Elite: Odyssey

Vasil Vasilescu
20 Jan 2024, 10:34pm
Artie... it works great for me and my dakkadakka "build".



We needz MORE DAKKA!
Minonian
21 Jan 2024, 3:17am
Yo home! I put more dakka to your dakka so you can haz dakka dakka.
-Sajuuk-
21 Jan 2024, 3:26am
Minonian

Ace Of Hearts

I can drop the heatsinks in flavor of more shield boosters but i prefer to not overcook my systems. You know? Prolonged combat with cargo in my hold in H RES sites. otherwise? I'm capable to go against this odds in my vette till run out consumables & ammo in my vette. I'm doing so with cut engines, opened hold while my limpets keep scavenging. And BTW? You are better off with adding point defense & chaff instead of letting em wear down your shields with rocket barrage, and keep picketing you.

I give you one thing, with this methods a prismatic might be better. But not missing it. Not just a bit.


This is honestly an awful build and you have 0 fucking clue what youre talking about. It would be easier for me to fix Fdevs netcode than deconstruct and list everything wrong with your build in a coherent matter. But ill briefly have a go anyway.

First of all, maneuverability? In a Corvette? Do you not realize you are almost the length a typical skyscraper??? no amount of chaff, or "speed" will make YOU "harder" to hit, and the only thing youre gonna "outmaneuver" is a stationary asteroid.

I've recreated this monstrosity in EDSY and i gotta say this is just hilarious.

Deep charge FSD, fast charge on reinforced shield, sturdy mounts(because you put an OC 5 plant when you didnt need to and i bet you were cooking your hardpoints off lmfao) You say you care about speed, but instead of putting Heavy duty on the free lightweight hull for literally free HP and 0 mass increase, you put MILITARY MOUNTS AND MADE THEM LIGHTWEIGHT INSTEAD LMAO. putting flow control on things you dont need when you have a surplus of power even without power priorities, sturdy weapon mounts, and a 5A shielded life support??? and Dirty drives with....STRIPPED DOWN??? weapons focused capacitor???...

The only thing this build got right, is the heavy duty mods on the HRPs and Mods on the SCBs.

All this because you were probably melting your hardpoints off along with half of your internals, you want to be "light and fast" but you also add mass everywhere you can for ...no reason? This build should be called "Cognitive Dissonance"

A walking dunning kruger effect.
Here, ive literally took the time, to undogshitfy your build.

Oh and would you look it that! it has prismatics AND ITS STILL FASTER THAN WHATEVER THE FUCK YOU CONJURED ORIGINALLY, i even added some proper power priorities as a bonus.
(is this the best pve build in existence? hell no and im sure people can conjure something more min maxed etc, but its 3AM and i cant be fucked more than i already have)
Now please, stop abusing people with your lack of knowledge.

Last edit: 21 Jan 2024, 3:40am
Minonian
21 Jan 2024, 12:04pm
In nutshell about firepower? The more the merrier. The faster you kill the more you can.

Sajuuk I don't give a flying fart about minmaxing and the likes. Playing isn't just about powering the crap out of everything nor you can only keep one point in your mind when making something. I have my goals in my mind and that's by the look of it after this tone? None of your business...
-Sajuuk-
21 Jan 2024, 5:35pm
MinonianIn nutshell about firepower? The more the merrier. The faster you kill the more you can.

Sajuuk I don't give a flying fart about minmaxing and the likes. Playing isn't just about powering the crap out of everything nor you can only keep one point in your mind when making something. I have my goals in my mind and that's by the look of it after this tone? None of your business...



This isnt even min maxxed, its literally better in every way.
Humble up and stop "teaching" people on how to build ships, and giving advice.

Mr bad to the bone profile picture
Lenecro
21 Jan 2024, 5:39pm
MinonianIn nutshell about firepower? The more the merrier. The faster you kill the more you can.

Sajuuk I don't give a flying fart about minmaxing and the likes. Playing isn't just about powering the crap out of everything nor you can only keep one point in your mind when making something. I have my goals in my mind and that's by the look of it after this tone? None of your business...


With that build of yours, which by the way looks like something you would build by rolling dices and picking whatever number you had on it.

You shouldn't give any advices regarding anything in this game even troglodytes homo sapiens have better understanding in numbers and situation in this game.

I think a game called Starfield would suit you better, so that you don't spread that rotting knowledge of yours.
Knowledge is like jam the less you have the more you spread it. And in your case you lack both jam and the toast.
-Sajuuk-
21 Jan 2024, 5:43pm
I honestly expected nothing less, any time someone like that talks out of their ass, they are never able to accept humility and admit they are wrong.
and still somehow try to insert some weird "fun fact" or meaningless "tip" lmfao.
Never change ED boomers, never change.

Its hilarious cause the build i gave him would literally do everything better, and still fly faster, which is what he endlessly praised his original "magnum opus" as.
Minonian
21 Jan 2024, 6:37pm
Wrong on what, when as i stated earlier i has to overlook this build? ???? You know what i thinking? Some peoples really has to read the topic and understand what the other said, before saying anything, instead of needlessly and mistakenly fussing over things. And from my part? This is where this discussion ends.

Last edit: 21 Jan 2024, 6:44pm
Rayman.
21 Jan 2024, 7:12pm
Wish there was try/sandbox mode where u can test ur ships, weapons and so on with engineered stuff without spending resources. That would save lots of pointless argues here and such and but it would also allow to test unusual builds like the guy was doing with keelback.

I once made a clipper for thargoid spiers farm. Everything was fine, I just had to replace a better repair module. Unsual choice and such but i enjoyed, mainly because to outrun hunter/abductor thargoids from hyperdiction/interdiction. While on on my xenofarmonda, i had shrug it off some damage.
Minonian
21 Jan 2024, 7:49pm
What i feel the most pointless to argue with peoples whom can't look beyond raw numbers.
But here's a theoretical build to demonstrate my point.

Let's just say someone want to build an explorer conda capable to get beagle and beyond than back. In overall the best builds to this has around 80 LYR range. But is that build really that good, or just a glass cannon? I afraid the latest... Now let's say aside of getting there and back you also want to do planet side exploration and exobiology, and on the top of that also need at least mediocre sensors just to pick up anything interesting you can possibly encounter in the big black. let's see what does this means? An average but underpowered hull shield and armor, just to ensure the ship survivability in case of rough landings, and it can get beagle and back. And top notch engines in case of high G planets. Aside of this the usual. plus what some peoples forget a secondary fuel tank than cry and call the ratties, because out of there there's a lot of places where the stars too sparse.

What we don't need?
Weapons OUT
Fighter bay OUT that's just for the lulz and takes too much space.
Scarab? 1 is enough.
Utility? heat sinks 2-3 is enough but with engineering their mass can be brought down next to none so why not? They come handy.

In overall, with these in mind the range brought down from the maxed out 80 somewhere between 60-70 with guardian booster depending on the exact choices we made. Oh? It's a lil bit slower? Well, the point never was racing to beagle than back, but to go beagle and explore explore explore. Which means the most possible star system touched while keeping up an acceptable pace. But the choices we made here increased survivability and comfort which is a sacrifice I'm willing to make. And this part? Cannot be enumerated.
Rayman.
22 Jan 2024, 12:51pm
it's a bit risky to do 80 ly anaconda because I'm guessing without a shield generator and scarab. Not that you shouldn't do it but if someone is confident with a glass cannon landing on high G planets, who will forbid it. Mine has a 72ly with 220t cargo. This was when I flew to colonia to unlock these engineers there and currectly for guardian stuff purposes. Plus, too big a ship for exobiology. It's better to use aspX or DiaX at this point so as not to waste time on finding optimal landings.
Minonian
22 Jan 2024, 1:15pm
Exactly! if you max out one stats than it's going to fall way too short at all other areas. maxing is stupid the right approach is balancing and versatility. And You can also do exo with a conda, but to find a good landing spot its a hurdle. non the less it can be done, as long you don't mind some things because of this left out. But yet again, when you cross the entire galaxy and back, none of these matters. There's more than enough sweet spots. Which is also preferable instead of stopping for every darn microbe colony. Yet again? Time efficiency. It's too much of an effort for too little.
Artie
22 Jan 2024, 2:00pm
Min-maxing isn't stupid, it's just a way how to achieve the desired goal as the player set it. For example, the player wants to have a perfect or near-perfect combat ship - in such case it's logical he/she will want to sacrifice and reduce any stuff that doesn't contribute to the goal - like you won't put SRV bay there same as many other things and the ship loadout and engineering will be optimized for the firepower, defence and agility instead. Similar for traders - you will put as many cargo racks as possible there and make your ship as light as possible to increase your jump range (with a shield or without), you don't need much other stuff there just to have the ship balanced or versatile, because it doesn't serve the intended purpose. And so on. It just depends on the goals.

That, of course, doesn't mean that highly optimized single-purpose ship setups are the best choice for all the cases, but also it doesn't mean that average ship setups should be presented as the "best option". Especially in cases when such setups can be further improved/optimized while keeping the very same purpose.

Circling back to the Corvettes, I have a SRV bay, limpets, etc. at the cost of extra SCB, hull reinforcements, etc. on it as I want to have it as a combat ship but also do everything else with it (to some extent). It's no way the best combat loadout possible (the defence and a few minor other things could be better), but I have it pretty min-maxed for my use and goals. Min-maxing isn't about focusing on a single ship's parameter/property, but about maximizing desirable properties and minimizing the other, not so desirable.
Minonian
22 Jan 2024, 2:34pm
Yes same as with my current build some peoples fussed about. A war ship must be capable to fight after all. My point is simply just the fact, it cannot fall way too short in other areas. That's too much of an Achilles heel.

But nor you can try to put too much thing in one build. That's hogwash. Good to nothing only for trouble.

Last edit: 22 Jan 2024, 2:58pm
Artie
22 Jan 2024, 2:46pm
MinonianYes same as with my current build some peoples fussed about. A war ship must be capable to fight after all. My point is simply just the fact, it cannot fall way too sort in other areas. That's too much of an Achilles heel.

But nor you can try to put too much thing in one build. That's hogwash. Good to nothing only for trouble.

Well, as I mentioned, when some build can be improved while keeping the same purpose (that's what the discussion was about, as I understand it), it's not very fortunate to present it as the best option possible, because it will inevitably lead to objections. And frankly, rightfully so.

Post a reply

You must be signed in to post here.
Anything about the Elite:Odyssey release version.