Move over, Anaconda: Type-7 Transporter is the best explorer ship in Beta 3

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

marx

marx
The latest beta update included a single line about the Type-7 Transporter: "Buffed the type 7 to improve its jump range"
Not very informative, is it? Well, jumping into the beta, it turns out they buffed it in such a way that if this goes live, it'll outperform even the Anaconda in terms of jump range, and will become the best ship for exploration.

The relevant changes were that base hull mass was increased from 420T to 460T, and the class 5 FSD slot was buffed to class 6. Same as the Anaconda. Now, the Anaconda might have a lighter base hull mass (400T), but it has to mount class 8 sensors and class 5 life support. Meanwhile, the Type-7 has to mount only class 3(!) sensors and class 4 life support. Also, the T7 needs only a 2D distributor to be able to boost, as opposed to the Anaconda's 6D.

Here's a lightweight explorer build on the Type-7, with only the FSD modded (64.23 ly max):

For comparison, here's a similar lightweight explorer build on the Anaconda, with only the FSD modded (61.66 ly max):


So, if this change was actually intended this way and will go live, then the Type-7 Transporter will reach the Anaconda's jump range, outperform it in supercruise handling, and outperform the jump ranges of the Asp and Diamondback Explorers.

Personally, I think this was an oversight, and put in a bug report as such. I just thought I'd post about this here too, so that more people would know about it.
 
Last edited:

Mrat13

M
Can't wait for these changes to be on the beta coriolis, so I can mess around with this myself (Xbox, so no beta sadly).
 

Mengy

Mengy
This has to have been a mistake, but honestly I'm hoping it wasn't! I think I'd be happy with the T7 being the best exploration ship in the game, lol.
 

JonathanBurnage

JonathanBurnage
Haha this is hilarious!

Haven't run the numbers but I think all fully kitted for lightweight modules, the Anaconda will still just pip the super-T7 for range, but only just. And there are still all the other good points you make; jump range isn’t the only factor for an exploration ship. And it’s still better than the AspE and DBE. So yes, daft. They should have just dropped its hull mass.
 

Kazahnn

Kazahnn
It's a great news for traders, miners and some explorers. The replacement of the anaconda or at least his competitor.
 

ASC

A
How's the heat management? The type-7 always used to overheat fairly easily.

And it won't be able to match the Anaconda for scooping speed. If it can't cope with heat but also has to spend longer scooping then it might be less practical than it appears.
 

Allitnil

Allitnil
marx said:
The relevant changes were that base hull mass was increased from 420T to 460T, and the class 5 FSD slot was buffed to class 6. Same as the Anaconda. Now, the Anaconda might have a lighter base hull mass (400T), but it has to mount class 8 sensors and class 5 life support. Meanwhile, the Type-7 has to mount only class 3(!) sensors and class 4 life support. Also, the T7 needs only a 2D distributor to be able to boost, as opposed to the Anaconda's 6D.
Click to expand...
The Conda benefits hugely from the lightweight mods to the sensors and life support - combined they come to way less than the 60 T difference in hulls. So the Conda will still be king for jump range.
 

Kenneth McGrew

Kenneth McGrew
Lol T7 king of exploration.

FD really know how to fiddle with ships,

its still an ugly duckling though, you would need a medal staring at that thing 65kly from Sol looking at everyone else's screenshots thinking "that's what i could have gone in"

61.2% FSDs open up a lot of possibilities, for instance a cutter could now reach semotus beacon

theory crafting - empty the T7 is beaten by the Conda by ~2ly empty, the system works i suppose, conda is still king

EDIT ****and actually thats not taking into account the additional 40T so its even worse once fattened up***

T7 = ~ 65LY max
CONDA = ~ 75LY max

*gets back into his box*
 
Last edited:

Mengy

Mengy
It actually almost makes sense and gives the T7 a purpose in the fleet. It's a large ship with a small cargo capacity compared to other large ships, but if these changes hold then it will be a long range large cargo ship. If you want volume fly the T9, but if you want range then take the T7.
 

marx

marx
Yeah, I was wrong in some specifics, so I edited the wording in the first post.
To sum things up though: the Anaconda still has the highest jump range, but a Type-7 can easily reach almost the same level, and with less engineering required. (Those lightweight mods don't come cheap.) However, the Anaconda handles considerably worse in supercruise, has worse cockpit visibility, and the ship costs nearly ten times as many credits. On the flip side, it can mount a higher fuel scoop (class 7 vs class 6) and has better heat management, plus multicrew and a hangar bay.

Sure, we can argue which factors outweigh which, and which would be The best explorer ship, but the main point still remains: should the Type-7 Transporter be buffed as much as to outjump Lakon's dedicated Explorer (Asp/DB) ships?

Update: also, it looks like the T7's heat management became even worse, and will now easily fry during regular jumping too.
 
Last edited:

Henkka77

Henkka77
^ Made a bug report of that heat management as it really doesnt work as intended. :)

(With 3A pp + G5 low emissions mod maxed, it builds heat up to 120% during normal jump.)
 

Macedonica

Macedonica
Oh. My. Lord. I think I may have the next exploration vessel in my fleet hangar! (By hangar, I mean the solitary Lakon Type 6E . . .
 

Satsuma

Satsuma
Mengy said:
It actually almost makes sense and gives the T7 a purpose in the fleet. It's a large ship with a small cargo capacity compared to other large ships, but if these changes hold then it will be a long range large cargo ship. If you want volume fly the T9, but if you want range then take the T7.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing. As it is, there's no reason to choose a T7 over a T9, but I like the idea that they'd cover two different scenarios: T9 for bulk hauling, T7 for long range trading.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom