Mass Lock Factor - Type 9 vs. Krait MkII

lenna

lenna
Using coriolios as a reference source:
  1. MLF 6: Eagle Mk 2, Hauler, Imperial Eagle, Sidewinder
  2. MLF 7: Adder, Imperial Courier, Viper Mk 3, Viper Mk 4
  3. MLF 8: Asp Scout, Cobra Mk 3, Cobra Mk 4, Diamondback Scout, Keelback, Type 6
  4. MLF 9: Dolphin
  5. MLF 10: Diamondback Explorer, Type 7, Vulture
  6. MLF 11: Asp Explorer
  7. MLF 12: Fer-De-Lance, Imperial Clipper, Mamba
  8. MLF 13: Alliance Challenger, Alliance Chieftain, Alliance Crusader
  9. MLF 14: Federal Assault Ship, Federal Dropship, Federal Gunship
  10. MLF 16: Orca, Type 9
  11. MLF 17: Krait Mk 2, Krait Phantom, Python
  12. MLF 18: Beluga
  13. MLF 23: Anaconda
  14. MLF 24: Federal Corvette
  15. MLF 26: Type 10
  16. MLF 27: Imperial Cutter
This differs from INARA (which has the Alliance Crusader with an MLF of 0 as well as other differences) and the Elite Dangerous Wiki (which is missing MLF data for the Cobra Mk 4 but otherwise is in-line with Coriolis).

Whichever is factually correct is uncertain, but what is quite clear is that actual ship mass seems to have very little to do with the MLF. My best guess is the MLF is used in part as a balancing factor and MLF is probably not purely a ship mass related effect but rather an effect of ship design.
 

AdmiralXanos

AdmiralXanos
rlsg said:
Whichever is factually correct is uncertain, but what is quite clear is that actual ship mass seems to have very little to do with the MLF. My best guess is the MLF is used in part as a balancing factor and MLF is probably not purely a ship mass related effect but rather an effect of ship design.
Click to expand...

if MLF was determined by tech/design and not purely mass I'd be into modules that can jam/slow the wake charge time on other ships.
 

MK Regular

M
AdmiralXanos said:
ether way I'd like the lore to explain more of how it works, I love sci-fi pseudo science.
Click to expand...
The best theory I've heard is that MLF is based on mass AND electronic interference, despite the name implying that mass is the only factor involved.

When you look at the sensor size of the ships with the same hull mass and different MLFs, the ship(s) with the larger sensors typically have a higher MLF than the ones with smaller sensors. I'm not sure exactly how MLF would be calculated, but I suspect that it would involve scaling exponentials with sensor size and hull mass. Looking at the list of MLFs and comparing it to these values, It seems like box volume might be a factor as well with ships that are too big or small getting penalties to MLF.

That said, this doesn't really explain that much, and there are a few rather large outliers no matter how you try to handle the data. It's probably best not to look into it if you're expecting some kind of in-universe explanation.
 

lenna

lenna
Six6VI said:
Hmm...

MLF 10: Diamondback Explorer, Type 7, Vulture

Sorry, not convinced :p
Click to expand...
That is consistent across all 3 data sources thus has a high probability of being accurate regarding current actual values.

Whether you personally feel it should be balanced that way is another matter.

AdmiralXanos said:
if MLF was determined by tech/design and not purely mass I'd be into modules that can jam/slow the wake charge time on other ships.
Click to expand...
There are the FSD Disruptor Missiles which are available via supporting PP's Yuri Grom.
 

lenna

lenna
MK_Regular said:
The best theory I've heard is that MLF is based on mass AND electronic interference, despite the name implying that mass is the only factor involved.
Click to expand...
That would perhaps explain why the Type 10 has a much higher MLF than the Type 9 on which it is based.
 

Bortas

Bortas
rlsg said:
MLF 17: Krait Mk 2, Krait Phantom, Python
Click to expand...

This information is incorrect. The Krait MK2 has an MLF of 16 and the Phantom 14.

Proof is here:

Krait MLF

Since both coriolis and edshipyard still have the numbers wrong, I decided to test it again and make some screenshots. Conclusions: Krait MK2 MLF is 16 Krait Phantom MLF is 14 Screenshots:
forums.frontier.co.uk forums.frontier.co.uk
 

lenna

lenna
Bortas said:
This information is incorrect. The Krait MK2 has an MLF of 16 and the Phantom 14.

Proof is here:

Krait MLF

Since both coriolis and edshipyard still have the numbers wrong, I decided to test it again and make some screenshots. Conclusions: Krait MK2 MLF is 16 Krait Phantom MLF is 14 Screenshots:
forums.frontier.co.uk forums.frontier.co.uk
Click to expand...
The values are taken directly from Coriolis and I have already pointed out that the accuracy of 3 of the most trusted data sources (Coriolis, INARA, Fandom Wiki) is questionable.

Ultimately, there is no single official data source to gather/update the information since FD seemingly hid the MLF stat during one of the UI redesign passes. Given this, whether the specific values are exactly correct or not, the general gist is fundamentally the same even if they are off by 1 or 2 points in places. That is to say that MLF is not purely mass related regardless of how you push the numbers around.

To me, it actually kind of makes sense that mass is not the primary consideration where MLF is concerned.
 

Ian Doncaster

Ian Doncaster
Agony_Aunt said:
Hmm... i suspect a T9 would be dead long before the grom bomb wore off and a high wake could be completed.
Click to expand...
Depends how it's equipped, as always - but especially with engineering you can get a ridiculous number of hitpoints on a T-9 and still keep the two class 8s for cargo - especially since they doubled the base hull.

7A reinforced shield, a couple of boosters to make it last longer and top up the resistances, military or ideally reactive armour, and then a bunch of MRPs and engineered HRPs in the size 1-5 internals which make little difference to its cargo capacity, and you can have well over 10,000 effective HP and still at least 512t cargo.
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
Ian Doncaster said:
Depends how it's equipped, as always - but especially with engineering you can get a ridiculous number of hitpoints on a T-9 and still keep the two class 8s for cargo - especially since they doubled the base hull.
Click to expand...

They did what now?

Now that is a pleasant surprise. This is something i've said the specialized trade ships needed for a long time. Now if they would only do something about that MLF...
 

MK Regular

M
Bortas said:
This information is incorrect. The Krait MK2 has an MLF of 16 and the Phantom 14.

Proof is here:

Krait MLF

Since both coriolis and edshipyard still have the numbers wrong, I decided to test it again and make some screenshots. Conclusions: Krait MK2 MLF is 16 Krait Phantom MLF is 14 Screenshots:
forums.frontier.co.uk forums.frontier.co.uk
Click to expand...
In this case, the MLFs of the ships are roughly proportional to the hull masses of the ships in question:
  • Phantom has 270T hull, MLF of 14 (~19.3 T per 1 MLF)
  • Krait II has 320T hull, MLF of 16 (20 T per 1 MLF)
  • Python has 350T hull, MLF of 17 (~20.6 T per 1 MLF)
Considering that they all have size 7 sensors (see my previous post), this is to be expected. If we take box volumes into account:
  • Phantom has box volume of ~77 000 m^3, ~19.3 T per MLF (1.49 MT m^3 per MLF)
  • Krait II has box volume of ~71 000 m^3, 20 T per MLF (1.42 MT m^3 per MLF)
  • Python has box volume of ~92 000 m^3, ~20.6T per MLF (1.89 MT m^3 per MLF)
Looking at the discrepancies in MT m^3 per MLF, it seems like this can be explained by the Kraits having less dead space in their box volumes. As such, I suspect that it is TRUE volume of the ship that is used for the volume component of the (potentially non-existient) MLF calculation rather than the box volume.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom