Mass Manager vs Deep Charge

This will probably come up a lot when 3.0 drops, so here's your guide to which one to pick in order to maximise jump range.

To recap:
Mass manager: gives you a 4% increase to your optimised mass. This multiplies with any base optimised mass increase you have from the increased range blueprint.
Deep charge: gives you a 10% increase in max fuel per jump.

Tl;dr - mass manager is best for larger FSD classes; deep charge is best for smaller ones. The break-even point is a class 5 FSD; in that case choose mass manager because it will be more fuel efficient.

The maths

If like me you like equations almost as much as you like playing Elite, read on for the details...

We begin with the hyperspace fuel equation:



Where:
  • f is the fuel required (tons)
  • d is the distance to be travelled (light years)
  • M_ship is the mass of your ship (tons)
  • M_opt is the optimised mass of your drive (tons)
  • l and p are constants defined by the rating and class of your drive, respectively
This governs your maximum range, because your drive cannot consume an unlimited amount of fuel per jump. This is why, if you select a system beyond your maximum range and attempt to jump, the error you get is 'max fuel exceeded'.

Rearranging, we get



Now we can see more clearly the factors affecting our maximum range. It scales linearly with optimised mass (irrespective of anything else), but any multiplier of maximum fuel is raised to the power of 1/p. The question, therefore, is which gives the higher multiplier: a straight 1.04 (Mass Manager) or 1.1^(1/p) (Deep Charge)? This calls for a spreadsheet! I like spreadsheets.

FSD classp1.1^(1/p)
221.049
32.151.045
42.31.042
52.451.04
62.61.037
72.751.035

You can now see that they give the same result for a class 5 FSD. Mass Manager would actually have a tiny advantage because M_ship includes the mass of the fuel needed for the jump, but it's already the best choice because it is more efficient.
 
Last edited:
Great research and well backed up with figures!

I'm looking forward to engineering my ships in the new system, when I get back from the black.
 
Respect and Rep - well researched CMDR! Will dive into it when the figures have settled, i.e. when the new Engineers go live.
 
If/when they change things please kick me and I'll update the first post; I'm on Xbox so I'm getting the new engineering details second hand.
 
Thanks for doing and posting this!
The max. possible optimal mass is likely going to change though, as some current ultra-rare rolls exist that wouldn't be possible with the new system. (~56% optimum mass and a max fuel usage increase.) We'll see. In that case, I hope they'll adjust the +10% max fuel per jump as well.

However, one thing about what you wrote. You sprinkled things like "the maths - 90% of you have probably stopped reading", "here's a boring table to finish you off", "nerdiness". That adds nothing to your text, but rather, it takes away from its quality. Why? Because it insinuates that parts of your (assumed) audience have a very short attention span and lack even a basic knowledge of mathematics. There might be a few readers like that, yes, but why point that out? In inserting such a comparison, you pretty much write a subtle variation of "we are so clever, guys". In my opinion, such remarks are not just unnecessary, but the presence of them makes the text worse. Which is a pity, because it's done well otherwise. So, what you wrote would be even better without them.
 
Last edited:
However, one thing about what you wrote. You sprinkled things like "the maths - 90% of you have probably stopped reading", "here's a boring table to finish you off", "nerdiness". That adds nothing to your text, but rather, it takes away from its quality. Why? Because it insinuates that parts of your (assumed) audience have a very short attention span and lack even a basic knowledge of mathematics. There might be a few readers like that, yes, but why point that out? In inserting such a comparison, you pretty much write a subtle variation of "we are so clever, guys". In my opinion, such remarks are not just unnecessary, but the presence of them makes the text worse. Which is a pity, because it's done well otherwise. So, what you wrote would be even better without them.
I read it as some lighthearted remarks not to be taken too seriously... *shrugs*
 
I read it as some lighthearted remarks not to be taken too seriously... *shrugs*
How anyone reads it doesn't really matter: in such subjects, remarks about the (parts of the) audience don't add much, and negative remarks even less so. But yeah, that was just my suggestion to improve the text, which wasn't asked for.
 
How anyone reads it doesn't really matter: in such subjects, remarks about the (parts of the) audience don't add much, and negative remarks even less so. But yeah, that was just my suggestion to improve the text, which wasn't asked for.
I was attempting to appear self-deprecating - I'll have another go :) (I've also missed some units and my OCD won't stand for that!)
 
I was attempting to appear self-deprecating - I'll have another go :) (I've also missed some units and my OCD won't stand for that!)
I thought the text was better as it was. Now you have a problem - which random easily-offended internet censor to obey? Nice thread by the way!
 
Great research and well backed up with figures!

I'm looking forward to engineering my ships in the new system, when I get back from the black.
Same. Unless, like all other good things, it's been nerfed by that time. :/

I want to engineer my Cutter or Corvette to be used for DW2. Hopefully there's enough time to get all mats too. I understand that the new system requires a lot of materials.
 
I want to engineer my Cutter or Corvette to be used for DW2. Hopefully there's enough time to get all mats too. I understand that the new system requires a lot of materials.
I think the main complaints come from those who want to engineer a lot of modules on a lot of ships and who are focussing on the need to take each module through the 5 levels (which definitely takes more effort but with certain results at the end of the process) compared to being able to just go straight to G5 every time once you've got the engineer to that level but then needing maybe dozens of attempts with each module to get something as good.

I personally think this aspect of the changes will see rather less effort needed by explorers to get a really well engineered ship. If you're happy with just an OK modded ship then it probably won't save much time and might even be worse, but at least if you do put in the extra effort then you are guaranteed to be rewarded for it.
 
I think the main complaints come from those who want to engineer a lot of modules on a lot of ships and who are focussing on the need to take each module through the 5 levels (which definitely takes more effort but with certain results at the end of the process) compared to being able to just go straight to G5 every time once you've got the engineer to that level but then needing maybe dozens of attempts with each module to get something as good.

I personally think this aspect of the changes will see rather less effort needed by explorers to get a really well engineered ship. If you're happy with just an OK modded ship then it probably won't save much time and might even be worse, but at least if you do put in the extra effort then you are guaranteed to be rewarded for it.
I agree - if you're going out into the black for any length of time, you might as well do a bit of preparation. And the new system does allow you to get excellent results in a fraction of the time. I'm not a fan of the G1-5 process but it is certainly quicker than trying to get a god roll.
 
One thing for sure is that after DECE is over and with the new 100 u/m inventory, I will have maxed out on all elements. So it'll only be a matter of hunting down the manufactured needed, since I got rid of them all before this expedition.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom