Ships humble question : would you change it?

[il-Vec]

It'd be nice if we had scouting missions that spawned further related missions, eg a detailed surface scan leads to a base assault or a salvage mission or a planetary scan of a ringed gas giant links to a mining or BH mission at the RES sites, perhaps systems in a civil war state could generate CZ or deserter hunt missions.

Scouting missions could be a whole new avenue content, trying to run past some blockade to do some scans/recover data or cargo in very hostile environments, using detection avoiding techniques.
FD does need to improve on the usability of Silent running in PvE though (mostly useless right now) and make some ships particularly adept at heat management, like the Scouts (DB and Asp) and others outside the Lakon lineup. That could be a way to revitalize some ships, they'd also be particularly suited to smuggling.

 

[K-Rose]

I had a scout for a short time, it's a nice agile functional multi-role ship though feels a little overpriced for what it is.

I'd not mind others changing it, but I'm not a fan of how it looks to be honest.

 

[Starbreaker]

Minimum an extra class 5 internal and one of the current internals bumped up one class. Currently it is identical to the DBX which is cheaper, has 2 more utility slots and a large hardpoint instead of 2 small. Apparantly it has decent armour hardness rating but that hardly justfies the state it is in atm, and don't forget the DBX is getting an extra internal in a future update.

 

[Konnivar]

The Asp Scout is a ship that I've always avoided because it doesn't really seem to fit any particular role, and not in a good way like the Cobra mkIII. Based on the visual differences between the AspS and AspX I agree that it should definitely have a similar internal setup as the hull size is virtually the same.

Considering the DBS and DBX as an example the DBX looks like someone stretched out a DBS. This presents itself in the form of extra internal compartments and a large hard point, but it retains the thruster class (visually the same between the scout and explorer). Additionally the DBS is the "original" version of the Diamondback and the general theme seems to be that the modified versions of "original" versions take significant performances losses in key areas (Viper mkIV, Cobra mkIV as additional examples).

The AspX being the "Original" version of the ship follows that the AspS would have those sacrifices in key areas, which it does. However in the AspS those sacrifices go a little bit too far.

To me a "Scout" ship is a more combat oriented ship, but the ship's description doesn't paint it as such. With this in mind I think adding a Class 5 internal bay and giving it the 4 utility mounts that the AspX has would be sufficient to make it more useful. If any additional changes were to be made to it the addition of more internal bays makes the most sense as the description states: "It utilizes much of the same airframe as the Explorer..."

 

[Godsailsaqueen]

Nice ideas and input there everyone. I think the time will come, some day. I personnally love the looks of the asp scout, don't really know why, and it's a pleasure to handle. I like these medium ships also. But one can hardly give it more internals without, like, getting it too close to its big sister : i would go with higher class optional internals, and not just one or 2 for the fun of it, I'd up everything. Let it be less multipurpose than the asp, but as high tech. Might give it another hardpoint too...

I'd go with the name really - with inexistent gameplay atm, what does scout mean? It may be speed, more jump range... Give it speed, keep its agility and it would become a nice fighter - but it would also make the DBS obsolete. Meta balancing between ships is hard... I could also live with it if its jumping capabilities were really great, currently they're not that impressive for its legacy.

 

[il-Vec]

I could also live with it if its jumping capabilities were really great, currently they're not that impressive for its legacy.

Oh I disagree... Very few ships have potentially larger jump distance: AspX, DBX, Conda, Hauler. After Engineer mods you can get as much as 45+ Ly out of it.

 

[Chrysophylax]

When it came out I was hoping it would maintain the relationship the DBS has to the DBE - faster, more agile, shorter jump range, more limited internals, same number of utilities. Essentially, the 'military version', kind of. So the way I'd change it is to make it in line with that expectation:

- At least as fast as the Asp E
- 4 utilities
- Perhaps slightly more shields?

It is entirely too big to have such bad shields, IMO. If it were faster while keeping the current agility, you could leverage that. So I think shields or speed, if such a compromise is needed.

 

[Armholeeio]

First thing drop it by a million to 2 mill and it would entice more suckers.... I mean cmdrs to use it

 

[Broadsword1986]

The Asp Scout is a bit lackluster for my tastes at this moment.
I expect a scout to be actually faster than the full version of a ship. The Asp scout received the maneuverability, but not the speed it would require.
The Asp E is also described as the civilian version of the military Asp. Then for me I rather would've received that military Asp then the Asp Scout we have now.
I also lacks in terms of taste for weapons. I personally feel we have way too many ships toting the 2 med and 2 small hardpoints and I'd welcome some more variety in this regard.