My point being that the Asp X doesn't have to compromise anything to use a booster while the DBX does. After such a compromise then the DBX is left with nothing going for it anymore, there is no reason to ever choose a DBX over an Asp X in 3.1 other than pure aesthetics.
Guardian FSD booster question
- Thread starter Skye A.
- Start date
My point being that the Asp X doesn't have to compromise anything to use a booster while the DBX does. After such a compromise then the DBX is left with nothing going for it anymore, there is no reason to ever choose a DBX over an Asp X in 3.1 other than pure aesthetics.
Indeed it boils down to that. The reason why I think that's not a big deal is that the DBX is considerably cheaper compared to the AspX & the fact that the DBX is still a very decent ship.
Edit: I'll remind you the DBX will still have more potential jump range and some minor advantages so its not a complete loss.
Last edited:
![[Diplomacy] Carnegie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/123/123809.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
Only if all you care about is jump range
I'm curious, can you tell me one way in which the 3.1 DBX would ever be preferable to the 3.1 Asp X, for a deep space explorer who wants to land on planets and take advantage of neutron jumps?
Are you expecting the smallest dedicated explorer to be equal or better in all respects than bigger dedicated explorers?
The dbx has advantages, but choosing your limitations is a bit dubious. NS boosting is not a requirement for exploration.
![mtt9999 [Parabolus]](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/124/124206.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
Lots of talk here about the Orb circus and guardian grind.... yes, it is true that by the third time you compete the puzzle it has gotten old. The first time is incredible, the music is spectacular, the sentinels are perfectly creeping, thier weapons just disruptive enough.... I literally had goosebumps the first time.
So while the identical repetition is bad design, at least give fdev credit for a wonderful tomb-raider like experience (this is a space game after all)... I don't really participate in the Thargoid / guardian game play. This was fantastic.
Note, however, that I'm dreading the 4 remaining runs though... Which for me has just as much to do with the terrible driving mechanics of the srv! That thing is terrible. #pebbles
Last edited:
Like what? After 3.1, what advantages will the DBX offer? Other than being cheaper to buy?
So, as I said, "If all you care about is jump range"
It doesn't sound like it's farting underwater.
Smaller landing footprint.
Flight characteristics, maybe, but that's subjective.
It'll still have the second highest jump range, it has higher speed normal and boost speed, it is the coolest ship the game (you can use that to fuel scoop) and of course, it is very cheap so that's why you can't expect that much about it.
I was trying to be nice to those who think the dbx is better already, which I disagree with, but have no desire to bother arguing with.
It does travel faster for planet scouring
It does land in rougher terrain than the other 2
It takes better selfies
Your insistence that dbx should perform better than the Asp in any respect is not tenable, I see no justification for it.
While I would like more choices, making the smallest and cheapest the best isn't the way to go about it.
I'm not saying that, at all.
Currently the DBX jumps farther than the Asp but scoops slower and can carry less gear, there is a trade off between the two and it works very well. After 3.1 that trade off is going away due to the boosters and the DBX will just be less capable in all regards to the Asp X. It's that imbalance that I don't like. I don't want one or the other to be the clear winner, I like each ship having their own strengths and weaknesses which make players choose based on what is more important to them.
After 3.1 the DBX will just be worse than the Asp X for exploration, unless you place subjective concerns over performance.
I already mentioned some superior characteristics in the DBX which you didn't adress. Those weren't subjective like aesthetics or cockpit view.
I'll say it again, why do you think the DBX should do eveything the Asp can?
It could also be flipped around.
Why do you think the Asp should do everything the DBX can?
Between the two ships (I use both for exploration), I usually use the DBX for bubble/near bubble running and the AspX for anything longer range. Each has its advantages, the AspX has an extra slot and is more stable in jet cones, the DBX is more nimble, faster and has longer jump range.
Quite simply, if the AspX gets a boost (because it has the extra slot) over the DBX, my DBX will get retired in a heartbeat.
Because it costs more than three times as much?
Sight, the DBX can still get a boost. You just need to compromise something.
Yes, precisely, and you WON'T need to compromise with the Asp X. That's the point I've been making.
Meanwhile, Anaconda becomes even more godlike. I sympathise Mengy! And I fly an Anaconda before anyone asks.
My ship setups are already a compromise, especially the DBX with less module space. There's nothing left to compromise there. Again, if my AspX can get a boost to range that makes it superior to the DBX in just about all aspects, my DBX will be relegated to my own personal museum.
Last edited:
And my point is that the AspX doesn't need to make the compromise because its much more expensive.
6 module slots isn't a compromise in all honesty, even Mengy thinks so.
Again, the DBX can also use the module and it'll still have the second highest jump range in the game. The only difference is that the Asp can do it with no compromise while the DBX can't because its wayyy cheaper.
I'd say the Anaconda is an issue by itself.
The DBx is hit with a double wammy when using FSD boosters, not enough module space and poor fuel scooping speeds made worse by 120% fuel usage increase due to the 4H booster. DBx is not fit to use the booster. Stick to the ASPx or Anaconda.