Thrusters explained in one simple table (Rating and Mass)

Cliffson · Jul 26, 2015

assuming the base speed is exactly 180 that gives 16.11% and 11.66'% so in line with the table, good to know.

+Rep

Cmdr. Numa · Jul 26, 2015

Renegade Roach said:
This is nonsense, the Python is far from being a 'brick' unless you fail to use directional thrusters. By comparison I also fly FDL, Vulture, DBS, Viper and recently Clipper on a regular basis. While the Python requires good pips management and thruster use it is more than capable of bringing fixed weapons to bear.

On that note, and with respect to the OP; any maneuverability test which ignores directional thrusters is pretty meaningless.

Agreed, the directional thrusters still pack a punch, which makes the ship feel wrong even more, because those same thrusters govern pitch, and that has become horrible. Still, with directional thrust to evade and turrets to deliver it's still a potent ship.

Cliffson · Aug 7, 2015

Renegade Roach said:
This is nonsense, the Python is far from being a 'brick' unless you fail to use directional thrusters. By comparison I also fly FDL, Vulture, DBS, Viper and recently Clipper on a regular basis. While the Python requires good pips management and thruster use it is more than capable of bringing fixed weapons to bear.

On that note, and with respect to the OP; any maneuverability test which ignores directional thrusters is pretty meaningless.

Suggestion noted, the next bit of research I'm planning to do is on the acceleration characteristics of various ships and thrusters. The problem of this though is that the only meaningful test is an acceleration test and that is very susceptable to error, i.e I'll have to do a lot of runs.

In the meantime in my original thread (link at bottom of OP) there is some Lateral and acceleration data, generally better thrusters / weight give better acceleration.

IronGremlin · Sep 20, 2015

Ralph Vargr said:
All this fits into the basic ship design/outfitting model: There are exponential cost increases, and diminishing returns for rating increases.

I think many of us use "A" power plants and jump drives (power, heat, and range), but are choosy over everything else. The thrusters will get shorted before shields will, as an example. I have a bias for "A" sensors. You would have to be daft to keep "E" life support and power distribution (the latter of which needs to be "A" on combat craft).

"D" equipment works for everything except pure combat craft. And, saving mass increases performance in normal space, as well as in jump performance. It also greatly reduces operational costs. "A/C/D" are the only ratings that make sense.

For final builds, or, assuming you're at a station that sells everything you want.

I find myself flying with B rated FSD, for example, on a lot of ships, because I don't quite have the cash to comfortably equip an A-rated, but I really want that extra range.

Same for shields on ships that have fairly crap shield /hullmass ratios - B-rank for 10 mil less is awfully attractive option if you're only gaining ~50 mj.

Saiidin · Jan 29, 2016

Snarfbuckle said:
Would be nice if it was consistent with ship maneuverability values.

Spitballing ideas
-Each agility rating is a base 1% roll/yaw rate
-Each PIP is Engines add an additional 1% roll/yaw/pitch rate per maneuverability rating
-Each engine rating adds an additional 1% to roll/yaw/pitch rate per maneuverability rating
-Speed above/below 50% adds or detracts an additional 1% per 10% from center.
-Hull mass below treshold for engine adds an additional 1% per 10% below minimum hull mass

And the T9 should really have a minimum of 1 and not zero.

So a ship with 10 agility and 4 pips to engine and A rated engine gains 20% roll/yaw/pitch rate at 50% speed and 15% at 100% speed or 25% at 0% speed.
An Anaconda would have 12% roll/yaw/pitch rate at 50% speed or 16% at 0% speed.

Large ships should not be agile in any direction and should have to sacrifice weight to gain agility.

I can see it now: new racing bulkheads for your Anaconda! Negative mass and reduced hull hp!

Shadowhaunt · Jan 29, 2016

Banzz said:
Ultimately, only the dev can put his exact thought on the subject with the words they used.

I guess it is just a term to say : "hey, you have a ship with this mass so these thrusters are fine to use with"

Also, higher rating/class thrusters have their pros (integrity, maneuverability, max speed, ...) but they also have cons (weight, price, power draw, etc.). Flight model is only one parameter among others

My assumption is that the mass range from optimal mass to max mass is 100-0% effectiveness. Any mass rating that is under the optimal mass rating is a bonus. I've yet to get anything bigger than a python, so I'm not sure just what it's like flying a ship that actually nears its max mass rating

Cmdr Eran Mintor · Jan 29, 2016

I noted a few people claiming that A rating is the way to go for combat fits but I wonder if they've forgotten that B has the best integrity and often can mean the difference between life and death in some combat situations.

Cliffson · May 6, 2016

~Updated for fancy new high performance thrusters~

goemon · May 7, 2016

Cliffson said:
~Updated for fancy new high performance thrusters~

amazing! i assume, that x=Mass/optimal thruster mass % in that graph?

i also assume, that the new thrusters have a-class optimal thruster mass?

Cliffson · May 7, 2016

goemon said:
amazing! i assume, that x=Mass/optimal thruster mass % in that graph?

i also assume, that the new thrusters have a-class optimal thruster mass?

Whoops, yeah it was late forgot to label axis.

It is %increasr vs mass

Goose4291 · May 7, 2016

askavir said:
This data proves what I felt while flying the Clipper. Despite its agility rating of 2 (?), the Clipper is one of the most agile ships in the game, and surely by far the most agile of the "big ships".

Can't understand where its agility 2 rating comes from. When I "upgraded" from the Clipper to the Python I was shocked by how cumbersome and sluggish the Python is for an agility 6 (?) rated ship.

I think that might just be a case of FDEV forgetting to alter the ship description blurb after the early python nerf (where they were comically agile)

goemon · May 7, 2016

Cliffson said:
Whoops, yeah it was late forgot to label axis.

It is %increasr vs mass

ty

what are the concrete optimal mass values for class 2/class 3 enhanced thrusters?

Cliffson · May 22, 2016

goemon said:
ty

what are the concrete optimal mass values for class 2/class 3 enhanced thrusters?

Class 3 is 70t, didn't look at Class2.

Luckily in the new outfitting screen it tells you the 'optimum' and 'actual optimum' mass on the thruster stats and even adjusts for the engineers

Gritzan · May 31, 2016

http://imgur.com/0SfMTVc

So, the values on this table are based on what?
That % Increase is based on the base values of the ship?
That mass is the total mass of the ship? (At the exact moment? Counting even fuel mass and etc?)

So, if I'm right, If I have an iCourier with ~74t of mass (http://coriolis.io/outfit/imperial_...rSrUKA==.EwBhBYy7lTIIxA==?bn=Michael Strogoff) I'll have a 50% increase in maximum speed / boost and 20% decrease in turn times? Making it a 420 m/s max speed and 570 m/s boost ship?

Just checking...

Cliffson · May 31, 2016

Gritzan said:
http://imgur.com/0SfMTVc

So, the values on this table are based on what?
That % Increase is based on the base values of the ship?
That mass is the total mass of the ship? (At the exact moment? Counting even fuel mass and etc?)

So, if I'm right, If I have an iCourier with ~74t of mass (http://coriolis.io/outfit/imperial_...rSrUKA==.EwBhBYy7lTIIxA==?bn=Michael Strogoff) I'll have a 50% increase in maximum speed / boost and 20% decrease in turn times? Making it a 420 m/s max speed and 570 m/s boost ship?

Yep, it is a straight up % boost to stats.
Everything counts towards mass, Base hull + all internals + fuel + cargo.

So yes your courier should get a 50% boost to speed and 20% decrease in turn time ifyou get it to 74t

Note the coriolis unladen mass doesn't include fuel.

taleden · Jun 5, 2016

So, the graph of Enhanced Thruster performance is great, but has anyone worked out the actual formula that yields that curve? I'd rather not have to hard-code every pair of mass/optimal ratio vs speed multiplier, but the (approximate) formula I worked out for regular thruster doesn't seem to apply very well for Enhanced Thrusters, so I'm hoping someone will be able to figure out a new formula that predicts both kinds of thrusters.

goemon · Jun 6, 2016

taleden said:
So, the graph of Enhanced Thruster performance is great, but has anyone worked out the actual formula that yields that curve? I'd rather not have to hard-code every pair of mass/optimal ratio vs speed multiplier, but the (approximate) formula I worked out for regular thruster doesn't seem to apply very well for Enhanced Thrusters, so I'm hoping someone will be able to figure out a new formula that predicts both kinds of thrusters.

they follow different curves, so there won#t be a formula for both type of thrusters.

exampel: at 50% optimal mass normal 3A thrusters cap out their bomus, while enhanced trhuster already do that at 77%.... manouverability-curve and speed-curve of enhanced thrusters isn't the same, whle it is the same with normal a-class thrusters.

Lucifer Hate · Jun 6, 2016

askavir said:
This data proves what I felt while flying the Clipper. Despite its agility rating of 2 (?), the Clipper is one of the most agile ships in the game, and surely by far the most agile of the "big ships".

Can't understand where its agility 2 rating comes from. When I "upgraded" from the Clipper to the Python I was shocked by how cumbersome and sluggish the Python is for an agility 6 (?) rated ship.

Python used to be a good maneuverable ship but then it took a big nerf and they likely did not change the numbers in description. not sure about the clippers 2 unless they buffed it since its creation

Cliffson · Jun 6, 2016

taleden said:
So, the graph of Enhanced Thruster performance is great, but has anyone worked out the actual formula that yields that curve? I'd rather not have to hard-code every pair of mass/optimal ratio vs speed multiplier, but the (approximate) formula I worked out for regular thruster doesn't seem to apply very well for Enhanced Thrusters, so I'm hoping someone will be able to figure out a new formula that predicts both kinds of thrusters.

I've got a lot of data points (did it 1t at a time) so can try some curve fitting, alternatively could send you the data if you want.?

Lucifer Hate said:
Python used to be a good maneuverable ship but then it took a big nerf and they likely did not change the numbers in description. not sure about the clippers 2 unless they buffed it since its creation

Mostly that (the nerf) partly the fact that the clipper has pretty pants lateral thrusters so while it can pivot well it doesn't change direction. I certainly find i crash less in my python. Still 2 seems silly rating for clipper should be at least a 4 if not a 6.

Navigare Necesse Est · Jun 6, 2016

Why is this in the general discussion? It should be conserved in the archives and daily praise be sung unto the people who tried to figure this out. Please move this thread into the outfitting screen.