Engineers Imperial cutter distributor needs love

[Iskariot]

Finally built up an imperial cutter and loaded it with 4 pulse turrets - 2 class 3 and 2 class 2.

the A7 distributor can barely keep up with all 4 firing. Tried same loadout on my python and it handles it no problem

i know when 2.1 hit distributors were buffed across the board and then got nerfed again shortly after. The cutters distributor however needs help. Specifically im talking about recharge rate here. I know the cutter isnt a dedicated combat vessel but it should have better recharge.

The Cutter's Power distributor is the same size as the one of your Python.
The Cutter is a much larger ship, so the power distributor is a serious bottleneck.

The Python only has to feed 3 large and two medium weapons.
The Cutter has to distribute power to 4 large, 2 mediums and one huge weapon.
It has a bigger powerplant of course, but the power distributor can only do so much with that I guess as it also has to distribute power to much larger shields and thrusters.

 

[Starender]

Choose your weapons according to the distributor, low energy consuption weapons will solve your problem (MCs, Missiles, pulses, frags)
then modify your weapons to get more damage per energy (overcharged or efficient), then modify your distributor towards weapons (high charge or weapon focused).

Problem solved

Edit: if you want a full railgun boat or beams everywhere, this ship is not for you, try the Anac/Corvette.

 

[SCTrojanbulldog]

Choose your weapons according to the distributor, low energy consuption weapons will solve your problem (MCs, Missiles, pulses, frags)
then modify your weapons to get more damage per energy (overcharged or efficient), then modify your distributor towards weapons (high charge or weapon focused).

Problem solved

Edit: if you want a full railgun boat or beams everywhere, this ship is not for you, try the Anac/Corvette.

This!!!!!

 

[Nerwan]

Buff the Cutter! It's distributor is too small.
Buff the Conda! It doesn't have big enough internals!
Buff the Corvette! It's jump range is too short!

Shall we just make them all the same ship? We could call it the Anacutvette ;-)

Just do what I do and buy one of each ;-) In fact why stick at 1?

 

[andrak]

Give it a better distributer. While you're at it sort out the Corvette so it has the originally quoted hardpoints. 2x c4, 3x c3 etc.

 

[Devari]

The Cutter's Power distributor is the same size as the one of your Python.
The Cutter is a much larger ship, so the power distributor is a serious bottleneck.

Yes, but this is only an issue if the Cutter is firing all of its weapons. The OP mentioned that he was only firing 2 x class 2 and 2 x class 3 pulse lasers. If you're not firing the other hardpoints they don't drain any capacitor power, same as how you can leave your engine capacitor fully charged with 0 pips to engines and it will stay fully charged as long as you don't use boost.

The Python only has to feed 3 large and two medium weapons.
The Cutter has to distribute power to 4 large, 2 mediums and one huge weapon.
It has a bigger powerplant of course, but the power distributor can only do so much with that I guess as it also has to distribute power to much larger shields and thrusters.

If you have 4 pips to weapons then it will fully charge the weapons capacitor regardless of the other modules mounted or drawing power. So a Python with an A7 distributor and a Cutter with an A7 distributor firing the same weapons with the same weapon pip settings will behave identically for weapons power drain. Obviously if you're firing the Cutter's full weapons loadout then it will drain the A7 weapons capacitor more quickly but this is not what the OP was referring to. Weapons that are powered but not firing will not drain capacitor power, same with shields that are fully charged but not actively recharging. Powered systems that are not being actively used only need the total MW available from the power plant but they don't drain capacitor charge.

 

[foebits]

Fly another ship... You obviously aren't cut out to be a cutter pilot. May I suggest a vulture or anaconda. Though you still will need to FA off an anaconda to get the most out of it.

I gave up on the cutter for combat within hours. I fly my battleconda instead and love it. Though you comment about FA off intrigues me since A) I do alternate FA on/off as i go and B) the anaconda is vastly more menuverable than the cutter.

It has nothing to do with being "cut out" to fly the ship at all, it just doesn't perform worth a dmn for the fighter style combat they tried to force on it.

 

[AdmiralFloof]

And the communities answer will be exactly the same:

Go to the Engineers!

I've got mine modded already, but he's asking for stock upgrade hence why I said I want the same but for FSD

 

[Quineloe]

This makes no-sense. Both ships have the same A7 distributor. I think any differences here are due to your imagination or testing methodology.
You may also want to do a Grade 4 Efficient Weapon upgrade for your class 3 turrets. That will also help with the distributor draw.

As far as the distributor buff / nerf is concerned, it never had any impact on the weapon capacitor. It was only for the SYS and ENG capacitors.

Actually due to hardpoint layout, python has fewer turrets firing, therefore it drains the capacitor less

The size 7 distributor has already been pointed out as the ships glaring weakness during the 1.5 beta. FDev ignored it and did not comment even once on it.

The "not a dedicated combat ship" is pretty much not an argument. The game is used as a combat vessel according to lore, it is the biggest ship Empire Factions use in Conflict zones and it has a lot of hardpoints. It has the shields and armor of a combat ship, but not the dps. Given the cutter is twice as expensive to build for combat as the Corvette it's just really sad.

 

[Lucius-Darcia]

Even the math does not make sense with the OP's claim.
An A7 power distributor has a capacity of 61 MW and a recharge rate of 6.1 MW / sec
the power draw of a class 2 pulse turret is 0.33 mw / shot * 3.037 shots / sec = 1 MW / sec
the power draw of a class 3 pulse turret is 0.56 mw / shot * 2.7 shots / sec = 1.5 MW / sec

So the OP's setup should be consuming 1 + 1 + 1.5 + 1.5 = 5 MW / sec
He should have no problem maintaining a full weapons capacitor with 4 pips to weapons.

Math isn't all, the power draw gets not simply added to each other. it raises with every hardpoint used. Look in the Vulture. 1x C3G Beam can be shot constant with nearly 0 powerdraw. Firing 2 of them sucks out all energy of the capacitor in 2 seconds! There is a little bit of more math behind the scene

 

[EValve]

then use its speed to boom and zoom,

It's crucial to understand that the concept of boom&zoom is entirely build around the fact we're flying in our atmosphere.
Outside in space the whole concept goes to water because what gives you this crucial advantage over your opponent is drag.

Like we all know ( I hope by now ); Space doesn't have drag.

 

[foebits]

It's crucial to understand that the concept of boom&zoom is entirely build around the fact we're flying in our atmosphere.
Outside in space the whole concept goes to water because what gives you this crucial advantage over your opponent is drag.

Like we all know ( I hope by now ); Space doesn't have drag.

But their space does have drag; how else would you slow down after boosting and turning your thrusters off?

 

[TuxedoSteve]

It's crucial to understand that the concept of boom&zoom is entirely build around the fact we're flying in our atmosphere.
Outside in space the whole concept goes to water because what gives you this crucial advantage over your opponent is drag.

Like we all know ( I hope by now ); Space doesn't have drag.

Yes, that's using the conventional meaning of Boom n' Zoom, I was using it more meaning that because the cutter has higher speed than most large ships, and indeed higher than a lot of ships it can use that advantage to get away from its opponent fast then turn back around and make another run towards its target.
Unfortunately this isn't easy in the Cutter, as its turn rate is too slow to quickly turn around and by the time you have done so, you've drifted out of sensor range. That's why imo if the cutter needs any buff it's not to its distributor, but to its turn rate. To make it still the slowest of the big 3, but at least a fair bit faster than a Type-9, but not giving a boost to the lateral thruster strength so it still drifts just as much up until you've turned fully around to where the forward thrusters can dead stop you. This would allow you to properly fight as described as once you've flown past your target you can get turned back around fairly quickly, but without too much change of direction until you've flipped backwards and can use the main thrusters and a boost to start heading back at your opponent.

 

[foebits]

Yes, that's using the conventional meaning of Boom n' Zoom, I was using it more meaning that because the cutter has higher speed than most large ships, and indeed higher than a lot of ships it can use that advantage to get away from its opponent fast then turn back around and make another run towards its target.
Unfortunately this isn't easy in the Cutter, as its turn rate is too slow to quickly turn around and by the time you have done so, you've drifted out of sensor range. That's why imo if the cutter needs any buff it's not to its distributor, but to its turn rate. To make it still the slowest of the big 3, but at least a fair bit faster than a Type-9, but not giving a boost to the lateral thruster strength so it still drifts just as much up until you've turned fully around to where the forward thrusters can dead stop you. This would allow you to properly fight as described as once you've flown past your target you can get turned back around fairly quickly, but without too much change of direction until you've flipped backwards and can use the main thrusters and a boost to start heading back at your opponent.

Despite it's abismaly small distributor I must agree. Its sidewinder thrusters cripple it more so.

 

[Devari]

It's crucial to understand that the concept of boom&zoom is entirely build around the fact we're flying in our atmosphere.
Outside in space the whole concept goes to water because what gives you this crucial advantage over your opponent is drag.

Like we all know ( I hope by now ); Space doesn't have drag.

Actually "boom and zoom" has nothing to do with drag, it's about "energy maneuvering" where you're trading gravitational potential energy (i.e., altitude) for kinetic energy (i.e. velocity) and can basically convert the energy from one form to another by strategic maneuvering against an opponent with less potential energy. The idea being that if you have an altitude advantage over your opponent you can convert this to a speed advantage, or vice versa, allowing you to dictate the positioning of the aerial engagement. A "boom and zoom" fighter tended to be fast and/or heavy but often had less maneuverability than their opponents, meaning they had to carefully "budget" their energy in maneuvers. A good example of this would be the Me-262 from WWII or the F-4 Phantom from the Vietnam war which both relied on high speed and energy management to win engagements. If they used superior speed/altitude they could readily achieve massive win/loss ratios but if they were drawn into slow, turning fights where they lost their energy they could be defeated by a much less "powerful" fighter. The opposite of the boom and zoom aerial combat strategy would be a small, maneuverable fighter like the A6M Zero from WWII or the Mig-17 from the Vietnam war that relied on aggressive maneuvering at low speed/altitude rather than trying to dictate the speed or altitude of the engagement. They couldn't out run, out climb or out dive vs. a boom and zoom fighter because they generally had less "energy" available for energy maneuvering, but if they could cause their opponent to lose their own energy and be drawn into a slow, turning fight, they could gain the edge they needed to win.

In terms of how this can be applied to Elite, since we don't have planetary combat modelled properly we can't really apply the same principles of energy maneuvering because this simply isn't how Elite combat works. You could in theory have a "boom and zoom" fighter that uses the same principles of energy maneuvering on a planet without atmosphere as you would still be trading kinetic vs. gravitational potential energy as you maneuver from higher to lower orbital altitudes but we don't have accurately modelled gravitational effects to actually do this. The other major problem with translating this to Elite is that none of your energy is actually "converted" between kinetic or gravitational energy and is artificially "lost" by the unrealistic physics of blue-zone maneuvering, boost decay, etc. The equivalent idea that most players are trying to refer to with "boom and zoom" however is still similar to aerial dogfighting in the sense that some Elite ships are designed more around high-speed "jousting" while others are designed more around low-speed maneuvering. A good example here would be comparing a fast Imperial Eagle or Imperial Courier build using speed and positioning vs. a slower Diamondback Scout or Vulture using superior agility and maneuvering. It's the same basic principle even if the actual details and mechanics of energy maneuvering don't actually come into play in Elite due to all the artificial "physics" and flight model limitations. So technically, there is no "true" boom and zoom maneuvering, but some of the fast fighter builds in Elite do come close to replicating the idea of dictating speed/position of the engagement by having more "energy" available to maneuver to avoid being caught in slow turning fights that would put them at a disadvantage.