Hello!
I believe this is my first time posting, but I wanted to make a suggestion I've been silently wishing for. With the advent of new ships this year, I thought I'd get this idea out there.
I love the Asp Explorer, and the history of the Asp series in general. I was really hoping for a purpose-built combat Asp design, reminiscent of the old Asp Mk II series. As such, I will refer to this new design as the "Asp Mk III" from here on.
Disclaimers: I'll admit, Im a solo player, and mostly speak from a standpoint of farming in HazRES and doing some bounty hunting missions, something I do enjoy spending my time on when in the bubble (I primarily explore and mine), so I will be speaking mainly from that standpoint. I do not have any experience fighting in PvP, and have little knowledge on the greater meta or state of game balance. The following specs are based off my own theorycrafting and my own arbitrary wants from a combat ship under the current rules of the game, with some attempt at gameplay balance in mind. Finally, Im also not a regular forum poster. I intend to drop this here mostly for self-interest, and am not likely to respond to anything in a timely manner, if at all. No need to take any of this too seriously.
That being said, let us begin:
Core Internals:
Size 6 Power Plant
Size 6 Thrusters
Size 5 FSD
Size 4 Life Support
Size 6 Power Capacitor
Size 5 Sensors
Size 4 Fuel Tank
Optional Internals:
Size 6
Size 5 (Military)
Size 5 (Military)
Size 5 (Military)
Size 4 (Military)
Size 4 (Military)
Size 3
Size 3
Size 2
Size 2
Size 1
Hardpoints:
Size 4 (Huge)
Size 3 (Large)
Size 3 (Large)
Size 3 (Large)
Utility:
6x Utililty Hardpoints
Principle Specifications:
Cost-effective Utilitarian Design: The Asp is one of the classic designs that was once represented by a simple polygon. I've always been a fan of boxy, polygonal designs. Such silhouettes have held true for many of the classic snake namesake ships. This new Asp Mk III would continue this tradition, maintaining the unmistakable profile of an Asp-series ship. Further, the older Asp Explorer, or perhaps Lakon, has been known for having high cost-effectiveness; that is to say for 6 million CR, you're getting ship that can do a whole lot for the price point. I'd imagine the Asp Mk III would cost between 35 million and 50 million CR, benefiting from it's utilitarian design to keep costs down, while also being in the vein of the type of high-performance combat ships I've experienced.
Medium Size: The Asp Mk III would be pushing the very limit of its silhouette under medium landing pad conditions. It would be bigger than the Asp Explorer to accommodate the dedicated military optional internals it would have as a purpose-built combat ship.
Huge Hardpoint: I have some experience flying the Fer-de-Lance (though I did recently switch the Python Mk II). Indeed, I actually think its one of the best HazRES farmers in it's class. However, I do wish there were more medium ships available with a Huge Hardpoint. Speaking from a more subjective position, having one super big gun has its own appeal over having many smaller guns. Again recalling the old classic Asp polygon, the point on the front could be translated to a modern day Asp Mk III as a huge hardpoint.
Superior Hull Tanking: I had originally written a much longer and convoluted section here about how I wanted to the Asp Mk III to be able to accommodate both hull and shield tanking, but further reflection on the intrinsic gameplay design issues of hull-vs-shield tanking made the idea seem pointless in the end. I asked myself, "why would I choose this over an FDL?" Indeed, why would anyone choose a hull-tank over a shield-tank? I believe that issue is deeper than I can address, so I opted for the simpler solution of making the Asp Mk III a more appealing hull tanker to set it apart from the already superb shield tanks we have in the FDL and Python Mk II. It would feature high base hull integrity and very high armour hardness. When compared to other medium hull-tanks like Core Dynamics' Federal line and the Alliance Chieftan variants, I found myself having complaints about the placements and lack of their utility slots, where point defenses did not cover all angles of attack on the ship, or a lack of space for ECMs, chaff, Kill Warrant scanners, etc. As such, I envision the Asp Mk III having at least 6 well placed utility slots to address these issues (having the full 8 commonly seen on Large ships would be nice, but I'm pushing my luck at that point heh). In addition, the protruding cockpit of the Asp Explorer and Asp Scouts would be removed in favor of a better protected cockpit inside the hull proper, as such:
Good Hardpoint Placement: With the Huge Hardpoint and cockpit out of the way, much space has been freed up on the front of the ship. This will allow for simple and useful hardpoint placement for the best convergeance of firepower.
Purpose Built Internals: Being a hull tank, the Asp Mk III would have a size 6 (at best) shield generator for the standard hull-tank shield buffer, while all other module slots are size 5 or lower, for maximum size efficiency for reinforcement packages, which only go up to size 5. Smaller modules would also allow fitting some Module Reinforcements, AFMs, or minimum cargo+limpets for in-field utility.
High Maneuverability: The Asp Explorer is quite maneuverable for a medium ship. Indeed, I found it more maneuverable than the FDL and Python Mk II in most circumstances. Lakon is known for making giant boxes that can fly pretty good, citing my experiences with both the Type-7 and Type-8 which turn deceptively well for their designs. The Asp Mk III would maintain most (not all) of its predecessor's high agility.
FSD SCO compatibility: All newer ships are being built with the new Achilles Aerospace FSDs in mind. This one is a given.
Balance Points:
Low Average Shields: Intended to be a hull tank, the Asp Mk III would only have an average shield level for its size and price range, which is between 200 and 300 points. This makes it a poor shield tank compared to the FDL and Python Mk II. While one could make the Asp Mk III a shield tank with its large amount of utilities and internals for shield batteries, it may be more prudent to either actually get a proper shield tank, or simply use the slots for the intended reinforcement packages.
Low Average Jump Range: Sacrificing jump range due to the weight of the armor is a common practice for most combat ships.
Specialized Internals: To justify the maximum efficiency of space, the size 5 and size 4 modules would be specifcally Military Comparments, barring their use for anything other than reinforcement or shield batteries.
Restrictive Weapon Modularity: Only having 4 total weapons slots means not really having the hardpoint amount to work with diversifying your loadouts.
Large Top-Down Target Profile: Like any other Asp, the top-down profile is quite large, making it easier to hit when engaged from above or below the ship.
Conclusion:
Thanks for reading my suggestion! Been playing Elite Dangerous for a long time and always thought about a combat-centric Asp variant. With all these new ships coming out, I felt like putting this out, if only for that fool's hope I'll get something like it down the line.
I believe this is my first time posting, but I wanted to make a suggestion I've been silently wishing for. With the advent of new ships this year, I thought I'd get this idea out there.
I love the Asp Explorer, and the history of the Asp series in general. I was really hoping for a purpose-built combat Asp design, reminiscent of the old Asp Mk II series. As such, I will refer to this new design as the "Asp Mk III" from here on.
Disclaimers: I'll admit, Im a solo player, and mostly speak from a standpoint of farming in HazRES and doing some bounty hunting missions, something I do enjoy spending my time on when in the bubble (I primarily explore and mine), so I will be speaking mainly from that standpoint. I do not have any experience fighting in PvP, and have little knowledge on the greater meta or state of game balance. The following specs are based off my own theorycrafting and my own arbitrary wants from a combat ship under the current rules of the game, with some attempt at gameplay balance in mind. Finally, Im also not a regular forum poster. I intend to drop this here mostly for self-interest, and am not likely to respond to anything in a timely manner, if at all. No need to take any of this too seriously.
That being said, let us begin:
Core Internals:
Size 6 Power Plant
Size 6 Thrusters
Size 5 FSD
Size 4 Life Support
Size 6 Power Capacitor
Size 5 Sensors
Size 4 Fuel Tank
Optional Internals:
Size 6
Size 5 (Military)
Size 5 (Military)
Size 5 (Military)
Size 4 (Military)
Size 4 (Military)
Size 3
Size 3
Size 2
Size 2
Size 1
Hardpoints:
Size 4 (Huge)
Size 3 (Large)
Size 3 (Large)
Size 3 (Large)
Utility:
6x Utililty Hardpoints
Principle Specifications:
Cost-effective Utilitarian Design: The Asp is one of the classic designs that was once represented by a simple polygon. I've always been a fan of boxy, polygonal designs. Such silhouettes have held true for many of the classic snake namesake ships. This new Asp Mk III would continue this tradition, maintaining the unmistakable profile of an Asp-series ship. Further, the older Asp Explorer, or perhaps Lakon, has been known for having high cost-effectiveness; that is to say for 6 million CR, you're getting ship that can do a whole lot for the price point. I'd imagine the Asp Mk III would cost between 35 million and 50 million CR, benefiting from it's utilitarian design to keep costs down, while also being in the vein of the type of high-performance combat ships I've experienced.
Medium Size: The Asp Mk III would be pushing the very limit of its silhouette under medium landing pad conditions. It would be bigger than the Asp Explorer to accommodate the dedicated military optional internals it would have as a purpose-built combat ship.
Huge Hardpoint: I have some experience flying the Fer-de-Lance (though I did recently switch the Python Mk II). Indeed, I actually think its one of the best HazRES farmers in it's class. However, I do wish there were more medium ships available with a Huge Hardpoint. Speaking from a more subjective position, having one super big gun has its own appeal over having many smaller guns. Again recalling the old classic Asp polygon, the point on the front could be translated to a modern day Asp Mk III as a huge hardpoint.
Superior Hull Tanking: I had originally written a much longer and convoluted section here about how I wanted to the Asp Mk III to be able to accommodate both hull and shield tanking, but further reflection on the intrinsic gameplay design issues of hull-vs-shield tanking made the idea seem pointless in the end. I asked myself, "why would I choose this over an FDL?" Indeed, why would anyone choose a hull-tank over a shield-tank? I believe that issue is deeper than I can address, so I opted for the simpler solution of making the Asp Mk III a more appealing hull tanker to set it apart from the already superb shield tanks we have in the FDL and Python Mk II. It would feature high base hull integrity and very high armour hardness. When compared to other medium hull-tanks like Core Dynamics' Federal line and the Alliance Chieftan variants, I found myself having complaints about the placements and lack of their utility slots, where point defenses did not cover all angles of attack on the ship, or a lack of space for ECMs, chaff, Kill Warrant scanners, etc. As such, I envision the Asp Mk III having at least 6 well placed utility slots to address these issues (having the full 8 commonly seen on Large ships would be nice, but I'm pushing my luck at that point heh). In addition, the protruding cockpit of the Asp Explorer and Asp Scouts would be removed in favor of a better protected cockpit inside the hull proper, as such:
Good Hardpoint Placement: With the Huge Hardpoint and cockpit out of the way, much space has been freed up on the front of the ship. This will allow for simple and useful hardpoint placement for the best convergeance of firepower.
Purpose Built Internals: Being a hull tank, the Asp Mk III would have a size 6 (at best) shield generator for the standard hull-tank shield buffer, while all other module slots are size 5 or lower, for maximum size efficiency for reinforcement packages, which only go up to size 5. Smaller modules would also allow fitting some Module Reinforcements, AFMs, or minimum cargo+limpets for in-field utility.
High Maneuverability: The Asp Explorer is quite maneuverable for a medium ship. Indeed, I found it more maneuverable than the FDL and Python Mk II in most circumstances. Lakon is known for making giant boxes that can fly pretty good, citing my experiences with both the Type-7 and Type-8 which turn deceptively well for their designs. The Asp Mk III would maintain most (not all) of its predecessor's high agility.
FSD SCO compatibility: All newer ships are being built with the new Achilles Aerospace FSDs in mind. This one is a given.
Balance Points:
Low Average Shields: Intended to be a hull tank, the Asp Mk III would only have an average shield level for its size and price range, which is between 200 and 300 points. This makes it a poor shield tank compared to the FDL and Python Mk II. While one could make the Asp Mk III a shield tank with its large amount of utilities and internals for shield batteries, it may be more prudent to either actually get a proper shield tank, or simply use the slots for the intended reinforcement packages.
Low Average Jump Range: Sacrificing jump range due to the weight of the armor is a common practice for most combat ships.
Specialized Internals: To justify the maximum efficiency of space, the size 5 and size 4 modules would be specifcally Military Comparments, barring their use for anything other than reinforcement or shield batteries.
Restrictive Weapon Modularity: Only having 4 total weapons slots means not really having the hardpoint amount to work with diversifying your loadouts.
Large Top-Down Target Profile: Like any other Asp, the top-down profile is quite large, making it easier to hit when engaged from above or below the ship.
Conclusion:
Thanks for reading my suggestion! Been playing Elite Dangerous for a long time and always thought about a combat-centric Asp variant. With all these new ships coming out, I felt like putting this out, if only for that fool's hope I'll get something like it down the line.
