RIP Asp Explorer

M00ka

M00ka
Sylveria said:
Funny that you mention the Orca... because with the recent lifting of optional restrictions, I'm very well considering doing exactly just that.

Damn the torpedoes! Even 50 LY is good enough for me for a max single jump. ;)
Click to expand...

Funny you should mention the Orca, I did just what you are talking about under Beta and it has become my favourite ship (at the moment lol). Just a tad over 50ly jump range, even with weapons, great view, has room for a SRV, great view (yep that view needs to be mentioned twice :D ), good speed 365, with 529 on boost, even room for a 32T cargo rack. All in all very very happy with it and unless the Phantom or the Mamba prove otherwise, will be buying and outfitting one when 3.3 drops.
 

Ralph Vargr

Ralph Vargr
Mengy said:
Not really, the Phantom can jump about 1.5lys more than the Asp can when similarly outfitted:

Asp X (70.62lys):
https://beta.coriolis.edcd.io/outfi....EweloBhBGA2EoFMCGBzANokMK4fiIA==&bn=WILDSTAR


Phantom (72.18lys):
https://beta.coriolis.edcd.io/outfi...BGA2EoFMCGBzANokMK4fiIA==&bn=TOWARD THE STARS


The reason is the Phantom has 1.6T more of sensors but 10T less of hull, for a net difference of 8.4T. Given the same size FSD the Phantom has to have longer legs, given the same configuration.
Click to expand...

But, the Asp Eplorer has better bathrooms. :)
 

M00ka

M00ka
Captain Willard said:
Never compare the annie to any other ship. That ships stats mean nothing compared to any ship in the game. A joke.
Click to expand...

Yep, fully agree. I find it hilarious that in any thread where the exploration 'experts' are demanding a dedicated exploration ship, one of the main criteria is always 'must have a jump range and number of slots comparable to the Anaconda'. Well the only way that would happen is if FD made the new ship out of the same noweightium hull the Anaconda has and everyone knows that will never happen.

FD should really nerf the Anaconda to bring it's mass into line with the rest of the ships but they will never do it because so many would rage quit in an instant (and the world's salt economy would collapse overnight).
 

ShadowWolf Kell

ShadowWolf Kell
Captain Willard said:
Never compare the annie to any other ship. That ships stats mean nothing compared to any ship in the game. A joke.
Click to expand...

Same holds for the Cutter. It might not have the same jump range, but mass impacts it less than the Anaconda because it has an even higher grade FSD. It's the reason I threw on weapons and a heavier shield and SBs for a trading config. It's a universal rule for all ships. The higher the ship's base mass and FSD, the less increasing mass on the ship impacts it's jump range. The advantage the Anaconda has is due to it's lower mass and sitting within the optimal sweet spot of the class 6 FSD. That's really no different than the AspX for the class 5 since it's the same principle.

When you move beyond that optimal mass, things start to degrade rapidly. This is why the Vette's range suffers, even though it's got identicle core internals to the Anaconda, but a much higher base mass. If it had the same hull mass as the Anaconda, the Vette would have the same jump characteristics.
 

Lily from anim.o.v.e

Lily from anim.o.v.e
Eidolon said:
I was thinking similar things.
Well we wanted an explorer ship in the explorer update didn't we?

Kudos to the Devs.
Click to expand...

It's not like we didn't had proper exploration ships. PS was great in the medium size bracket, conda does it on large scale prett well. Why was there a need for a bigger one?

I am not sure about the cockpit view, the free cockpit view above is surely great in the phantom.
 

Ziljan

Ziljan
Eh just flew the Phantom in beta. The SC agility is pretty bad, about as bad as the Mk II. The jump range and boost speed are in the same ballpark. Supercruise agility and cockpit view make me choose the Asp over the Conda, and they'll probably make me choose the Asp over the Phantom as well. So yeah, this is definitely not an Asp killer.
 

Dbrn47

Dbrn47
Ziljan said:
Eh just flew the Phantom in beta. The SC agility is pretty bad, about as bad as the Mk II. The jump range and boost speed are in the same ballpark. Supercruise agility and cockpit view make me choose the Asp over the Conda, and they'll probably make me choose the Asp over the Phantom as well. So yeah, this is definitely not an Asp killer.
Click to expand...

I owe someone an I told you so, it seems. I'll wait for other observations though, give me time to wash my foot before it goes in my mouth.
 

Blaize Meduenin

B
The reason a large exploration ship is STILL needed is for the nedgame explorer. The anaconda isnt an endgamne explorer, its a hybrid. It has the range and internals, but lacks the maneuverability and view, while having offence and defence an explorer doesn't need.

An endgame large explorer ship should have the range and internals of the anaconda with better maneuverability and a great view, but lacking in offense and defense capability.

A hybrid combat ship isn't the large explorer that means another isn't needed, the anaconda is also broken and should have considerably more mass to be inline with every other ship as well, but even without the fix it needs a large explorer is STILL needed.
 

Lily from anim.o.v.e

Lily from anim.o.v.e
Blaize Meduenin said:
The reason a large exploration ship is STILL needed is for the nedgame explorer. The anaconda isnt an endgamne explorer, its a hybrid. It has the range and internals, but lacks the maneuverability and view, while having offence and defence an explorer doesn't need.

An endgame large explorer ship should have the range and internals of the anaconda with better maneuverability and a great view, but lacking in offense and defense capability.


A hybrid combat ship isn't the large explorer that means another isn't needed, the anaconda is also broken and should have considerably more mass to be inline with every other ship as well, but even without the fix it needs a large explorer is STILL needed.
Click to expand...

what is there so tough during exploration to need maneuvrability?
also, for a great view just use a SFL or the external cam.
 
Last edited:

Kaybe

Kaybe
Blaize Meduenin said:
The reason a large exploration ship is STILL needed is for the nedgame explorer. The anaconda isnt an endgamne explorer, its a hybrid. It has the range and internals, but lacks the maneuverability and view, while having offence and defence an explorer doesn't need.

An endgame large explorer ship should have the range and internals of the anaconda with better maneuverability and a great view, but lacking in offense and defense capability.

A hybrid combat ship isn't the large explorer that means another isn't needed, the anaconda is also broken and should have considerably more mass to be inline with every other ship as well, but even without the fix it needs a large explorer is STILL needed.
Click to expand...

But why? Conda already shows us that loading up on too many modules will greatly cut into the jump range, and most people boasting about extreme ranges are also using Condas that are completely stripped of everything. Also, exploration doesn't require heavy modules. Plus Conda can't pitch in supercruise.

Now if you're talking about a very fast and agile ship with the Anaconda jump range and optional internals, sure ... but I can guarantee such a ship would be craaaazy expensive. Probably even more so than Cutter.

Seriously, there's no reason for another large size explorer. It can't land at outposts, and larger ships have a hard time landing on especially bumpy surfaces.
 

leeG

leeG
I replaced my AspX miner with a Krait Mk.II to get more cargo and a better power distributor. While the Mk.II is a better miner, I much prefer the AspX’s cockpit view. The Krait’s view ain’t that great with those horse blinders high on each side.

I like the view out so much I won’t be replacing my AspX explorer anytime soon.
 

Stealthie

Stealthie
Just had a stab at building a Phantom and it's not bad IMO.

G5 FSD and some other minor engineering, stuck a 5H GFSB on it and it does 67Ly.

I'm guessing this is going to be a bit like the difference between a DBX and an AspX - the cheaper ship gives better ultimate jump-range but sacrifices some convenience.
Seems like it'll be the same with the AspX vs the Phantom. Phantom will have slightly less (?) range but provide some other conveniences.

Right now I'm happy with the way my AspX works but if anything else in the game changes it's got no potential for further development so I'd probably move to the Phantom instead.
 

Mengy

Mengy

Bob McBobblehead

Bob McBobblehead
Reverse thruster on the Phantom are quite weak. Nearly crashed into the ground, best off using your vertical thrusters instead.
 
Last edited:

krylite

krylite
The AspX has been reluctantly mothballed for me for quite some time. It was my favorite at the time medium ship in my progression. But I love using a fighter so the gunship took over until I finally got the cutter. Then it was 98% of the time in the cutter and aspx or gunship for outpost missions. Since the Krait Mk II, it's now maybe 91% cutter, 9% KraitMK II. For exploring, guardian excursions, the Krait MK II already does it for me where the slightly less rolly rate in SC and normal than aspx/cobra hardly matters to a heavy driver like myself that is used to cutter roll & pitch rates (similar to boeing heavies in FSX) and I suspect much less so and needed with the new FSS coming. The Krait Phantom and Mamba are great knockout new designs and feel. Krait phantom is to me in comparison to the Mk II like Viper MKIII to MkIV. A zippier lighter unique looking version and probably more in line with the Frontier & FFE Krait. Beyond, I'd think marks a year of a best round of new ships for ED, notwithstanding as much the chieftain variants although I appreciate the crusader /w slf. So sorry, AspX, may you RIP well..
 
Last edited:

Tifu

Tifu
Mengy said:
They have since yesterday morning.
Click to expand...

Picked this up from the beta 3.3 forums. Has anyone else noticed any discrepancies?

Xious said:
It seems that Coriolis stats are inaccurate compared to actual game stats while EDSY stats appear to be fine.

I'm just wondering what everyone else's experiences have been when using these two apps.

If you have any screen shots or examples, please post them also.

Thanks
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom