Python Fighters ???

[Heavenly-Hammer]

Guys, not every ship needs a fighter bay.

In fact, I think for the future of the game, it is essential that there be MORE ship differentiation; not less. Ships that are capable of things others simply cannot do. Up until now, every ship could do everything in the game. Some ships may require more patience to do certain tasks than others, but they can all equip the same sorts of modules. This hurts gameplay depth and variety. It makes owning certain ships redundant or a waste of money.

The more features we get that justify the ownership of certain ships, the better.

 

[Red Anders]

The complaining is coming from people whose personal favourite ship can't support fighters.

Not even that; the Python is probably my favourite ship taking all things into account and it was the one I named in the 'if you could only own one ship...' thread just for its sheer versatility.

I enjoy just flying the Courier more but it's not even a contest in terms of actual use in gameplay because there is nothing at all that you can't do in a Python, including reasonable amounts of bulk trading which the smaller ships obviously can't handle. In fact since Engineers arrived even going exploring in mine wouldn't be especially painful because I'd have a jump range of well over 30 LY with an exploration fit on it. I'm seriously considering buying a third one for just that purpose because despite having a shorter range the Python is a damn site nicer to fly than my exploration Asp and I still have my 49.75LY Anaconda for trips where a long jump range is essential.

Despite all of that I never had any expectation that it would have a fighter bay on account of it not being one of the ships which have clearly stated they have fighter bays from the day I started playing and I could not care less that it can't equip one.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I wonder which one is that? Are you talking about the Clipper? If that's the case, Clipper is a large ship, not medium.

I assumed he meant the FGS since he's talking about fighter bays.

 

[Kelta Lan]

We'll see soon enough whether this ship thing will change the balance and where the Python will stand in this new landscape.
I'd think that if the Python is still competitive facing ships + a fighter, this means the fighter is pretty much useless, and if the Python is not competitive anymore, then the fighter is as useful as expected and the Python owners have a problem.
More ship differentiation yes : have them provide an alternative to having a fighter in a Python to keep the balance.
More ship differentiation could also mean more ship customisation, and fighters are a way to do so. It could at the expense of something else and/or at a high cost (reflecting the need for heavy modifications of the ship itself, which in turn may change some of its specs, etc.)
More ships differentiation could also mean more ships...
Anything is possible but it sure would require more dev work than simply say "not fighter in a Python"

 

[Iskariot]

Not everyone can afford the most expensive ships in the game.

Everyone can afford the most expensive ships in the game.
Getting them is a result of playing the game. That is part of the game.
But you will have to play the game to get there.

and not everyone likes lumbering giants anyway

Then do not buy them. That is why you have choice.
There are ships in the game I do not use either. I might never use them. Or I might try them for a while and then discard them, because I do not like them.
All that is part of the game. That is playing the game.

But I have to add this... the lumbering giants can be great fun though.
Currently I am in my Anaconda again. It is such a hoot to fly this ship. For a large vessel it is quite agile and not lumbering at all and you can turn it into a monster from hell. Just try it.

The only vaguely usable medium ship is seriously rank locked.

What ship are you referring to? You mean with regard to fighters?
The Gunship? Well, you need to play the game. You don't seem to want to.

If you don't take fighter carrying capacity into account...
The Python is the most versatile medium ship ever designed for ED. It is a superb trader and a very good combat ship. It is not rank locked.
The FDL is arguably the best medium combat ship in the game. It is not rank locked.

I do feel that the game needs a few more medium ships with internals comparable to the Python.
There is no competition at all in that most important niche whatsoever.
And it would be great if these new ships could carry a fighter.
We will see what happens in the future. FD will no doubt add new ships eventually.

Putting fighters on a keelback takes its measure of uselessness completely off the scale.

I have difficulty seeing the use for fighters on such ship too. I have said so several times in other threads.
It does offer an accessible way to experience fighters though.

Effectively telling many, many people that they can't use content that they have paid for is unacceptable.

But the fact is that nobody is telling anyone they can not use this content.
It is you saying that you choose not to use the content for your particular and not very good reasons.

You don't seem to want to play the game. You want to create your own game play rules and then force FD to abide by them.
That is not how it works. You should create your own game then...

 

[LeoBartlet]

Ah another thread asking for a ship to be all things to all people.

 

[Devari]

I only get interdicted by Eagles when I WANT to be caught by an Eagle. When that happens I have plenty of time to flip my Python and go weapons hot. Unless that Eagle is running a high ranking 'OH !' moment when he drops in and realizes he's staring a very angry Python in the teeth, he's not going to last long enough to summon the cops.

Vipers and the like on the other hand just shake off the first barrage even at low levels.

Well with the lobotomized AI I don't find most ships a threat, but against a properly Engineered Eagle or Courier flown by a competent pilot they can be a real pain to catch.

Oh really? I thought we were throwing out pointless arbitrary 'balancing' in favor of giving ships abilites that would make them more powerful but I guess Corvettes don't need to chase down pirates across multiple systems.

Not if they're NPC AI, which don't have to follow jump rules. They just spawn wherever they want, including instantly appearing behind you when you're at full-speed supercruise and nothing should be able to catch you.

Escort. Class. Ship.

"Escort" is not a class of ship in the navy. Escort is a role that different ships can carry out. It is not a "type" of ship.

Yes I may be making up my own terms to more easily and accurately describe the ship types based on landing pad sizes but I don't think they're too far off the mark if you're actually reading the in-game descriptions. Which apparently yes, DO use RL ship classes to describe them.

The in-game descriptions don't use ship terms very well, for example, they describe Pythons as "patrol cruisers" when they are closer in role to coast guard cutters. Similarly describing the Anaconda as being a "light cruiser" or "frigate" doesn't make a lot of sense when the Federal Corvette actually weighs more than an Anaconda and is simply a "corvette". It's even more of an issue if you try using landing pad sizes as these are very arbitrary based on ships exceeding certain dimensions. For example, the Clipper and Type 7 are both "large pad" ships but are really medium-sized ships given that the Clipper actually weighs less than the Python. Similarly the Anaconda/Corvette/Cutter are considerably larger than both the Clipper and Type 7 and are really in a different class entirely.

Dev Speak Translation: In development. Nothing to comment on as we have nothing solid to report at this time but we are aware it's a feature we can add and looks feasible.

Which means exactly nothing.

So what are these missiles and torpedo hardpoints for? Candy and popcorn storage?

They're simply a weapon system. They don't define a ship role or even style of play, they are niche weapons that only really have a use due to the ridiculous Engineering effects. They certainly aren't for "bombing runs" the way that you're thinking. My Anaconda carries torpedoes, it doesn't mean it carries out "bombing runs" on larger ships.

So I suppose I was simply imagining things and Tutorial Mission Number 5: "Wolfpack Tactics" was a figment of my imagination and that mission doesn't exist. I just made up the entire lesson it's supposed to teach new players about how to take advantage of ally NPCs and work together to bring down bigger more powerful ships.

That's not a role exclusively for fighters. I often see a pair of Clippers or a Clipper and a FdL working together. It doesn't mean that there are massed wings of fighters picking apart larger ships, any ships can work together in that manner.

No, you're trying to bull me and hoping I'm too stupid to notice.

SEMPAI NOTICED.

Given that you just admitted to making up ship types like "escort" that don't actually exist in the game I think you've got this backwards.

 

[h347h]

No the Python is already too good. This will finally bring it down a peg or two.

 

[ballingham]

The Python, especially with some engineering tweaks is a very good ship, it doesn't require a fighter bay, IMO. I also think the same about the Clipper. They don't require extra help.

By that thinking the FGS doesn't need them either. (haven't played 2.2 yet so don't tear my head off if they don't have it anyway, I heard they were getting it)

 

[jacozilla]

Well my .02 cents is I'm ok with either Python with fighters, or no fighters.

My only issue worth caring about to reply is if you say python = no fighters = FD reasons for play balance --> no problem, I can agree or disagree why FD is right/wrong, but players basing this on balance reasons makes logical sense to me (even if I agree/disagree with stated reason why the balance should be that way)

But it goes off the rails when someone says python = no fighters = because python can't fit door or fighter space
Physical space logic falls apart since clearly the python has both the volume and mass towing space. Perhaps the logic applies where the module size has to be big enough in terms of python giving up enough cargo space to fit the fighter, sure - that makes sense. But python having zero room for fighter is opposite of logic being quoted.

The balance reason sounds more the reason why FD went the way they did. Python is hands down best no brainer multi-role ship for all purposes other than Anaconda multirole. I would like fighters yes, just because more fun for me. But I get the too good for play balance reason. Don't get the no mass/volume/space reason since the python carries so much cargo like a beast to prove otherwise.

 

[TomP]

By that thinking the FGS doesn't need them either. (haven't played 2.2 yet so don't tear my head off if they don't have it anyway, I heard they were getting it)

I respectfully disagree. Have you ever flown the FGS?! The Python and Clipper are both understandably popular vessels, the FGS, up until now, has struggled as anything other than dumb-fire ground assault farmer. Even with engineering mods, it's a cumbersome beast.

The availability of the cheaper, lower ranked, faster, more manoeuvrable FAS only makes sense if the FGS can launch a fighter; otherwise, why on earth would anyone get one?

(I know there are some lunatics FGS devotees on here; now they will finally get the complete package, bless 'em)

 

[Snarfbuckle]

How many are flying the:

- Keelback

- Gunship

- T9

for their combat prowess compared to similary priced ships?

The Keelback get's a nice firepower boost and is rather cheap.

The Gunship can now have a little less tank but add an escort to counter it's poor maneuverability.

The T9 now get's something to harass or take out an opponent while it escapes.

It also makes fighter operations rather unique instead of EVERY ship can has it because let's face it, people would rather have fighters on Pythons than Gunships and Keelbacks.

Perhaps we will soon see wings of gunships and keelbacks launching fighters against other ships.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

(I know there are some lunatics FGS devotees on here; now they will finally get the complete package, bless 'em)

I am honestly just a FGS devotee because im a pack launcherophile and can fit X4 pack launchers on those cumbersome beasts.

But the fighter will be a welcome addition and work well as an harasser.

 

[KR4K40]

NO.

enough characters.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

By that thinking the FGS doesn't need them either. (haven't played 2.2 yet so don't tear my head off if they don't have it anyway, I heard they were getting it)

The Python is X3 times as maneuverable as the FGS (Maneuverability 2 vs 6) so a fighter is a welcome harasser and escort since the Python is VERY maneuverable for it's size. The python also has X2 the amount of internal module slots and would not have to sacrifice as much as the FGS to fit a fighter.

https://coriolis.io/outfit/python

https://coriolis.io/outfit/federal_gunship

The FGS has a VERY limited amount of internal slots and unlike the python is far more specialized.

 

[Rob At Work]

Why cant my Ford Escort Popular be a Porsche?

 

[Fishy]

From a variety point-of-view, it may be a good thing to maintain the current restricted list of ships with a fighter bay option. I mean, apart from trading CGs, pretty much every traffic report reads like:

Ship model A: 4
Ship model B: 3
Ship model C: 8
Ship model D: 11
Ship model E: 2
Asp Explorer: 469382e14
Ship model F: 5
Python: 112842e12
Ship model G: 1
Ship model H: 3

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Why cant my Ford Escort Popular be a Porsche?

Oh it can, you just have to convince Ford to build a Porche. =P

 

[Lobstris]

If the Python was just a trade ship, as in the earlier Elites, then, yes, I could see the need for it having fighters (or hired AI escorts (hint! hint!)).

As it stands as pretty much the most versatile 'jack-of-all-trades' in the game, I'm indifferent to it's lack of fighter-base-y-ness. See Fishy's post above as to another reason why.

PS: I'm flying a Python...

 

[Cmdr Esteban]

As a Python aficionado / 'fan boy' I will add to the growing chorus that it definitely does not need a fighter bay.

It's enough to say that - please stop going on about how great the Python is and that it's the best ship in the game etc, or FD might hit it with the nerf bat again!

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Adding a fighter bay to the Python would give it a considerable buff.
Which would then call for a considerable nerf in other areas.

So no, I like my Python the way it is.

If I want a pet fighter, I'll use my Anaconda.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

From a variety point-of-view, it may be a good thing to maintain the current restricted list of ships with a fighter bay option. I mean, apart from trading CGs, pretty much every traffic report reads like:

Ship model A: 4
Ship model B: 3
Ship model C: 8
Ship model D: 11
Ship model E: 2
Asp Explorer: 469382e14
Ship model F: 5
Python: 112842e12
Ship model G: 1
Ship model H: 3

Yea, some ships early on are VERY lucrative and useful.

Cheap and good jumprange is the AspX in a nutshell so it's my go-to mission runner ship.

It's current setup cannot fight a damn but I have my FGS for that.