|
HiroProtagonist posted:The Corvette seems okay though? I think the Cutter is good? But you're looking at nearly $1b to outfit one.
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 22:37 |
|
|
Adult Sword Owner posted:I think the Cutter is good? The cutter is a good cargo boat, but people were hoping for a bigger newer Clipper. Something that can haul some tonnage or be outfit to fight.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
I'm going to buck the trend and say the Corvette is good. It's noticeably more nimble than the Anaconda which means with a little skill and aim you can land PAC shots on anything larger than a Cobra with some practice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
The cutter is in lore terms supposed to be an intimidating Imperial navy ship nearly on part with the Corvette in combat performance but it has atrocious agility and an undersized power distributor so it's kind of bad for combat though it sure can take a lot of beating. The Corvette is pretty bad rear end at straight up fighting though it's incredibly drat slow - I think the buffed FDL will possibly be generally considered the better ship when you consider the cost difference. If they add huge lasers then the Corvette will have an amazing amount of firepower though. I was refering more to the new smaller ships though, all of which are either straight up redundant or sidegrades in the price / performance range where there is already a good selection of ships. Also weird choices like making the successor to the Viper into a slightly different Cobra, or the new Cobra being worse at everything other than trading in spite of being presented as a more combat-capable successor.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Could the Cutter be made to go vs other Large ships and be outfitted with turrets? I don't know it's hardpoint placement.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
So, is my evaluation of the merits of the big three accurate? Corvette: best maneuverability, shittiest jump range - best at fighting, but terrible range Cutter: terrible maneuverability and power plant, best top speed - worst at fighting, best for trading / mining Anaconda: middling maneuverability - middle of the road, best explorer
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 19:56
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:I'm going to buck the trend and say the Corvette is good. It's noticeably more nimble than the Anaconda which means with a little skill and aim you can land PAC shots on anything larger than a Cobra with some practice. The Corvette is probably the best of the new ships. The Cutter is pretty good for a Cargo boat, but pretty bad at anything else. People were hoping for a bigger Clipper and didn't get one. The Asp Scout isn't terrible, it is just outclassed by a hull 1/10th its size and is worse than the Asp Explorer in every possible way. The Keelback, Viper Mk4 and Cobra Mk4 are all bad ships. Maybe the Keelback will be good when you can launch a fighter. And maybe the Mk4s will find their niche, but right now they're just bad ships. And to make matters worse there are good ships in the same price range.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:The cutter is in lore terms supposed to be an intimidating Imperial navy ship nearly on part with the Corvette in combat performance but it has atrocious agility and an undersized power distributor so it's kind of bad for combat though it sure can take a lot of beating. I feel like the host of smaller ships being added are there for horizons content, where ship size can be a huge problem. The Cobra IV might be my go-to in-bubble explorer, but I'll probably just stick with my asp.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
I like the Keelback for reasons I don't fully understand  Agree 100% on the Mk IV's. One thing to note about the Corvette is that while its per jump range is pretty bad, it is fairly simple to fit a large size scoop on it without sacrificing another more combat oriented module which is what you run into on the Vulture and FdL. This means that while it might take you 20 jumps to get where you're going, it doesn't feel as bad because you're topping off your tank fairly quickly at each stop.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:I like the Keelback for reasons I don't fully understand I kind of like the Cobra Mk IV because of its extra internal bays. I kind of wanna use it as like a planetary-landing home base. There's room for a 2-car vehicle bay while still having some cargo racks to hold my loot from doing whatever down there, as well as still some decent defenses. It loses a lot of its speed, but I think it works as an inexpensive space-poor mothership.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
deadly_pudding posted:I kind of like the Cobra Mk IV because of its extra internal bays. I kind of wanna use it as like a planetary-landing home base. There's room for a 2-car vehicle bay while still having some cargo racks to hold my loot from doing whatever down there, as well as still some decent defenses. It loses a lot of its speed, but I think it works as an inexpensive space-poor mothership. It doesn't have decent defenses. It has almost the worst defenses in the game. It is far too slow to run from anything while still having poo poo shields.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
deadly_pudding posted:I kind of like the Cobra Mk IV because of its extra internal bays. I kind of wanna use it as like a planetary-landing home base. There's room for a 2-car vehicle bay while still having some cargo racks to hold my loot from doing whatever down there, as well as still some decent defenses. It loses a lot of its speed, but I think it works as an inexpensive space-poor mothership. Loot so far on planets is either minerals, which don't take up cargo space or single cans of tea and gold which you can only hold two at a time on your srv so you will be making frequent trips back to your ship. Basically you do not need cargo space for planet scrounging as there is nothing to store. If you are in bubble and landing on planets there still is no point for a whole bunch of module space on a ship, just take a Courier you'll have a much better time flying that planetside than a Cobra mk4.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
Time for my semimonthly or whatever check. Horizons doing anything to make the gameplay lake deeper, or just another mile wider?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Time for my semimonthly or whatever check. Horizons doing anything to make the gameplay lake deeper, or just another mile wider? Nope!
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Time for my semimonthly or whatever check. Horizons doing anything to make the gameplay lake deeper, or just another mile wider? They're seemingly making an effort, at least, with the BGS. That's about it 
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
What time does it launch tomorrow?
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
Cowcaster posted:Cool. The PGS thread makes it sound like railguns and plasma accelerators are the cream of the crop when it comes to weaponry, just that the ammo count on the former makes it lousy for PvE hunting. It doesn't really mention anything about the latter besides "it's awesome, but has punishing heat levels" but it looks like from the video the travel time is slow as hell and not great for hunting. Plasmas and railguns tend to be good for more specialized 'gently caress xxx in specific' type runs - when you're hunting a specific target and you're not too worried about the limited ammo pool. Both guns also have a tendency to put out a poo poo-ton of waste heat and drain your weapon capacitor pretty fast, making them awkward at best on most dedicated fighters. Thankfully the Cobra's power systems are beefy enough that you can likely run either if you really need/want to. Personally for a 'cookie cutter' bounty hunting build, I'd recommend a mixture of kinetic and energy weapons - thermal damage like lasers downs shields faster, while kinetic weapons deal more hull damage. (Kinetic weapons are also extremely light on your power core, so you can fire a bunch of multicannons while letting your cap build back up for the lasers). Multicannons are best for dogfighting against ships of about your own size, while the heavy cannons are a pain in the rear end to aim with but are more effective against large armored targets. Lasers - pulse lasers are the most cap efficient but low-powered weapon, bursts hurt more but take up more power, and beam lasers end wars but take up ridiculous energy. I recommend bursts, then turn it up to beams if you think you can handle the heat. Plasma cannons are effectively always-fixed cannons that do thermal damage (making them more effective against shields than standard cannons) but put out large amount of waste heat when fired. An A-grade power distributor on a Cobra can likely handle maybe two shots with dual C2 plasmas before things start overheating. Railguns are powerful hitscan weapons that deal both kinetic and thermal damage (making them highly flexible) and have extremely high armor penetration (excelling in sniping out subsystems) but put out extreme waste heat and have a verry limited ammo pool. I recommend pairing these guys with a heat sink launcher. Missiles are expensive to run (individual ammo costs are very high) but powerful weapons, especially as they'll be buffed in 1.5. They deal explosive damage which is extremely effective against unshielded hulls but of limited effectiveness against shields (effectively zero shield damage in 1.4x, more in 1.5+). Dumbfires carry about twice the ammo, fire three times as fast, and have to be lead. Seekers home in on your target but carry less ammo and fire more slowly. Personally I would rather recommend dumbfires against big slow targets and seekers for dogfighting against small nimble craft. (Missiles are also kind of in a weird spot in PVP - nobody uses missiles since they can be countered by point defense and the like, so nobody uses point defense, so..) Be aware that on the Cobra, the secondary mounts are pretty widely spaced - they're almost on the very back corners of the hull, so they can be awkward to aim with, particularly at close ranges. I recommend gimbaling whatever weapons you use here - or going for seeker missiles. TLDR: Cookie Cutter Bounty Hunter: I'd recommend two C2 multicannons and a pair of C1 gimbaled burst or beam lasers, depending on your funding and power systems. gently caress Your Clipper, Man: Same as above, but switch the multis for C2 cannons. Yes, they're difficult to aim with at any further than spitting range, but whatever gets a lovetap from dual C2s is going to feel it. Screw Aiming Ahead With Multicannons: C2 burst or beam lasers (fixed), C1 gimbaled multicannons. Easier to aim with and less reliant on ammunition, though less effective against heavy armor. I Could Aim, But With This Thing I Don't Have To: C2 gimbaled burst/beam lasers, C1 seeker missile launchers. You know how Eagles and other fast-moving ships are a pain in the rear end to pin down? Not anymore. Also note that though your ammo counts can be limited on weapons that aren't multicannons, 1.5 adds the ability to synthetize ammunition on-site from recovered resources, thus making you less reliant on returning to base for a rearming.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
deadly_pudding posted:They're seemingly making an effort, at least, with the BGS. That's about it Welp.  Maybe I'll start playing for a while again anyway, I never did do much more than get enough money for a Cobra Mk3 and putz around doing nothing. Maybe I'll try actually exploring a bit, or something. Don't really want to dig out the HOTAS or the head tracking sensor thingy, though. How well does this control with a 360 controller? Or hell even KB+M alone? Never even tried either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Welp. It's fine on the 360 controller, but you'll wanna get creative with your keybinds. I use all 4 of the face buttons as "shift keys" so I can bind like 16 different things to the directional pad, as well as making the bumpers do a little double duty. Un-shifted directional pad is lateral thrust on the forward/backward/left/right plane, right stick is rudder-rotation and up-down thrust, clicking the right stick changes it to head-look mode and back. All I have to use my keyboard for in that setup is power management, on the arrow keys, and the bottom row of the numpad for various functions in multiplayer Wings.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
Is it possible to exhaust higher paying bounty targets in a given system? I've been flying around doing bounties at one particular High Intensity RES, and where before I was seeing an endless parade of Pythons, Fer-de-Lances, and Anacondas, I'm suddenly starting to see nothing but Sidewinders and Eagles. Mostly the former, at that. It's kind of frustrating when those beautiful 200,000 bounties turn into dipshits with 5,000.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
DoubleNegative posted:Is it possible to exhaust higher paying bounty targets in a given system? I've been flying around doing bounties at one particular High Intensity RES, and where before I was seeing an endless parade of Pythons, Fer-de-Lances, and Anacondas, I'm suddenly starting to see nothing but Sidewinders and Eagles. Mostly the former, at that. It is all RNG based. There is a "seed" value in a RES or instance of a system that determines what type of NPCs spawn there. Keep disconnecting/reconnecting until you get a good one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
And if another player enters the instance the seed gets rerolled, so if you play on open there is always a possibility of someone dropping in and ending your Anaconda train.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
I can understand and get behind the desire for there to be more C4 weapons, but where do people keep getting the idea that the current ones suck? The cannon is easy to fit at the cost being hard to hit with, but it will still blow the gently caress out of subsystems and take out at least 51% of the hull of a Viper in one hit. The plasma accelerator is much easier to hit targets with and I think I saw one take out 20% of a Python hull in one go, and it mails internals. The Corvette will probably be able to blow up Pythons in four or five clicks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
Xae posted:It doesn't have decent defenses. Actually, I'll see how much hull I can put on the Mk.3 and see if there really is a massive difference. Edit: or I will after it updates. radintorov fucked around with this message at 23:24 on Dec 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
deadly_pudding posted:It's fine on the 360 controller, but you'll wanna get creative with your keybinds. That's a clever idea, using the face buttons as shift keys. I'll give that a try tonight or tomorrow, or whenever I get around to this again
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
Xae posted:It is all RNG based. Rectus posted:And if another player enters the instance the seed gets rerolled, so if you play on open there is always a possibility of someone dropping in and ending your Anaconda train. Good to know. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:That's a clever idea, using the face buttons as shift keys. I'll give that a try tonight or tomorrow, or whenever I get around to this again The "contextual binding" options do this by default, and actually have a bit of a UI that pops up if you hold it down for awhile. You can also bind more than is initially visible on that popover-- for example, you can do things like bind X+Back or X+Trigger even though it's not displayed on the UI. The downside is that you have to modify it via XML files, since the UI binding doesn't really "get" how to bind the shift buttons sanely, and by default you actually can't rebind those buttons at all. If you're interested in visiting XML hell, I made a post with my configuration awhile back: Ursine Catastrophe posted:So in case anyone else made the same mistake(?) I did and got an XBox One Elite controller thinking that you can actually make use of the back paddles as additional buttons, I have good news for you: I've got a control scheme you're (probably) going to love.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 23:30
|
|
doesn't provide a way to modify this stuff properly except through the XML-- trying to bind it in the controller UI will result in a "modifer+button" bind instead of a contexual bind, the difference being the latter will let you hold down ABXY and then hit the followup at your leisure, whereas the former requires you to hit both buttons at the exact same time, and will still occasionally fire off one binding or the other in addition depending on what you have it bound to.
|
Drake_263 posted:TLDR: This post is informative and useful, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2015 23:36
|
|
|
Ursine Catastrophe posted:The "contextual binding" options do this by default, and actually have a bit of a UI that pops up if you hold it down for awhile. You can also bind more than is initially visible on that popover-- for example, you can do things like bind X+Back or X+Trigger even though it's not displayed on the UI. Cool stuff, thanks a lot. I'm probably going to try this configuration tonight first, just because it's there and done for me, but we'll see how it feels ingame. Do I get the  off Horizons for owning Dangerous even if I buy it after it comes out, or is that only for preorders?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
radintorov posted:Actually, I'll see how much hull I can put on the Mk.3 and see if there really is a massive difference. Viper's values are 227 for shields and 1605 for hull; Cobra mk.3 values are 124 and 1650; Cobra Mk.4 are 173 and 2310. So HRP stacking can make a Mk.4 almost twice as resilient as a Mk.3 while having an extra 60t minimum added on a less agile ship that uses the same thruster array as its predecessor (size 4) while being unable to reliably outrun a Sidewinder, much less anything bigger and meaner than it. It is a decent bulk-trader if you can't afford a Type-6 and just annoying to kill without ballistic weapons, but for a customizable multi-role ship the upcoming Viper mk.4 has it beat. fake edit: for fun I checked out how the Diamondback Scout fares with the fan-favourite "stealth special" loadout, and with the new 1.5/Horizons values it can get a hull of 1390, which may not seem much for those that haven't flown/fought one of these, but it's pretty damned impressive for a ship its size  real edit: turns out I did not have to go in the game to test this out, since Coriolis.io has been updated with the 1.5/Horizons data. radintorov fucked around with this message at 00:40 on Dec 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
Ursine Catastrophe posted:The downside is that you have to modify it via XML files, since the UI binding doesn't really "get" how to bind the shift buttons sanely, and by default you actually can't rebind those buttons at all. Explain what you mean by this, because I've had no trouble with it at all. For example, I use Y as my 'targetting and UI control' shift and B as my 'mechanical systems' shift, and I have various binds like Y+triggers for switching fire groups, Y+LB for target ahead, B+Dpad Up for hardpoints, B+LTrigger for chaff, so on and so forth. All bound through the options menu controls section. It also lets me use Y+B to toggle FA and will even accept three-button combos. So no, you can rebind those buttons easily, and I have no idea what you mean by binding them 'sanely'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
I haven't played since the faction thing or whatever came out, what'd I miss?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
Cathair posted:Explain what you mean by this, because I've had no trouble with it at all. For example, I use Y as my 'targetting and UI control' shift and B as my 'mechanical systems' shift, and I have various binds like Y+triggers for switching fire groups, Y+LB for target ahead, B+Dpad Up for hardpoints, B+LTrigger for chaff, so on and so forth. All bound through the options menu controls section. It also lets me use Y+B to toggle FA and will even accept three-button combos. Ursine Catastrophe posted:As usual, the downside is that doesn't provide a way to modify this stuff properly except through the XML-- trying to bind it in the controller UI will result in a "modifer+button" bind instead of a contexual bind, the difference being the latter will let you hold down ABXY and then hit the followup at your leisure, whereas the former requires you to hit both buttons at the exact same time, and will still occasionally fire off one binding or the other in addition depending on what you have it bound to. Your mileage may, of course, vary, but if you're talking about three-button combos then you're (probably) not talking about contextual combos. e: Or my game is just hosed, who knows! I just know that every time I attempt to do contextual bindings via the UI I get weird poo poo like "X + X" showing up as the new binding. e2: With contextual bindings, holding down A/B/X/Y gets something like this to pop up:  Going into my bindings to see the current binding:  Removing it:  And attempting to re-add it: 
Ursine Catastrophe fucked around with this message at 00:34 on Dec 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
Asproigerosis posted:I haven't played since the faction thing or whatever came out, what'd I miss? Oh and you also missed a massive goon burnout caused by said faction thing being poo poo and screwing everything we were doing previously. We now have another faction we fight for, different organization and Elite 1.5 / Horizons comes out tomorrow, bringing more rebalancing and a few new ships if you have the regular game, and the ability to land on planets, gather planetside resources and do missions on the ground if you've bought the Horizons expansion. radintorov fucked around with this message at 00:36 on Dec 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
Asproigerosis posted:I haven't played since the faction thing or whatever came out, what'd I miss? General disillusionment with the faction thing. Slightly better shield modules as a side effect of the faction thing, and a bunch of other useless junk it's not worth wasting a month on. A vaguely official goon faction, and a relocation to Goatsec. Background sim still broken. An actual decent Federation ship! Fun (but irrelvant to main game) PvP arenas with super-manouverable ships. Enormous amounts of cash from long-range smuggling missions. Everyone gearing up for
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
Ciaphas posted:Cool stuff, thanks a lot. I'm probably going to try this configuration tonight first, just because it's there and done for me, but we'll see how it feels ingame. They said they're going to offer the loyalty discount for "some time" after Horizons is released.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
Ursine Catastrophe posted:Your mileage may, of course, vary, but if you're talking about three-button combos then you're (probably) not talking about contextual combos. Yeah, I think either your game is hosed, or your controller is, or the game just doesn't like your controller. When I hold down a shift key, "hold down ABXY and then hit the followup at your leisure" is exactly what it does for me. When I hold down Y, anything I press while holding it down uses the Y+whatever binding if one is available. No time limit, no change after pressing any number of other keys, straight-up shifted bindings until I let go of Y. If I have a three-button combo, let's say Y+B+Lstick, I can hold down Y+B for as long as I want before clicking Lstick and it'll work. This is also how it works in the bindings menu, and it doesn't register a new binding until you've let go of all keys.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
So if I have about 100M right now, is it worthwhile to poo poo-fit a python or something to run robigo or other long-range trading missions, or am I better off sticking with the ASP? Also, what's it cost for a non-shitfit FDL/Python?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
Cathair posted:Yeah, I think either your game is hosed, or your controller is, or the game just doesn't like your controller. I think it might be because I started from a base of the contextual "for xbox controllers" stuff-- I assume that your Y button is explicitly bound as "a shift button", and doesn't have anything mapped to Y by itself? And do you have that popup show up when you hold down Y?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 22:37 |
|
|
Naturally Selected posted:So if I have about 100M right now, is it worthwhile to poo poo-fit a python or something to run robigo or other long-range trading missions, or am I better off sticking with the ASP? Robigo runs *may* be getting merged in tomorrows update, so I wouldn't upgrade your ship for that. An A class combat python is approx 200m credits. But if the robigo run isn't buggered tomorrow then the Asp is about the best lower cost ship for the job. Fit A class jump drive, thrusters and energy capacitor. D class pretty much everything else, take 96 tons of cargo hold and the rest as fuel tanks and you are sorted.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2015 01:04
|
|