Whats the thing with Thrusters?

I was just upgrading my asp, when i noticed the thrusters.

All D thrusters are a lot lighter than the rest, E C B A are heavier...
then i found this table here
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10G_gwGAL08LC0yEkbVfAKizdIw3rzbDeUE4VIMQwuj4/edit#gid=0
why is the C thruster worse than the D?
whats the deal with them? can somebody explain that?

its allready hard enough that i cant find any logical explanation for that weird missile damage...now not even thrusters make sense? T_T
 
Last edited:
  • D-rated modules are always the lightest, no matter what module type. They are therefore preferred for non-jump-prelated modules when exploring.
  • All thrusters have optimum and maximum masses. The optimum mass for D-rated is 10% less than for C-rated. The experiment (and table) may not have taken this into account.
 
I wish they would overhaul the grading system and add prefixes to all the modules.

Like Lightweight, Heavy Duty, Standard etc... That way the module performance is always E < D < C < B < A but you have the option of getting the different types if you need whatever bonuses they provide.

It's kind of dumb when you want to upgrade your FSD but can only afford the B but it weighs so much it provides barely any range increase over the C.
 
I wish they would overhaul the grading system and add prefixes to all the modules.

Like Lightweight, Heavy Duty, Standard etc... That way the module performance is always E < D < C < B < A but you have the option of getting the different types if you need whatever bonuses they provide.

It's kind of dumb when you want to upgrade your FSD but can only afford the B but it weighs so much it provides barely any range increase over the C.

People buy modules for different reasons. The progression from E<D<C<B<A usually works for price, power draw, optimal mass etc.

But mass is (and IMHO should be) the exception. E, C and A modules weigh the same as each other. D weighs 60% less; B weighs 60% more.

In real life we might expect something like this as new and costlier materials are used. For example, E is the basic design in the basic material, and they used a better material but otherwise similar design for D, so it's lighter. C is a new and more complex design based on D, restoring its weight but improving its performance. Extra complexity was added to C to improve its performance and create B, but it's much heavier as a result. And finally B's design was used with the latest top-rated materials to produce A.
 
You will live longer if you just do like me.
The world of outfitting is either D or A. Ignore the rest.
Don't ponder why Fuel tanks have any rating at all. It will drive you mad. Why C, we have no other choices? Are we to accept that C is the norm? Who sells stuff in 3031 like this? Is there a used ship salesman that re brands fuel tanks as A? It will drive you nuts.
 
Thrusters have several properties to consider: speed, mass, power consumption, durability, and heat generation. It is naïve to think that the only reason that everybody upgrades the thruster is to get better speed. Clearly that's the main reason but not the only reason. If someone wants lower heat generation and better durability for combat, then I believe that C is clearly better than D, but I don't have hard data to support that statement. The spreadsheet referenced by the OP doesn't provide data on these properties. Perhaps someone has already evaluated these properties and can comment.
 
I wish they would overhaul the grading system and add prefixes to all the modules.

Like Lightweight, Heavy Duty, Standard etc... That way the module performance is always E < D < C < B < A but you have the option of getting the different types if you need whatever bonuses they provide.

It's kind of dumb when you want to upgrade your FSD but can only afford the B but it weighs so much it provides barely any range increase over the C.

yeah...its just confusing without any form of explanation...
but thanks for the answers ^-^
 
Back
Top Bottom