everything I have already mentioned, but will force players to deal with some very nasty power issues (probably worse than the vulture), so a size 6 power plant would be very much welcome here. The life support and sensors don't really have much of an effect on ship builds, since they are quite often D-rated and engineered for lightweight.

This leaves us with:
  • Size 6 Power Plant
  • Size 5 Thrusters
  • Size 6 FSD
  • Size 6 Power Distributor
  • 4x Medium Hardpoints
  • 1x Large Hardpoint
  • 4x Utility Mounts
  • 1x Size 7 Optional Internal
  • 1x Size 6 Optional Internal
  • 3x Size 5 Optional Internals
  • 1x Size 4 Optional Internal
  • 1x Size 3 Optional Internal
  • 1x Size 1 Optional Internal
This is actually a pretty good small pad combat ship. However, I think that it still needs a bit of work to be balanced. First off, if it is going to be a combat ship (it's totally not an exploration ship), it will need to be quite maneuverable. I honestly don't see how this ship will be competitive if were to have the same maneuverability as the DBX. If it is going to be a combat ship, it should be BY DEFAULT at least as maneuverable as a DBS, preferably as good as or better than a Vulture. Probably the best way to achieve this would be to upgrade the thrusters to size 8. Second, the amount of firepower you wanted in the original setup seems a bit anemic. I would recommend either upgrading 2 of the medium hardpoints to huges or upgrading the large hardpoint to a huge, preferably both, with a distributor upgrade to compensate. Next, in terms of tanking damage, the DBG should be capable of both shield tanking and hull tanking, although different builds should be required or each. For shield tanking, a size 7 shield is quite nice, but it with only 4 utility mounts it is nowhere near as good at shield tanking as the Anaconda, which itself is hardly the best shield tank in the game. Therefore, the DBG needs more utility mounts, 6 utility mounts should be enough, but 8 would be preferable. For hull tanking, with military bulkheads, 2xMRPs and the rest HRPs, the DBG doesn't even break 3.6k hull before engineering. This is nowhere near adequate, especially if the DBG were to get the DBX's hardness value of 42. The DBG would get absolutely shredded in a PvP engagement! To compensate, the DBG should get a higher base hull strength (1200 vs 680) and a higher hull hardness value, say ~70 or so. This should provide the DBG with ample survivability for any engagement. Of course, with all of the additional power demand from the larger hardpoints, distributor, thrusters and the addition of more utility mounts, the DBG will need a larger power plant (size 8+). With these changes, the DBG should be a very well-balanced small pad combat ship.

Edit: I just came back after a few days. The first part is fine, but I'm honestly not sure what I was thinking towards the end of the post. Needless to say I'm not mixing rum and coffee again.
 
Last edited:
You aren't describing a small pad ship. Those internals are more like a large pad ship.
That's the thing. DBG sounds very much like the Alliance Chieftain in a slightly different packaging. So a medium ship at least (agreed, with some internals of a much bigger ship, kinda like DBX now)
 
kinda like DBX now)
The DBX is close to the limit for a small ship. Though what does define the maximum size of a small ship is the Type-6. Though the Type-6 is a medium pad ship, it appears to have been built to be a tight squeeze into a small pad, just like the Type-7 with the medium pad..
 
You aren't describing a small pad ship. Those internals are more like a large pad ship.
It's 3044 - surely we can squeeze 314t of cargo into a ship weighing less 260t.

For reference:
The only ships that can carry more cargo than hull weight is the 'Conda - which we all know is gimped - and the Hauler.
 
Last edited:
The setup you proposed is rather interesting.

For the weapons, 2 mediums fixed beams with 1 large and 2 medium gimbaled multis have a combined sustained distributor draw of about 9.2 MW. Naturally, this means that a size 4 distributor with its 3.5 MW wep recharge would be woefully under powered, even with engineering. A size 6 distributor would probably work quite well for the ship.

For the optional internals, generally when making a combat you will put a shield generator in your largest optional internal. Naturally, this means that the Diamondback Gunship (DBG) would probably end up with a 7A or bi-weave shield generator. After that, the most likely module to appear in the size 6 slot would be a 6A or 6B SCB. The rest of the optional internals would likely be HRPs and MRPs, although an interdictor or a fuel scoop would also be likely candidates. The modules wouldn't really require much power to operate and would have negligible mass when compared to the rest of the build, so they really wouldn't have much of an effect on the demands placed on the core internals.

Speaking of the core internals, we have already determined that the DBG would need a size 6 distributor. Combine this with the size 6 FSD that was in the original setup, and we now have a ship that has a total mass that exceeds the maximum mass of 4A thrusters. Therefore, an increase in thruster size is in order. Size 5 thrusters should be more than adequate for the ship. Of course, with all of the power draw from the larger modules on the ship, the power plant can no longer keep up, and needs to be upgraded. A size 5 power distributor can just about handle everything I have already mentioned, but will force players to deal with some very nasty power issues (probably worse than the vulture), so a size 6 power plant would be very much welcome here. The life support and sensors don't really have much of an effect on ship builds, since they are quite often D-rated and engineered for lightweight.

This leaves us with:
  • Size 6 Power Plant
  • Size 5 Thrusters
  • Size 6 FSD
  • Size 6 Power Distributor
  • 4x Medium Hardpoints
  • 1x Large Hardpoint
  • 4x Utility Mounts
  • 1x Size 7 Optional Internal
  • 1x Size 6 Optional Internal
  • 3x Size 5 Optional Internals
  • 1x Size 4 Optional Internal
  • 1x Size 3 Optional Internal
  • 1x Size 1 Optional Internal
This is actually a pretty good small pad combat ship. However, I think that it still needs a bit of work to be balanced. First off, if it is going to be a combat ship (it's totally not an exploration ship), it will need to be quite maneuverable. I honestly don't see how this ship will be competitive if were to have the same maneuverability as the DBX. If it is going to be a combat ship, it should be BY DEFAULT at least as maneuverable as a DBS, preferably as good as or better than a Vulture. Probably the best way to achieve this would be to upgrade the thrusters to size 8. Second, the amount of firepower you wanted in the original setup seems a bit anemic. I would recommend either upgrading 2 of the medium hardpoints to huges or upgrading the large hardpoint to a huge, preferably both, with a distributor upgrade to compensate. Next, in terms of tanking damage, the DBG should be capable of both shield tanking and hull tanking, although different builds should be required or each. For shield tanking, a size 7 shield is quite nice, but it with only 4 utility mounts it is nowhere near as good at shield tanking as the Anaconda, which itself is hardly the best shield tank in the game. Therefore, the DBG needs more utility mounts, 6 utility mounts should be enough, but 8 would be preferable. For hull tanking, with military bulkheads, 2xMRPs and the rest HRPs, the DBG doesn't even break 3.6k hull before engineering. This is nowhere near adequate, especially if the DBG were to get the DBX's hardness value of 42. The DBG would get absolutely shredded in a PvP engagement! To compensate, the DBG should get a higher base hull strength (1200 vs 680) and a higher hull hardness value, say ~70 or so. This should provide the DBG with ample survivability for any engagement. Of course, with all of the additional power demand from the larger hardpoints, distributor, thrusters and the addition of more utility mounts, the DBG will need a larger power plant (size 8+). With these changes, the DBG should be a very well-balanced small pad combat ship.
Smaller “big” hard point / bigger FSD but that’s a lot like an FDL ...
 
While I like the concept of a gunship style fighter, the OPs suggestion would make it incredibly overpowered and completely negate all other small combat ships (and possibly a couple of the medium ones too). As a good balance point, look at the Vulture and figure out how to scale the DB into a similarly powerful gunship.

Using the Vulture as a balance benchmark for firepower, the DBX is already up there, as it is the highest DPS small ship in the game. Admittedly, the Vulture has slightly improved big game hunting power due to using large mounts, but overall 2x medium + 1x large is actually pretty comparable due to it's higher DPS so that would also work fine for a DBG (weapon placement and arcs might want tweaking though). The only flaw in the DBX's firepower is its class 4 distributor, so moving the DBG's distributor up to the Vulture's class 5 would equalise that metric.

In terms of internal slots, most small ships have 4-6 unrestricted internals, with the military ones having a restricted slot. We could easily achieve much the same effect by keeping the DBX's smaller internals the same, adding a class 4 military slot and merging the two class 4s into a class 5 slot for a larger shield generator. This would overall make the optional internals into (compared against the Vulture):

1x vs 1x for class 5
0x vs 1x for class 4
2x vs 0x for class 3
2x vs 1x for class 2
0x vs 1x for class 1

With a class 4 vs a class 5 military slot. Alternatively, they could give the DBG a pair of smaller military slots, such as a pair of class 2s. This would give the DBG better hull tanking performance due to how smaller HRPs are much more efficient.

This would overall give the DBG similar internal capacity to the Vulture, albeit distributed quite differently in terms of slot sizes.

Obviously, the 4x utility slots would stay.

To round out the modules with the core ones, obviously the size 4 generator should stay from the DBX, as should the class 4 thrusters (which would make the ship pretty drifty, as befits a gunship), as should the class 5 FSD (so overall good jump range, but worse than the DBX due to extra weight), class 3 life support, upgrade to class 5 PD (to bring firepower into line with Vulture), possibly upgrade sensors to class 4 (would draw lots of power, but also lets the ship keep part of its heritage as a combat scout) and maybe downgrade the fuel tank to a class 4. This should overall give the ship near Vulture-like combat performance (albeit quite different in how it achieves said performance) while also keeping part of the ships heritage as a scout.
 
While I like the concept of a gunship style fighter, the OPs suggestion would make it incredibly overpowered and completely negate all other small combat ships (and possibly a couple of the medium ones too). As a good balance point, look at the Vulture and figure out how to scale the DB into a similarly powerful gunship.

Using the Vulture as a balance benchmark for firepower, the DBX is already up there, as it is the highest DPS small ship in the game. Admittedly, the Vulture has slightly improved big game hunting power due to using large mounts, but overall 2x medium + 1x large is actually pretty comparable due to it's higher DPS so that would also work fine for a DBG (weapon placement and arcs might want tweaking though). The only flaw in the DBX's firepower is its class 4 distributor, so moving the DBG's distributor up to the Vulture's class 5 would equalise that metric.

In terms of internal slots, most small ships have 4-6 unrestricted internals, with the military ones having a restricted slot. We could easily achieve much the same effect by keeping the DBX's smaller internals the same, adding a class 4 military slot and merging the two class 4s into a class 5 slot for a larger shield generator. This would overall make the optional internals into (compared against the Vulture):

1x vs 1x for class 5
0x vs 1x for class 4
2x vs 0x for class 3
2x vs 1x for class 2
0x vs 1x for class 1

With a class 4 vs a class 5 military slot. Alternatively, they could give the DBG a pair of smaller military slots, such as a pair of class 2s. This would give the DBG better hull tanking performance due to how smaller HRPs are much more efficient.

This would overall give the DBG similar internal capacity to the Vulture, albeit distributed quite differently in terms of slot sizes.

Obviously, the 4x utility slots would stay.

To round out the modules with the core ones, obviously the size 4 generator should stay from the DBX, as should the class 4 thrusters (which would make the ship pretty drifty, as befits a gunship), as should the class 5 FSD (so overall good jump range, but worse than the DBX due to extra weight), class 3 life support, upgrade to class 5 PD (to bring firepower into line with Vulture), possibly upgrade sensors to class 4 (would draw lots of power, but also lets the ship keep part of its heritage as a combat scout) and maybe downgrade the fuel tank to a class 4. This should overall give the ship near Vulture-like combat performance (albeit quite different in how it achieves said performance) while also keeping part of the ships heritage as a scout.
Alright, after reading all of these new posts, my mind's a complete whirlwind right now, but it's clear that you're on the same track as me....Albeit way ahead. You've definitely picked up what I dropped and took off with it, as has everyone else! ♥ Makes me feel good.

So, I'm going to try to list these new suggestions, although incorporated into the original concept, and re-explain the role of it again, just for myself here so I can get back into seat (Since I've been away from the forum and the game for a few days here and completely forgot where I was at! Last time I take a break from a vacation.), please correct me if I list something incorrectly or forget something.

The DBG's concept is as a small-pad combat ship with an auxiliary seat for a gunner, meant for a team of two to engage medium-pad ships in a hunter-killer fashion, and for a team of two ships with gunners each to engage large ships effectively. In addition it can be efficiently balanced to be a single-seat attack craft with decent speed and agility while having a good armament focus. The modified core and optional internals follow.

C5 Power Pant
C5 PowDis
C4 Thrusters
C5 FSD
C3 LS (Maybe C2? As long as you don't let the cockpit smash you'll be fine, right?)
C4 Sensors (Is a Hunter Killer, maybe C5 Sens? Could cut one of the Meds on the cockpit-side (DBS Config) to compensate, move the remaining to the midpoint on the top, right behind the utility mount and cockpit. Good firing arc there.)
C4 Fuel Tank

1x Large HP
4x Medium HP

Optionals follow, modified for balancing.

1x C6 (Shield.)
1x C5 (Not designated.)
2x C3 (Not Designated.)
2x C2 (Not designated.)

4x Utility


The input everyone's offered has been invaluable here! While I immensely hope that Frontier will come across the forums and see the proposition, I highly doubt it'll ever happen. I'm still quite thankful to see people provide suggestions and thoughts towards my concept and I would like to say I really appreciate it folks! Thank you for taking the time. ♥ If you can, I'd like to hear about how you fine people think this will handle with the modified systems, and if you think you'd use it if it ever happened to be selected by the Devs.~ (Which we know it won't, but it's nice to dream, right?~)
 
Top Bottom