How to build exploration ships

CMDR AKIRA MASAKARI

CMDR AKIRA MASAKARI
I'm not saying that boosting is dangerous in general. I'm saying that is dangerous for me when i tryp to land a conda. It can happen that i get impatient, that I boost with a wrong angle. If the whale gets too much speed it's impossible to control it.
Also I did boost for accident and it costed me dearly, but, as you suggested, I've chpamged my bindings too so not only it won't happen I boost for mistake, but also out of impulse. I have to think twice before boosting now.

To each its own, for me it's better not too boost.
 

newman1702

newman1702
Fair enough, I'll stand by what I said on this. I even consulted my old friend HAL on this subject, and this is what he had to say on the subject of boosting being dangerous on planetary landings:

[video=youtube;CD9YqdWwwdw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD9YqdWwwdw[/video]


:D
 

Kuroshio

Kuroshio
Battle of the Boost, the

A minor skimish during the ->Distant Worlds Outfitting Wars (3301-3302). In a phase of growing tensions among the explorer community - no doubt raised by the prospect of spending 3 months with other people, something an explorer does not do naturally - local conflicts erupted all over GalNet. Thanks to the civilized nature of explorers, casualties remained close to zero, though ship losses occured in both the pro-boost and the anti-boost faction while each side tried to prove a point. (Attempts to drive a point home via SRV later escalated into the ->2 SRV good, 4 SRV bad ambush at Achenar 3.) Among the notable losses were the Anaconda-class ship "Golden Mean Phallusy", whose specialized control setup activated the ships' boost when the pilot pitched down; and the Asp-class ship "I Like Big Boost And I Cannot Lie', whose experimental A9 thrusters decapitated the pilot when they broke loose and are now headed for Andromeda at relativistic speeds. Calls for the establishment of pro- and anti-boost minor factions in Sirius Corporation space remained unheard. Like all conflictions within the explorer community, the Battle of the Boost and the DWOW ended not in all out war, but in agreement to disagree, legal drug consumption and shouts of 'I love you, man'.
 

newman1702

newman1702
DoubtOutLoud said:
Battle of the Boost, the

A minor skimish during the ->Distant Worlds Outfitting Wars (3301-3302). In a phase of growing tensions among the explorer community - no doubt raised by the prospect of spending 3 months with other people, something an explorer does not do naturally - local conflicts erupted all over GalNet. Thanks to the civilized nature of explorers, casualties remained close to zero, though ship losses occured in both the pro-boost and the anti-boost faction while each side tried to prove a point. (Attempts to drive a point home via SRV later escalated into the ->2 SRV good, 4 SRV bad ambush at Achenar 3.) Among the notable losses were the Anaconda-class ship "Golden Mean Phallusy", whose specialized control setup activated the ships' boost when the pilot pitched down; and the Asp-class ship "I Like Big Boost And I Cannot Lie', whose experimental A9 thrusters decapitated the pilot when they broke loose and are now headed for Andromeda at relativistic speeds. Calls for the establishment of pro- and anti-boost minor factions in Sirius Corporation space remained unheard. Like all conflictions within the explorer community, the Battle of the Boost and the DWOW ended not in all out war, but in agreement to disagree, legal drug consumption and shouts of 'I love you, man'.
Click to expand...

That's quite funny :D PC aside, both sides are not always right, and I wouldn't try to equalize both sides od the argument here; boost can be useful or kill you if you misuse it by accident. The solution is obvious: bind boost so you won't activate it by accident. This is less risky than not having it at all, as you may very well encounter situations when it will save you. If it's possible to die because of a lack of boosting ability, and it's possible to die because of hitting boost by accident, then removing boosting ability just trades one way to die for another. It's like saying "driving your car into a wall can kill you, so don't own a car". Or you could just drive carefully so that doesn't happen. I've heard combat pilots say that they took damage and even lost their ships because they accidentally boosted into a rock. I have never, ever heard a combat pilot follow that up with "therefore, unbind boost so that doesn't happen". Why? Because they engage in a pilot skill-intensive activity and know boost is useful when used correctly. Therefore they make sure not to hit it by accident again and move on. Experienced explorers may differ beacause they each had time to develop methods that work for them, even if they are not always optimal, but advising newcomers to not have boost is just plain wrong. Bind it to something you won't hit by accident - problem solved.
 
Last edited:

dognosh

dognosh
If placed far away from keyboard, this can work as a safe boost key ? :D

FKmEgD7.jpg
 

newman1702

newman1702
dognosh said:
Akira, we're being frisky and only playing ,no offence meant :)
Click to expand...


Agreed! I'm certainly not even seeing it as a heated debate, let alone some kind of offensive one. Just explaining my reasoning on this. I did add a warning about binding boost onto something safe to the first post, though, because that is a good point.
 
Last edited:

Cdr Voorheez

Cdr Voorheez
DoubtOutLoud said:
Battle of the Boost, the

A minor skimish during the ->Distant Worlds Outfitting Wars (3301-3302). In a phase of growing tensions among the explorer community - no doubt raised by the prospect of spending 3 months with other people, something an explorer does not do naturally - local conflicts erupted all over GalNet. Thanks to the civilized nature of explorers, casualties remained close to zero, though ship losses occured in both the pro-boost and the anti-boost faction while each side tried to prove a point. (Attempts to drive a point home via SRV later escalated into the ->2 SRV good, 4 SRV bad ambush at Achenar 3.) Among the notable losses were the Anaconda-class ship "Golden Mean Phallusy", whose specialized control setup activated the ships' boost when the pilot pitched down; and the Asp-class ship "I Like Big Boost And I Cannot Lie', whose experimental A9 thrusters decapitated the pilot when they broke loose and are now headed for Andromeda at relativistic speeds. Calls for the establishment of pro- and anti-boost minor factions in Sirius Corporation space remained unheard. Like all conflictions within the explorer community, the Battle of the Boost and the DWOW ended not in all out war, but in agreement to disagree, legal drug consumption and shouts of 'I love you, man'.
Click to expand...

God that's funny and so so true. Repped when I hit PC.
By the way Akira and Neman, how are those Conda builds faring up with the expiremental fuel tank setup? If it works I'll be joining you both in trying it out on DW.

Here is my 28T fuel tank build based on what I'm reading here. I have kept luxuries like docking computer and ADS.

ISS TERRA NOVA (28tFT)

5D THRUSTERS: CHECK
5A PD FOR BOOST: CHECK
5D SHIELDS FOR MISHAPS: CHECK
ADS/DSS: CHECK
DOCKING COMPUTER FOR LAZINESS: CHECK
X2 64T CARGO FOR MICRO SLIDER ADJUSTMENTS TO RANGE: CHECK
X1 AFMU(6A) BECAUSE IM COLLECTING AFMU MATS: CHECK
7A FUEL SCOOP BECAUSE I CAN: CHECK

Taking her to Betelgeuse because I hear the landing there is 'lively', and it has good mats. Have been practicing loads on 2g worlds so I'll let you know:)
 
Last edited:

Ashnak

Ashnak
CMDR AKIRA MASAKARI said:
I'm having a lot of fun! Can you send me one of those devices to not hit boost accidently? They are illegal in Italy, the only viable thing is to ALWAYS boos, even to dock.
If i can place the device few hundred meters from the pilot seat, I'll fit a 11A boost.
Click to expand...

Is it still that bad? I remember living near Rome for a year (25 years back...), and it seemed to me that braking was actually against the law...

As for those switches - try Farnell or RS Components. IIRC they also deliver to Italy. Yes, I'm actually fantasizing about a custom ED control board. Arduino Micro as USB keyboard emulator, and a bunch of switches and twisters connected to it.
 

Ralph Vargr

Ralph Vargr
Yup. Two interdiction attempts on my last approach to the port where I was going to sell my data.

I survived. Made about 1 MCr.

Need those shield boosters.
 

Henkka77

Henkka77
Just trying to do two builds, one for Asp and one for Python. I know that Python build is pretty much useless and im 99,8% going with the Asp, but i still want to see how much can i get out of it.

Distant Worlds strongly in mind what comes to these builds, but how about cargo racks? Do we need them? What could we possibly find in there? Many builds has cargo racks excluded but its against my thinking that im going out there, thousands of Lys away and i dont have anything to store possibly interesting finds.
Now, im pretty sure theres nothing to find but still..
 

NeoTron

NeoTron
On fuel tanks - someone did a test that showed that if speed travel is your thing, having extra fuel tanks is quite a bit faster than smaller (simply because jump and scope is more time consuming per fuel than jump x 6-10 times and scope - it takes quite a bit of time to max out the fuel scope collecting, and then to fly away from the star to jump safely). If your goal isn't to reach the most sparsely populated areas of the galaxy, it's probably better to add up to 2x the normal fuel. You make more jumps overall (but considering most travel isn't the core, where you almost always jump near max range, it's not as bad as you'd think), but spend less time doing them.

There's really no reason to go with less fuel in an Anaconda especially unless you really want to max out that jump range. That said, I am considering going with 24t in an Asp for Distant Horizons, specifically since it DOES include jumping to the most sparse locations on the far side of the galaxy.

If your goal is to go to the core, and back, and you have extra internals, bring fuel.
 

newman1702

newman1702
NeoTron said:
On fuel tanks - someone did a test that showed that if speed travel is your thing, having extra fuel tanks is quite a bit faster than smaller (simply because jump and scope is more time consuming per fuel than jump x 6-10 times and scope - it takes quite a bit of time to max out the fuel scope collecting, and then to fly away from the star to jump safely). If your goal isn't to reach the most sparsely populated areas of the galaxy, it's probably better to add up to 2x the normal fuel. You make more jumps overall (but considering most travel isn't the core, where you almost always jump near max range, it's not as bad as you'd think), but spend less time doing them.
Click to expand...

It depends on your ship, build, scooping and exploration styles. If you have a big scoop and always scan the primary, I'd prefer to have the single jump range and less fuel, topping up on every scoopable before the scan even finishes. It also depends on the type of exploration you do as well. But, different people, different preferences. I saw an anaconda exploration build once that was basically a flying fuel tanker with maybe 25ly range. Owner claimed this is great as he does nearly 1000ly without scooping than goes make tea as he tops up with a measly class 3 (or something low like that) scoop. Hardly what I'd call optimal, as you gimp the main advantage of the conda by giving her such a range, but he likes it. I still wouldn't advise that route to people, though :)
 

CMDR AKIRA MASAKARI

CMDR AKIRA MASAKARI
NeoTron said:
On fuel tanks - someone did a test that showed that if speed travel is your thing, having extra fuel tanks is quite a bit faster than smaller (simply because jump and scope is more time consuming per fuel than jump x 6-10 times and scope - it takes quite a bit of time to max out the fuel scope collecting, and then to fly away from the star to jump safely). If your goal isn't to reach the most sparsely populated areas of the galaxy, it's probably better to add up to 2x the normal fuel. You make more jumps overall (but considering most travel isn't the core, where you almost always jump near max range, it's not as bad as you'd think), but spend less time doing them.

There's really no reason to go with less fuel in an Anaconda especially unless you really want to max out that jump range. That said, I am considering going with 24t in an Asp for Distant Horizons, specifically since it DOES include jumping to the most sparse locations on the far side of the galaxy.

If your goal is to go to the core, and back, and you have extra internals, bring fuel.
Click to expand...
Don't want to offend the CMDR that did that test, but a round trip of 1000ly can't be taken as universal law. I know where he come from, since I've done 180,000LY with an ASP with 56T. First thing when docked back has been remove them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom