Reinforced alloy vs. military grade composite vs. mirrored surface composite vs. reactive surface composite: which one?

CMDR Kantos Kan

CMDR Kantos Kan
Reinforced alloy vs. military grade composite vs. mirrored surface composite vs. reactive surface composite: which one?

I've read a bit about how different alloys offer increased protection to the hull but I'm wondering if they offer any protection to the modules. I guess it would be a waste to get the mirrored composite if your power plant is still exposed when you lose your shields.

What is the exact benefit of having hull reinforcement packages?

I'm looking at ways to make my Cutter a little stronger in combat so that I don't have to run away as soon as I lose my shields.

Anybody cares to comment?
 

GilliganTX

GilliganTX
The 1.5/2.0 Update came with a massive buff to upgraded bulkheads and reinforcement packages.

"Hull Tanking," is now an incredibly viable build-type for most ships, especially smaller ships which suffered most heavily from the SCB "nerfing."


IMO
Military grade bulkheads are where the money is at. Much cheaper than mirrored or kinetic armor, and is IMO, the best bulkhead you can get.

Stacking a few HRP's with that should make any ship much more survivable.



One diligent CMDR/Team of CMDRs took some time and made a VERY detailed analysis of the different bulkheads and the effect of HRP's and posted their results here in DD.
 
Last edited:

CMDR Kantos Kan

CMDR Kantos Kan
GilliganTX said:
The 1.5/2.0 Update came with a massive buff to upgraded bulkheads and reinforcement packages.

"Hull Tanking," is now an incredibly viable build-type for most ships, especially smaller ships which suffered most heavily from the SCB "nerfing."


IMO
Military grade bulkheads are where the money is at. Much cheaper than mirrored or kinetic armor, and is IMO, the best bulkhead you can get.

Stacking a few HRP's with that should make any ship much more survivable.



One diligent CMDR/Team of CMDRs took some time and made a VERY detailed analysis of the different bulkheads and the effect of HRP's and posted their results here in DD.
Click to expand...

Thank you! Sorry but what is "DD"? I'm very interested in reading what those commanders found out.

EDIT: Oh, Dangerous Discussion? You have any link or remember the title of the thread? I did a search on "alloy" in the title before posting but I got too many threads about the "meta-alloy". Found one thread about some tests that some commanders did for collision but I'm not really interested in finding which alloy resists the best to collisions.

And I'm particularly interested in learning whether internal modules get additional protection from the alloy or they are still exposed.
 
Last edited:

CMDR Kantos Kan

CMDR Kantos Kan
CMDR Rasputin said:
Military all day long. Best money/weight/all-around protection balance.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your comment, much appreciated!

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

RwD said:
Check this one out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9dWiFLKVwo
Click to expand...

Thanks, watching it now!

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

Anybody knows whether those alloys offer better protection for your internal modules, like the power plant?
 

CMDR Kantos Kan

CMDR Kantos Kan
GilliganTX said:
Testing thread - I was wrong, they just did the bulkheads, not inclusion of HRP's.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=202992&highlight=2.0+hull+test+HRP

Link to Data:
http://triadius.net/2015/11/25/bulkhead-armor-test-beta-1-5-3/


Relevant:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=224474&highlight=2.0+hull+test+HRP
Click to expand...

Thanks for those links. Sorry, can't rep you more!

Still wondering what's the verdict on modules protection from better alloys. But I think I'm going to go with the military grade alloy. Seems to offer like others said the most bang for the bucks.
 

GilliganTX

GilliganTX
No problem.


I could be wrong, but I think I recall being in a discussion where someone said that the bulkheads do the most to prevent module damage, and that HPR's are more for reinforcing the hull, than preventing module damage.


It makes sense thinking about it, considering "bulkhead" means the interior dividing walls, so all the metal inside and around the modules and things, vs HULL REINFORCEMENT, which would reinforce the outer hull.
 

CMDR Kantos Kan

CMDR Kantos Kan
GilliganTX said:
No problem.


I could be wrong, but I think I recall being in a discussion where someone said that the bulkheads do the most to prevent module damage, and that HPR's are more for reinforcing the hull, than preventing module damage.


It makes sense thinking about it, considering "bulkhead" means the interior dividing walls, so all the metal inside and around the modules and things, vs HULL REINFORCEMENT, which would reinforce the outer hull.
Click to expand...

Thank you, much appreciated!
 

CMDR Kantos Kan

CMDR Kantos Kan
Frenotx said:
The exact resistance values of the different bulkhead types are listed in the armour mechanics thread linked in my signature.
Click to expand...

Thank you for this, much appreciated.

So, according to your table, the Cutter is the ship with the highest Hardness-Frontier-Value. Just curious. How does that relate to the base armor that it has? Based on my experience in combat, once I lose the shields on the Cutter, it's time to look for an exit because the hull usually goes down quite quickly, while the Anaconda, which has a higher base armor, can sustain much more beating before I look to retreat. Just trying to relate your table to the actual values in game used by FD.
 

Frenotx

Frenotx
CMDR Kantos Kan said:
Thank you for this, much appreciated.

So, according to your table, the Cutter is the ship with the highest Hardness-Frontier-Value. Just curious. How does that relate to the base armor that it has? Based on my experience in combat, once I lose the shields on the Cutter, it's time to look for an exit because the hull usually goes down quite quickly, while the Anaconda, which has a higher base armor, can sustain much more beating before I look to retreat. Just trying to relate your table to the actual values in game used by FD.
Click to expand...

Having a high HFV means that the ship takes less damage smaller weapons (ones with lower APF). For instance, if you shot a cutter (HFV of 70) with a small pulse laser (APF 20), the cutter would ignore about 71% of the damage. If you shot it with a medium pulse laser (APF 35), the cutter would ignore about 50% of the damage. In the case of the large pulse (APF 50), the cutter only ignores 29% of the damage. In summary, having a high HFV makes your armor go a lot further when facing opponents using smaller weapons, but matters a lot less when facing opponents with larger, higher-APF weapons.
 

CMDR Kantos Kan

CMDR Kantos Kan
Frenotx said:
Having a high HFV means that the ship takes less damage smaller weapons (ones with lower APF). For instance, if you shot a cutter (HFV of 70) with a small pulse laser (APF 20), the cutter would ignore about 71% of the damage. If you shot it with a medium pulse laser (APF 35), the cutter would ignore about 50% of the damage. In the case of the large pulse (APF 50), the cutter only ignores 29% of the damage. In summary, having a high HFV makes your armor go a lot further when facing opponents using smaller weapons, but matters a lot less when facing opponents with larger, higher-APF weapons.
Click to expand...

Got it. I did forget the meaning of HFV.

This is awesome work, thank you!
 

sgurr

S
For me it depends on ship size and agility.

If it's small and agile then mirrored every time, because flown right they're much harder to hit with kinetic weapons and the only reliable way to damage them is with hitscan weapons, ie. lasers and railguns. Also it's much, much harder to target and damage modules on smaller/agile ships.

For everything else military for the best balance.

I've never been able to give myself a good reason to go with reactive, hostiles using purely kinetic loadouts are rare.
 

shadragon

shadragon
jontycampbell said:
Military hull has the best trade off, or in another way of putting it the least worse.
Click to expand...
This. Mil is best for any ship you plan to put in harms way. That way you can lose shields and still fight or if you have no shields at all in a stealth build.

I find mil spec armour helps in CZ, or RES when fighting Wings where you know you will lose shields at some point. Not a fan of hull reinf personally as I do more than just RES and CZ and hate having to reconfig my ship each time I change play style.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom