Rethinking the Lakon exploration ships

[Saool]

I posed this image on a thread in Dangerous Discussion, but thought it might justify it's own post here.

I've never really understood the relationship between the four Lakon exploration ships. To my mind they should be defined by two factors: Scout/Explorer and Asp/Diamondback. Each of the four factors would have it's own characteristics and these then combine or cancel out, to give four unique ships:

Thoughts?

 

[mtt9999 [Parabolus]]

Totally irrelevant: my favorite Lakon exploration ship, Type-6 explorer class "The Summanus". [42.44ly]

 

[Major Klutz]

I don't get it. That info is wrong.
The Asp Explorer has a much better jump range than the Scout and the DBE has the best jump range of them all.

 

[mtt9999 [Parabolus]]

I don't get it. That info is wrong.
The Asp Explorer has a much better jump range than the Scout and the DBE has the best jump range of them all.

I was wondering that too, I think he means what if the ships were organized as indicated (suggesting a more logical way?), not as they are right now in game.

 

[[VR] optimal_909]

Interesting layout, I like the setup that you can achieve better jumprange in exchange of the versatility.

On the other hand, why is the slowest and least agile ship is the best for combat? And in general better offense and defense isn't really relevant for exploration, putting the Diamondbacks in a huge disadvantage.
I think the balance is quite good now in-between the DBX (slow scoop, better range) and the AspX, but the scouts -as mentioned above- could be buffed as you suggest.

Edit: To be honest, the truly great addition would be a Zorgon Peterson explorer. Either one bases on the FDL, or it could be a completely new one. Explorers also deserve to be fabulous.

 

[MrFailfactory]

Interesting layout, I like the setup that you can achieve better jumprange in exchange of the versatility.

On the other hand, why is the slowest and least agile ship is the best for combat? And in general better offense and defense isn't really relevant for exploration, putting the Diamondbacks in a huge disadvantage.
I think the balance is quite good now in-between the DBX (slow scoop, better range) and the AspX, but the scouts -as mentioned above- could be buffed as you suggest.

Edit: To be honest, the truly great addition would be a Zorgon Peterson explorer. Either one bases on the FDL, or it could be a completely new one. Explorers also deserve to be fabulous.

My friend, there is nothing more fabulous than the Gutamaya girls.

Riôt

 

[mossfoot]

Totally irrelevant: my favorite Lakon exploration ship, Type-6 explorer class "The Summanus". [42.44ly]

http://i.imgur.com/bjpWaDx.jpg

Naw, man, I totally get it. I made Elite explorer almost exclusively in a T6, the Viaticus Rex II, which I've since "upgraded" to a Keelback, the Viaticus Rex II.I



Sure the range ain't the greatest, 33LY or so with a fighter and SRV on board, but that fighter has lots of fun exploration possibilities

 

[Qohen Leth]

So, if I get this correctly, you advise to lower the jump range of the two top version of those exploration ships, and to raise the jump range of the two cheap and entry-level versions? How is that not cancelling out one of their most important differences and thus failing the purpose of your idea?

 

[varonica]

Totally irrelevant: my favorite Lakon exploration ship, Type-6 explorer class "The Summanus". [42.44ly]

My T-6 "The End of All Things" has been my companion for many exploration trips now, wouldn't swap it for anything except a Keelback, and even then only if they actually made a small launchable explorer/scout type ship.

 

[Traesha]

The relationship between the ships are:
Asp, more internal compartments, faster fuel scoop
Diamondback: cheaper, (atm diamondback explorer) larger jump range in exchange for slower fuel scoop

In your system probably the majority would fly the asp scout (if they choose to fly a lakon exploration ship). Explorers don't really care about combat ability and the asp scout allready has 6 internal compartments which is sufficient (fuel scoop, shield, planetary vehicle hangar, afmu, ads and dss). It would also be sad that now that the diamondback explorer has the longest jump range of the four, will then be nerfed to the least...

I am not sure if the scouts would need a boost, they are entry lvl ships but perhaps a higher speed / manoeuvrability would be a thing.

 

[Saool]

I don't get it. That info is wrong.
The Asp Explorer has a much better jump range than the Scout and the DBE has the best jump range of them all.

The key word was 'rethinking'. I'm putting forward how I would change the four ships.

Interesting layout, I like the setup that you can achieve better jumprange in exchange of the versatility.

On the other hand, why is the slowest and least agile ship is the best for combat? And in general better offense and defense isn't really relevant for exploration, putting the Diamondbacks in a huge disadvantage.
I think the balance is quite good now in-between the DBX (slow scoop, better range) and the AspX, but the scouts -as mentioned above- could be buffed as you suggest.

Edit: To be honest, the truly great addition would be a Zorgon Peterson explorer. Either one bases on the FDL, or it could be a completely new one. Explorers also deserve to be fabulous.

I did look at the speed and manoeuvrability bit and think I'm not sure that makes sense'. I was going for the idea that the scouts would be lighter and more manoeuvrable than the Explorers in general.

In all cases I am comparing the four to each other, as opposed to other ships altogether.

So, if I get this correctly, you advise to lower the jump range of the two top version of those exploration ships, and to raise the jump range of the two cheap and entry-level versions? How is that not cancelling out one of their most important differences and thus failing the purpose of your idea?

Again, perhaps I should have been more clear. This would be a complete reworking, including price for each.



Let me try re-illiterate. The idea is that each of the four has clear advantages and disadvantages: (again these are in comparison to each other. So 'shorter jumps ranges' on the explorers is in comparison to the scouts. They will still be long jump ranges compared to non exploration ships).

The two scouts: Longer jump ranges (than explorers). Lightweight. Fewer fitting options (than explorers)

The two explorers: Shorter jump ranges (than scouts). Heavier. More fitting options (than scouts)

The two Asps: Poorer combat options (than Diamondbacks), More fitting options (than Diamondbacks), Longer range (than Diamondbacks) < not sure about this last one

The two Diamondbacks: Better combat options (than Asps), Fewer fitting options (than Asps). Shorter jump range (that Asps) < not sure about this last one


So that results in:

Asp Scout: Longest just range of all four. Lightweight. Poor combat options. Ok fitting options but has to pick and choose it's fittings

Diamondback Scout: Second longest range. Lightweight. Good combat options. Limited fitting options

Diamondback Explorer: Ok (but shortest of the four) jump range. Heavier. Good combat options. Ok fitting options but has to pick and choose it's fittings

Asp Explorer: Ok jump range. Heavier. Poor combat options. Extensive fitting options.

- - - Updated - - -

The relationship between the ships are:
Asp, more internal compartments, faster fuel scoop
Diamondback: cheaper, (atm diamondback explorer) larger jump range in exchange for slower fuel scoop

In your system probably the majority would fly the asp scout (if they choose to fly a lakon exploration ship). Explorers don't really care about combat ability and the asp scout allready has 6 internal compartments which is sufficient (fuel scoop, shield, planetary vehicle hangar, afmu, ads and dss). It would also be sad that now that the diamondback explorer has the longest jump range of the four, will then be nerfed to the least...

I am not sure if the scouts would need a boost, they are entry lvl ships but perhaps a higher speed / manoeuvrability would be a thing.

Internals would need to be rebalanced in the version I am setting out. The 'explorers' would have more options than the 'scouts', and the 'Asps' more than the 'Diamondbacks'. So in terms of best fitting options it would be (from most to least):

Asp Explorer
Diamondback Explorer
Asp Scout
Diamondback Scout

In terms of jump ranges it would be:

Asp Scout
Diamondback Scout
Asp Explorer
Diamondback Explorer

In terms of combat ability it would be:

Diamondback Explorer
Diamondback Scout
Asp Explorer
Asp Scout

 

[Jackie Silver]

For me, all problems would be solved if FD introduced size 4 enhanced drives.

 

[marx]

Interesting ideas, but I don't think they are better than what we currently have. Both Scouts are combat-explorer ships instead of explorer ones, meaning they are more like combat ships with a higher-than-usual jump range. Plus the crucial thing is: compared to the upheaval that the changes would cause, would the advantages be worth it? I don't think so. You propose a radical rework of the characteristics of the ships, and actually implementing those changes would probably render most of the four ships useless. It would be upsetting even for people whose ships are just stored, and what about explorers in Asps way out in the black who'd find that their jump ranges magically became lower? They might even be stuck somewhere then. So, a radical reworking of four ships would be a nightmare to implement.

Perhaps the changes would work better for four brand-new ships instead. Gutamaya could really use a medium ship, and two explorer / combat-explorer variants would be good there. Same for the Alliance, and then you have those four new ships, with one variant each.
That said, I think I prefer the current design of "scouts are combat-explorer ships, explorers are explorer ships" versus your proposed design of "scouts have longer range but less internals". That would mean that the latter variants would just be minor tweaks to the ships, as opposed to more different flavours.


Oh, and about the Asp Scout. Recent buffs have had it be in a better place than before (it was one of the most useless ships earlier), but without much more serious buffs (at least to the base shields), it's never going to excel in combat due to its large size. When it comes to defense, speed and size (especially the profile) are very important.

 

[Traesha]

I think, a possible way to really think about ship choice would be if supercruise speeds would change depending on the "base" speed of a ship (a type 9 would go slow even in supercruise while a viper mk III would go fast).