Have you ever gone exploring outside the bubble with Archeron?
Should the Corvette get a better jump range?
- Thread starter Lord Celestine
- Start date
Have you ever gone exploring outside the bubble with Archeron?
I tried missiles. I found them too weak for the ammo count provided. I will certainly give them another shot if they are buffed. I like the idea of a missile boat, it just needs to have more punch against large ships.
Ignore the military armor in my link. That ended up there by accident. I fly without it.
What I linked is one of the weapon configurations I use. Sometimes I use dual C4 PA - that can be fun against large ships.
I like flying with a good SCB. I really only need one 7A SCB, that 2nd one is a luxury so I can stay in a haz res longer. A class 7 SCB is sized pretty well for a class 7 shield. I would like to point out that 1 7A SCB consumes less power than 2 4A SCB while providing a greater shield recharge. Power efficiency is important to me.
5A life support is because I had close calls in a vulture and FAS with D rated life support. Since it is only an extra 12 tons, the difference in weight is effectively negligible. My jump range would increase by 0.09ly if I downgraded to D. However the corvette is not the fastest ship so having a little extra time to get back to the station may be useful. In all honesty I would be fine with 5C or 5B life support, but since neither of them offers a weight advantage to 5A then I go with 5A. On the other hand I have yet to have a breached canopy in this beast of a ship.
Well I think it's ridiculous that I'm forced to use a ship like the Corvette if I want to fight, so I assume all of these people asking for the Corvette to get a jump range buff will support my campaign to have two class 4 hardpoints and 3 class 7 internals added to the Asp, right..?
It's OK, I know what you're thinking but they can put the price up a bit too.
Elite lore does have a military version of the Asp explorer. I would like to see frontier release a version of that ship.
And there is a large price gap to fill between the Python / FDL and the Conda / Vette /Cutter. A modern medium size high tech ship could fill that role. Both the Python and FDL are fairly old designs, each of them being well over 200 years old, that should be replaced with newer modern tech.
All joking aside yeah, I would actually like to see the original military version of the Asp in the game. One thing I've always loved about the current civilian version it is that its hardpoint placement is outrageous and having that allied to a more combat-orientated ship would be quite cool. Granted we have the Asp Scout but that's more of a lightweight conversion; I imagine the military Asp to be essentially the same ship as the Asp Explorer but with a somewhat more restrictive set of internal slots, also probably a tougher base hull and stronger shields but it would still need to be balanced or else we just get into power creep.
Trouble is, I'm not sure that there's a role for that ship in the game at the moment. Maybe one for the future.
I would also say that the Python, much like the Anaconda, is still with us in-game for a reason - they are probably the two most versatile ships around. They're also both great looking ships; they may be old but they are ageing like wine. The FDL, I'm less sold on to be honest.
Last edited:
Individually, yes missiles are relatively weak, but a five missile volley is quite effective. For added fun, my missiles are all on their own firegroups, so holding down the trigger and tapping 'next firegroup' is a 30 missile long chain of destruction. Everything dies. 5 medium missile launchers is 90 missiles total, remember. Done at close range point defense can be defeated. And as for Large ships, why sit back and plinck with weapons when it's so much faster to ram them? You are gimping your ttk if you don't use this ship's most devastating feature.
And compared to reloading C4 PA, the missiles are a deal.
I chose those dual 4A SCBs because they are lighter than a single 7A and it frees up the size 7 internal for the big fuel scoop, keeping with the spirit of the loadout for long and fast travel. Also, a 7A SCB recharges 2/3 of your shields. I don't like to let my shields get that low because it risks them being knocked out altogether, so I feel like the 7A SCBs would be a little overkill, for me at least.
You make a good point about the 5A life support, the weight and power demand would still fit with my loadout. I'll probably be changing to that.
When I first fully upgraded this ship for combat, similar to your example, it just felt like overkill and not much more effective than when it was D-graded (except for the PP).
Now don't get me wrong, if I settle into a system that I want to get down and dirty in I will change the loadout. Usually though I will check outfitting to see if I can reconfigure back. My loadout allows me to roam far and wide and is able to take on any enemy, or almost any mission type. It's a big ship, why limit it to combat? There is plenty of room for variety while staying combat effective/overkill.
Missiles are bad and if you use them you should feel bad.
Besides if you want to put as many missiles on your ship as possible, the Asp is that way >
Also ramming constantly is a poor strategy. All it does is wear your shields or hull down when you could just as easily win without ever taking damage (reducing the need to use SCB's).
Besides if you want to put as many missiles on your ship as possible, the Asp is that way >
Also ramming constantly is a poor strategy. All it does is wear your shields or hull down when you could just as easily win without ever taking damage (reducing the need to use SCB's).
Nope, that's what the ASP and DBE are for.
Ramming makes the most DPS. Especially as an opener it's a good strategy, because then it's most easy to ram. Look at the radar, turn against the ship that's approaching before you hear the impact warning ("Scan detected"), boost and put all pips to sys.
Yes, because the shields recharge slowly, you cannot always do that, but every now and then against larger ships, it's totally practicable. Then come about and disable the power plant with kinetic weapons.
Last edited:
I should feel bad, I guess, but it makes me feel sooooooooo good.
And did I miss when the Asp got more hard points than the Corvette? Corvette=7, Asp=6. Also, my missiles are all medium, no smalls.
Anyways, for ramming, bi-weave shields do actually recharge fast. And how are you going to keep taking damage if your target is destroyed quickly? It doesn't cost money to recharge shields, but reloading weapons does.
jumpranges really sucks and im tired of hearing about that the FRIENDSHIP DRIVE CHARGING everytime im gonna jump. They should scrap the whole idea and have it more like travelsystem in solar system. Cruise between the stars of the galaxy Just stop someplace and take a break when you need fuel or just enjoy some onion heads and watch the stars on a distant planet hillside [up]
The most medium missile batteries you can put on a Corvette is 5, which is a colossal waste of hardpoints. Hell if you were determined to cram as many missiles as possible onto a ship the Anaconda or Cutter are better options. The Asp is simply the most cost-effective missile ship since you aren't wasting perfectly good C4 or C3 hardpoints on C2 weapons. Lower rebuy cost too, which matters because missile boats suck.
If you were using weapons that didn't suck maybe you wouldn't need to rely on ramming to make up for your lack of ammo.
I guess we just disagree. What you see as "relying on ramming to make up for your lack of ammo", I see as "Using the most devastating characteristic of this ship to full effect" Ammo really isn't an issue, 90 missiles is a lot. Also, as far as the Asp goes, small missile launchers do less damage than mediums and have less ammo. No wonder you think that missile boats suck. I thought mining and trading sucked until I got ships that were effective at it. I could possibly put more launchers on other ships, but I don't own them, I want to use the Corvette. Another point about me loading all the missiles on is because they are easier on the distributer, making it possible to equip only an 8D and save 100 tons of mass for jump range. Again, giving the Corvette 15+LY range, which several forum posters here have said would be reasonable.
It should be buffed slightly. Not close to an Anaconda (it's multi-role) but higher then 11 for a combat fit. It should be 15 at least.
It's never going to intercept a smaller craft, nor is it going to out run anything so it's not going to make it OP for PVP or PVE. Anaconda and Cutter trade better or explore better.
It's never going to intercept a smaller craft, nor is it going to out run anything so it's not going to make it OP for PVP or PVE. Anaconda and Cutter trade better or explore better.
Last edited:
I wouldn't mind a FSD buff but remember it's the most agile large ship, it's going to be the most powerful when the new C4 weapons come out, and it has the second "hardest" armor only behind the Cutter.
The only downsides to it are speed, jump range, and the placement of the large hardpoint. You could argue the small hardpoints are a downside but those are clearly for balancing reasons as no other ship in the game is going to be as agile as the Vette is with two large hardpoints.
The only downsides to it are speed, jump range, and the placement of the large hardpoint. You could argue the small hardpoints are a downside but those are clearly for balancing reasons as no other ship in the game is going to be as agile as the Vette is with two large hardpoints.
I'm really hoping the Engineers will help to buff my FSD on my Corvette, and thats the first thing I need to upgrade, as A's are still not great with a full loaded ship its like 7-9lys range. NOT 14/15.
After 2.1, I want engineers to make my sensors lighter, my power supply lighter, and my FSD better. All weapons lighter, and perhaps super-light bulk heads to bring unladen up to 20lys and laden up to maybe 13/14. That is enough for a good range but it would take a lot of hard work. Yes FD could provide a bigger FSD slot for this but they wont want a 'best ship for everything' scenario so thats why they nerfed it.
I think we need a long range bulk cruiser to take over from the Anaconda, but that may be the Panther, its not the Corvette.
After 2.1, I want engineers to make my sensors lighter, my power supply lighter, and my FSD better. All weapons lighter, and perhaps super-light bulk heads to bring unladen up to 20lys and laden up to maybe 13/14. That is enough for a good range but it would take a lot of hard work. Yes FD could provide a bigger FSD slot for this but they wont want a 'best ship for everything' scenario so thats why they nerfed it.
I think we need a long range bulk cruiser to take over from the Anaconda, but that may be the Panther, its not the Corvette.
Last edited:
I can't get the jump range THAT low without using a lower class/size FSD, and that's going with EVERYTHING A graded/maxed, prismatic, hull packages, and all that..so...what did you not make an A?
*edit*
Ok, even swapping the 7/6 hrps for SCBs, still have a higher jump range, you definitely aren't using all A modules.
Last edited:
I feel the simple solution to this would be to bring the hull mass of the corvette (and I guess the cutter) more similar to the anaconda.
Reducing the hull mass by half (or at least shave off a third) aught to make the corvette light enough to where the jump would be good.
At 900 Hull weight (Corvette) vs 400 Hull giving them both Prismatic shields + trying to load up the anaconda with as much cargo to try to match the weight on the corvette (as in not a combat build), its still not as heavy as the corvette with just the prismatic.
If you made the corvette about 550 Ton (and I guess the cutter 700 or 800 mass) they might be better I don't know I haven't tested out a "lighter" corvette in coriolis with a typical combat build
I had to trick coriolis to put monster size cargo racks on the conda to match the mass of the corvette to thus match the jump ranges (in this scenario obvously look at the laden for both)
Covertte barebones - http://coriolis.io/outfit/federal_c...--1717----------p0---------.Iw18Z5A=.Aw18Z5A=
Heavy Anaconda load - http://coriolis.io/outfit/anaconda/...--------p006060605040301---.Iw18ZlA=.Aw18ZlA=
and in regards to the FDL with it being too good of a ship if you increased the size of its FSD the trick would be opposite here.
Make it a heavier ship say by another 300 T (by upping its FSD class by 1 and giving it 300 extra mass to the hull [again simulated with cargo racks]) it would get a more decent 17 LYs
http://coriolis.io/outfit/fer_de_lance/06A5A5A4D6A4D3C-1717--------p207040201--.Iw18aQ==.Aw18aQ==
this would I will admit effect speed (the thrusters dealing with more weight) of the ships whose hulls will be tweaked about but it would silence the complaints of the lack of range
Reducing the hull mass by half (or at least shave off a third) aught to make the corvette light enough to where the jump would be good.
At 900 Hull weight (Corvette) vs 400 Hull giving them both Prismatic shields + trying to load up the anaconda with as much cargo to try to match the weight on the corvette (as in not a combat build), its still not as heavy as the corvette with just the prismatic.
If you made the corvette about 550 Ton (and I guess the cutter 700 or 800 mass) they might be better I don't know I haven't tested out a "lighter" corvette in coriolis with a typical combat build
I had to trick coriolis to put monster size cargo racks on the conda to match the mass of the corvette to thus match the jump ranges (in this scenario obvously look at the laden for both)
Covertte barebones - http://coriolis.io/outfit/federal_c...--1717----------p0---------.Iw18Z5A=.Aw18Z5A=
Heavy Anaconda load - http://coriolis.io/outfit/anaconda/...--------p006060605040301---.Iw18ZlA=.Aw18ZlA=
and in regards to the FDL with it being too good of a ship if you increased the size of its FSD the trick would be opposite here.
Make it a heavier ship say by another 300 T (by upping its FSD class by 1 and giving it 300 extra mass to the hull [again simulated with cargo racks]) it would get a more decent 17 LYs
http://coriolis.io/outfit/fer_de_lance/06A5A5A4D6A4D3C-1717--------p207040201--.Iw18aQ==.Aw18aQ==
this would I will admit effect speed (the thrusters dealing with more weight) of the ships whose hulls will be tweaked about but it would silence the complaints of the lack of range
Last edited:
I agree it should be around 15ly jump give's it more of a chance to used more for trade or combat..
I think all ships should get a boost in jump range. It would mean that the smaller ships wouldn't become obsolete but we wouldn't have to suffer higher end ships with sub 15 ly jump ranges. Failing that maybe jumponium should last for a period of time rather than just for one jump. Its all about quality of life really..
The FDL and Corvette have terrible ranges fully loaded
The FDL and Corvette have terrible ranges fully loaded
Last edited: