Jump range - is it really that important for exploration?

[Neokortex]

I wouldnt go with a shorter Range anymore...

Simple calculation:

Lets say you compare 35Ly jump to 25Ly on a trip to sag with around 25k Ly

714 Jumps with 35Ly (if perfect)
+286 Jumps with lower range

Its almost 30% more time for the same trip and in details: 1 FSD Jump takes me about 45s when I am targeting the goal allready. So just the Jumps are 3.5hrs more (one trip). Then you need more often routeplotting etc.

With longer Range you can also jump very little. I dont see a reason to travel with a ship that can less. Creditsmaking is also not really a problem - at least it wasnt pre 1.3

 

[BlueTeamMember]

A bigger jump range is useful for getting First Discovered in areas close to human space.
There are pockets of low distribution at the top and bottom of human space. Call it Dark Matter.
I found a few undiscovered places that i had to do corkscrews to get to at 30 LY jumps. Some place are so isolated that I had to retrace my last 3-4 jumps to get back to navigable areas.

 

[Ziljan]

I'm one of those players who values jump range very high.
For exploration I think there are 2 ships which are clearly best,
(exactly those with the highest jumpranges ): Anaconda and Asp.

The only other very important considerations is fuel scoop size (speed). But that is very good on both ships as well.

I see OP likes maneuvrability so I would advise Asp in that case. But you really don't need more maneuvrability than that.

Jump range and scooping time are indeed important for both speed and durability. But don't forget heat management. A courier has a decent stripped down range and an OK scooping speed, it is even quite maneurable in SC which can save quite a bit of time with scanning, however it's heat builds up so quickly that using it for exploration would be extremely challenging of not out right nutty.

 

[dognosh]

Jump range and scooping time are indeed important for both speed and durability. But don't forget heat management. A courier has a decent stripped down range and an OK scooping speed, it is even quite maneurable in SC which can save quite a bit of time with scanning, however it's heat builds up so quickly that using it for exploration would be extremely challenging of not out right nutty.

The Asp I set up recently has excellent heat management, but then there is no shield & totally defenseless with a 34.47LY jump range. You get out of the bubble real quick and you'll be ok.
Thrusters D4
FSD A5
Life D4
P Dist. D4
Sensors D5
P Plant D3
scoop, detailed & adv acanners

 

[CMDR DoubleSkulls]

So my conclusion is that the jump range is important only in some cases. However, there are more important properties that are missing from many discussions. For example, ship's maneuvrability in SC is probably the most relevant, especially speed-up and slow-down capabilities. But I have never seen any statistics on this or information on how it can be upgraded. I am sure there are other parameters that go unnoticed too.

I tend to agree with you, but I would make an important distinction that exploration styles may vary even for the same explorer over time. At the moment I'm crawling along probably making 10ly jumps on average, other times I'll want to move quickly, so a high jump range will matter. Many of us will have occasions we want to get back to the bubble in a hurry and then switch modes.

I believe that SC performance is constant other than turning speed. I've no evidence of this though. Turning speed I think is consistent with the ship's turning in regular space, which means it isn't the same as ship manoeuvrability rating - which includes thruster performance.

 

[Bam]

Anything over 30ly is good enough for me.
If you are scanning for cash in the dense neutron fields 90% of your jumps can be under 10ly often much less than this.
It is nice to be able to cover a long distance quickly though, after my trip to Sag A, and spending a week looking at Neutron Stars I just wanted to be home fast. I had 37ly range on that trip and was doing about 100 jumps a session on my way home, 27ly range would have been 1000ly less each session.

At the end of the day I wouldn't worry about getting that absolute maximum jump range you can out of a ship unless you know you HAVE to have that range to get where you are going.

 

[DrNoesis]

I bought the skin pack for the Python, even though I'm still a week out. Gives me something to look forward to.

When I get back I'm going to equip it as an explorer (no 10% penalty View attachment 43009) and pose in front of many things. It is after all the prettiest ship in Elite at the moment.
If it's range exceeds 20 Ly, I'm golden.

"But Ziggy, the Imperial ..."

The Imperial Anythings are iPod players.

ditto to this, except that im probably a bit further away.....

They really need to just automatically hit you up with rep from me for anything you post...

 

[puca]

The Imperial Anythings are iPod players.

Harsh, but fair.

 

[Zulu Romeo]

I've said this before.

On paper, there is a case for designing your ship specifically on what you want to do on your exploration, and this may mean a setup or a ship that has less jump range than you'd like, or more jump range with other compromises. However, in the end a general setup has been preferred, in order to cover almost all eventualities to a decent degree. Remember what happened at Sagittarius A*, for instance: such things are only going to be more common in the future, and you need to know how to deal with it.

Ultimately, it's all about what you are most comfortable with.

 

[Ziljan]

The Asp I set up recently has excellent heat management, but then there is no shield & totally defenseless with a 34.47LY jump range. You get out of the bubble real quick and you'll be ok.
Thrusters D4
FSD A5
Life D4
P Dist. D4
Sensors D5
P Plant D3
scoop, detailed & adv acanners

I've been doing some experiments on the 2 Diamondbacks and the Asp. They are all excellent at heat management. The Asp can cool down to the lowest % with reduced power usage, but I think the DB ships have a slight edge when it comes to the % change from using devices. I don't have all of my data in yet, since I'm mostly testing using heat sinks for stealth during interdictions. I keep the best thrusters possible on each and use FAoff to hide my engine exhaust.

I believe that SC performance is constant other than turning speed. I've no evidence of this though. Turning speed I think is consistent with the ship's turning in regular space, which means it isn't the same as ship manoeuvrability rating - which includes thruster performance.

I haven't timed it yet, but it feels like engines might impact turning speed even in SC. Could just be in my head though since turning differences aren't always large between thrusters.

 

[Schattenbogen]

I like to go to the outer borders of galaxy and a good jump range can help a lot.
Good fuel tanks too.

 

[drkaii]

Just to point out if no one else has that the higher jump range, the better fuel efficiency, generally speaking. If you have a higher jump range you a) have less mass and b) have a better FSD which both contribute to less fuel per light year per jump. So it's not just that you have a % fewer stars per distance, you have to also you have a % fewer light years per refuel to add to the mix as well. A lower-range ship also runs a greater risk of running out of fuel. If you are neglectful and find yourself with not enough fuel for the next jump, the chances of you reaching the closest scoopable goes down.

Also, in low density star regions, such as between arms and high above/below the plane, it will make a massive difference as there will be more options for route plotting.

And about the point about better supercruise maneuverability, it's an interesting point. If you can turn to face an object faster, then over 1000's of scans that might make a significant difference to "surveyors" To the "racers", not a drop of time is saved as you already have more than enough time to turn to face your next destination after activating FSD.

As Allitnil said though, it's only maneuverability, not speed/acceleration that differs between ships. Some just yaw and/or pitch better, that's all.

And it's been stated before many times, but jump distance can be important for those hard-to-reach systems, a rare case but a real one Both racers and surveyors alike never know when they will come across something that's too far to reach.

 

[Kancro Vantas]

Hi there!

I noticed in every discussion about exploration ships: jump range is the first thing to pop up. But having visited over 2000 systems and got ranked Ranger, I have a growing doubt that this is not quite right.

Recently I was typically playing as a surveyor. Although I fly Asp with A5 FSD, I noticed that most of the time I don't use its potential and simply switch to economical route-planning. In this case, my route is far from the straight line, especially between the galaxy arms, but who cares: I got my scans. And I spend considerably less time fuel scooping.

So my conclusion is that the jump range is important only in some cases. However, there are more important properties that are missing from many discussions.

Editing your OP as I just did, it almost come across as trying to troll in this thread! LOL....I know you are not, but seriously, you asked the question and gave the best answer to yourself all at the same time.

Let me tell you something, with all due respect of my colleagues in this thread: PAY NO ATTENTION TO ANYONE BUT YOURSELF WHEN IT COMES TO ENJOYING EXPLORATION AND THE GAME IN GENERAL.

Only you know your style and only you know what you like and what not.

And I tell you this from being one of the few explorers here that is flying around with what many would think is a flying collection of senseless modules for exploration. From mining gear, to lasers, to warrant scanners, to shield, to multicannons, to refinery...my dear Orinoco looks like this for them:

Spoiler

However, I can jump up to 29.88 ly. And for my style, that suits me just fine.

I am with you 100%: I think that is you are doing jumps of 25 ly or more, you are perfectly equipped to have a taste of both exploration styles you mention above. Can't reach that 40ly star in the outskirt of the Galaxy? Couldn't care less BECAUSE that's not my cup of tea, but it might be all for the explorer next to me. And I respect that.

So, your conclusion is accurate and jump range is overrated. But is definitively an important area to consider when outfitting your ship. I don't think there are limits after 25ly jump, but going with a 7 ly jump HAS TO BE PAINFUL even if going next door.

My 2 cents.

 

[Zulu Romeo]

I have noticed a difference between ships when it comes to acceleration and deceleration. The heavier ships with reduced unit thrust per unit mass do decelerate and accelerate slower than the lighter ones with better thrusters, at least in normal space.

Certainly there is a big difference in lateral, vertical and axial thrusting manoeuvres in supercruise between the ships according to mass and thruster performance. I think it can make a difference when being interdicted: the more nimble ships will more easily win an interdiction arm wrestling match against a much less nimble one. How the class and rating of interdictor affects this is unclear, though: I have always thought that only the swiftest ships will give a 4A interdictor a challenge.

 

[Zenith]

My course took me to some targets that were hanging on to the underside of the galaxy by their fingertips.
V4641 Sagittarii is at -2500 ly below the galactic plane and you need 30ly+ range to reach it.
Another one was XTE J1817-330 at -1391 ly and between galactic arms, so the star density got thin rapidly.

Those were examples of when I needed 30ly+ range. Most of the time I could have got by with 20ly-25ly.

"Better to have and not need it, than need it and not have it"

 

[Kancro Vantas]

"Better to have and not need it, than need it and not have it"

Only thing is that's not a real need...if I go and see a star that is beyond my 29.8 LY range, say is at 34 ly out, you can bet your sweet bottom that I won't be missing any hour sleep about it! I will just go on to a star that I can reach and be happy about it!!

So in that sense, need it??? pffft... not me! .... and that's the beauty... is my style... and your style... no needs here...

Need is to have no fuel, next star is 2 ly away and you have a jump range of 1 ly...that's need...not 30 vs 34ly... that's style.. that's preference... ;-)

 

[Zenith]

True, but I set myself the task of visiting a whole class of systems to see what was in them, and to get distances to other systems to trilaterate their exact location in the galaxy.
Some of them were a mere jump or 2 away from the ultimate limits of my jump range.

I'm already considering my next ship, and my range requirement is 25ly minimum, fully combat-ready and refuel drone capable.

If you're heading coreward, jump range isn't really essential.
If you're heading rimward, you need to consider your range and fuel tanks.

 

[Allitnil]

I have noticed a difference between ships when it comes to acceleration and deceleration. The heavier ships with reduced unit thrust per unit mass do decelerate and accelerate slower than the lighter ones with better thrusters, at least in normal space.

Certainly there is a big difference in lateral, vertical and axial thrusting manoeuvres in supercruise between the ships according to mass and thruster performance. I think it can make a difference when being interdicted: the more nimble ships will more easily win an interdiction arm wrestling match against a much less nimble one. How the class and rating of interdictor affects this is unclear, though: I have always thought that only the swiftest ships will give a 4A interdictor a challenge.

I'm sure you're right when it comes to interdictions although I always submit anyway. If I get the chance tomorrow I'll try some simple tests on acceleration & deceleration across a few ships.

 

[Zeeman]

There are many ways to explore and all of them are valid. Saying "range" or "scooping speed" is unimportant to your narrow playstyle is as obnoxious as the people who brag about taking down an elite anaconda in a sidewinder.

Yup, pretty much.

Having a bigger scoop and longer jump range mans you can potentially do more, it doesn't mean you have to.

If you have a smaller scoop, or shorter jump range, well, you can't go beyond those limits, can you?

In other words, it's better to over estimate, and not need the extra, than under estimate, and not be able to go that extra Ly.

Z...

 

[Allitnil]

I timed how long it took to accelerate from rest (30km/s) next to a star to 25c and then back down to 30km/s again. I tried it with a mostly A-rated Asp, a stripped down Asp and a stripped down Anaconda. They all took 56.7 (+/- 0.1) seconds to accelerate to 25c and 13.0 (+/- 0.1) seconds to decelerate to 30km/s.

I also timed how long it took to do a full 360 degree vertical turn whilst at 30km/s. Both of the two variations of the Asp took 22.6 seconds whilst the Anaconda took a whopping 48.4.

My preliminary conclusions are that acceleration and deceleration are independent of the type of ship and that turning speed depends on the ship type, not the modules fitted. That's what we had expected but it's good to have at least a little evidence to back up our thoughts