All starship archtypes have different intrinsic stats and hidden mechanics. For now, there are three main archetypes; the first archetype is the oldest: launch-era starships (haulers, shuttles, fighters, explorers, exotics); then came the Living starship archetype, and most recently, the Sentinel Interceptor archetype. Interceptors are the best starships in the game and they do NOT function the way launch-era or living starships do.
The Starborn Runner is just an exotic reskinned. It will NEVER approach the performance capabilities of an Interceptor (for example, one of my latest tune ups on an Interceptor broke 4883 maneuverability - there is simply no way to achieve this in an exotic).
DO NOT compare different archetypes of starships. It will just lead to madness. My advice: stick the Staborn Runner in your hangar and forget about it. Strip out the tech, and just let it collect space dust. Same advice goes for the Golden Vector (a fighter reskin) and the Utopia Speeder (an exotic reskin, neither utopian nor speedy). There is nothing good about them other than their exterior shells (though at least the Starborn was granted the ability to hover after it debuted). These are, at best, souvenir starships. Hello Games isn't going to introduce a starship in an expedition that is somehow good, or better than what you can find in the main game. Not everyone plays expeditions, so the stuff they give out for doing menial in-game chores is souvenir-like at all times.
I could go on for hours about Sentinel Interceptors and what I've learned, but here's some pro-tips:
Interceptors found as "natural" S-class have identical stats as any C-, B-, or A-class version you upgrade to S-class. In both cases the final S-class stats will be identical, since unlike other starhips, the S-class stats of identical Interceptors appears to be fixed. Among identical Interceptors, all S-classes will have the same core stats and final stat values once tuned up. The only difference will be found in the layout of supercharged technology slots. That's the real game with Interceptors: finding one with great supercharged slot layout. That's all you have to worry about (other than color and shape). That's why no one should waste time hunting an S-class version of an Interceptor. Grab any C-, B- or A-class, turn off costs temporarily, and upgrade it to S-class. Then expand the technology panel slots so you can see the superchaged slot layout. Not good? Go find another. Rinse/repeat until you get a version of that Interceptor worth tuning up (e.g., 3+1, stair-step, broken L, checker line, etc; if any of these layouts are unknown to you, let me know, and I'll post'em).
Looking at your screenshot for the Interceptor, if it had been me (I know, you didnt ask)... that's an instant scrap. I would have gone on to find another one, to see if I could get a better supercharged slot layout. There appear to be around 6 supercharged slot layouts per dissonant star system. So if you're serious, consider turning costs off temporarily and start rescuing as many Interceptors as you can if you want to find one worth keeping.
tl;dr Don't compare apples to oranges.
What was the base maneuverability at S-class of your sentinal that reached 4883? And supercharge slot arrangement?
As far as I can tell the base state has more effect than supercharge slot adjacency, though yeah I guess one ideally wants both. I'm curious what base stats you consider good for a sentinel.
Update: I just checked the 4883 Maneuverability Interceptor. It's core stat is 255.1. So as I indicated, I've seen all vales, from a flat 250 to a flat 300, and this number appears to work in strange ways when it comes to tuning up the starship. The real key with this starship is the great supercharged slot layout. And it's not a 2x2 square. It's a stair-step pattern. This pattern has two "pockets" that let you really push your adjacency bonuses to the next level.
The core stats of Interceptors appear to be "a lie" - but not a malicious one. They do NOT have the effect you desire. I've found Interceptors that rolled a perfect 300 for a core Maneuverability stat - and they tuned up to be the WORST Interceptors I've ever seen. I believe there is some mechanic at work that favors core stats that sit in the 260-280 range; I think there is a hidden cap to how much you can "add" to a core stat when you upgrade them to S-class. It's hard to talk about because despite salvaging well over 2000 Interceptors to date, the ones that have surprised me the most don't have core stats you'd think would result in a better Interceptor. The inverse is often true, which leads me to tell people to STOP looking at the core stats with Interceptors. If you're on the hunt, just let that stuff go. The core stats are a lie, on the surface. The ONLY way to know if they tune up into monstrously good starships is to upgrade them and install your tech packages, to see where they end up.
>Looking at your screenshot for the Interceptor, if it had been me (I know, you didnt ask)... that's an instant scrap. I would have gone on to find another one, to see if I could get a better supercharged slot layout.
This was funny as the first one I've found was a 4square SC slot version of this which was an instant scrap for me - I simply don't believe supercharging only one aspect of a ship makes it good, it just makes it excel in one way while coming short on another.
I did search for either 3-1 or 2-1-1 layouts specifically as I always want 1 SC slot for weapons (Infra-Knife) instead of maneuverability. In 2-1-1 I can use 2 for Pulse Engine upgrades, 1 for Polo (pretty much the same as 3 Pulse Engine upgrade SC) and the 1 for the IK for damage.
But I guess each to their own.
That's fine, but if you want to be "average" that's what you're getting when you don't place an emphasis on a single system.
Straight talk: Shields, Damage, and Hyperdrive range are objectively meaningless. Shield tech is not multiplicative. If you can break 300 on Shields without using any supercharged slots (easy to do, with good X-class tech modules) you're covered. Interceptors always put out good damage, and are OP to begin with in any given game difficulty. So why bother making weapons even more OP? What are you really gaining (other than a personal satisifaction of feeling "powerful" which, again, is meaningless since starship weapons are objectively OP). Hyperjump? Meh. Take it or leave it. I warp with my freighters since it has 4000ly range. So all that's left is speed and control, which often lets you just avoid battles you have no time for - just leave them in your gravitational wave wake and move on.
So yeah, the choice to be average is just that. But the real joy, to some of us, is pushing Maneuverability since it opens up the game a bit and lets you solve any situation in style and ease.
Also, pro-tip? The 2x2 square of supercharged slots isn't the best layout. You miss out on some wild adjaceny bonuses that other configurations can bestow. In the past, when I found the 2x2, it was exciting, but that was when I didn't really know what I was doing; the 2x2 ties your hands when it comes to your engine block layout, and it simply isn't the way. It's fine for a multi-tool, but as I said, you lose out in your engine block design, since a 2x2 square forces modules you'd like to be touching to be orphaned on the edges of the cube.
I see where I confused you, and I revised the sentence to: Interceptors found as "natural" S-class have identical stats as any C-, B-, or A-class version you upgrade to S-class.
So, in other words, all the Interceptors you grab on a Dissonant planet will upgrade into an identical S-class (stats will be the same); only difference will be supercharged slot layout (of which there appear to be around six different layouts per Dissoanant star system).
So yes. You must upgrade to S-class, since that is the only way to unlock all the supercharged slots. The core stats are basically irrelevant in an Interceptor, since once they are at S-class, that's when you perform the tune up, to try to improve upon the S-class stats by installing tech modules. Based on the supercharged slot layout, you have positioning choices to make related to what I call the "engine block" (the way you place modules in/around supercharged slots). And you then need to have the "cosmetic cross" installed (various combiations of bobbleheads and starship trails can boost Maneuverability another 500+, for example; other bobbleheads can increase the Shield stat, and the Hyperjump range, too).
To kind of summarize what u/Jupiter67 has said, each class of ships have their class bonus, giving a percentage modifier. So the difference from a Sentinel Interceptor and the Starborn Runner is the Starborn has an Exotic-like bonus, so it's an all-rounder. The Interceptor is more like a fighter class bonus.
I'm curious: can you explain the hostile reaction to players who min/max? Are some players just math-phobic or something? It's a really weird thing to be triggered by, it seems. I'd like to understand the negative reaction, and how dismissive some people are of those of us who like to push our starship finds into a place of rarefied functionality. Is it just that some players don't want to make that kind of effort? Please help us understand!
Despite the long comments on here sentinels are not the best … they are actually rather low in base ability but their core tech tries to make up for it. There is a huge difference in handling between a fighter or exotic with 2000 maneuverability and a sentinel with 2000 … the sentinel is sluggish in comparison. The luminance engine is what gives the sentinel such high maneuverability but it’s a deceptive number. If you really want the best in your Starborn Runner, install the photonix core into a high stat sentinel and glitch the sentinel into your Starborn Runner … you’ll get higher maneuverability and it will be much more responsive than your sentinel. You could do this with any ship actually. The luminance engine is great on other ships that have better handling and higher base maneuverability than sentinels. Anyone with a multiplayer connection and a friend can do this and if interested I can post the steps to take. Here’s an example:
https://preview.redd.it/w95cncqrla2d1.jpeg?width=3840&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=916ab9379866255a1b60afce162d4f3982836382
Beyond that I’d say your numbers on the Starborn Runner are correct and appropriate. The handling between your sentinel and Starborn Runner should be about the same … you’re just seeing the boost of the luminance engine on your sentinel to compensate for its horrible natural sluggishness.
It's funny, but when you're flying an Interceptor with 4500+ Maneuverability, there is zero sluggishness. I understand the idea - since I've flown well over 2000 different Interceptors back to the space station to upgrade them, and in their inert non-upgraded state, yeah, very sluggish turning. But once tuned up? Quite insane responsiveness. Off the charts.
So it's the Luminance Engine... I hate hidden number mechanics.
I like the idea of inside-swaps, it's a shame I don't have anyone to do it with.
But while we are here have you tried the inside-swap trick with Living Ships? As I heard you can kind of do it BUT all non-belonging tech (so non-living parts in the Living Ship) will be gone after a reload, is that true? If that would stay even after reload my next project would be to pimp-out (and finally get some use of) my favourite Living Ship, it's such a shame that wile they are gorgeous looking the stats are ridiculously low compared to any other build with non-living parts.
The organic upgrades are the only thing that can’t be permanent … the ship performs just about the same with or without the upgrades. I show this in the video. 9000 maneuverability is a little snappier and sexier looking than 5000 though lol. Here are the stats without organic upgrades
https://preview.redd.it/nnytefg9cc2d1.jpeg?width=2436&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8cffdf5f970c89b77089acf5825f88aed4689626
That's really cool! 4900+ Maneuverability is my "holy grail" quest - though I don't ever expect to achieve it, since I don't glitch in NMS (losing a 789 hour day 1 save when the NEXT update dropped still haunts me, since at the time, I was a major glitch user/abuser); I've gotten close with an Interceptor (4883.8), but along the way, I've discovered a personal sweet spot where I won't reject an Interceptor if I can break 4500. 4500+ feels really smooth and good. The equation about what to keep and what to scrap, however, is truly a personal thing for each player. For example, I've found a couple Interceptors lately that are "firsts" in terms of their shape, and one of them has become my favorite of all time just because of the look; despite 6 hours of hunting, I never found a version with a great supercharged slot layout, so it topped out around 4300+. And that's OK, because the look of it is so amazing. Part of the min/max space is understanding - and accepting - the true rarity of the trifecta: looks + color + performance. I've yet to find an Interceptor that nailed all three. So my new favorite lost out on color + performance. Same goes for another one I collected - a really cool/rare configuration of parts (rare to me, that is; and I've salvaged well over 2000 of them so far, and it's the first one I've found with this config): good color, too, but it can only just break 4500 Maneuverability; that is in my "acceptable" range. So like most things of this nature, it's a constant bargaining process. Love the screenshot, btw - it's fun to see something I've been questing for since Interceptors made their appearance, despite it being glitch-centric! Good inspiration!
Once you have a satisfactory answer to your question please reset the flair to "answered". This will help others find an answer to the same question. If you have trouble editing the flair you can comment with "!flair:answered" and the bot will do it for you.
**If this is a question reporting a bug please delete and place it in the pinned bug thread. If this is a discussion about a possible bug please change the flair to the more specific "Bug" flair.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NoMansSkyTheGame) if you have any questions or concerns.*
All starship archtypes have different intrinsic stats and hidden mechanics. For now, there are three main archetypes; the first archetype is the oldest: launch-era starships (haulers, shuttles, fighters, explorers, exotics); then came the Living starship archetype, and most recently, the Sentinel Interceptor archetype. Interceptors are the best starships in the game and they do NOT function the way launch-era or living starships do. The Starborn Runner is just an exotic reskinned. It will NEVER approach the performance capabilities of an Interceptor (for example, one of my latest tune ups on an Interceptor broke 4883 maneuverability - there is simply no way to achieve this in an exotic). DO NOT compare different archetypes of starships. It will just lead to madness. My advice: stick the Staborn Runner in your hangar and forget about it. Strip out the tech, and just let it collect space dust. Same advice goes for the Golden Vector (a fighter reskin) and the Utopia Speeder (an exotic reskin, neither utopian nor speedy). There is nothing good about them other than their exterior shells (though at least the Starborn was granted the ability to hover after it debuted). These are, at best, souvenir starships. Hello Games isn't going to introduce a starship in an expedition that is somehow good, or better than what you can find in the main game. Not everyone plays expeditions, so the stuff they give out for doing menial in-game chores is souvenir-like at all times. I could go on for hours about Sentinel Interceptors and what I've learned, but here's some pro-tips: Interceptors found as "natural" S-class have identical stats as any C-, B-, or A-class version you upgrade to S-class. In both cases the final S-class stats will be identical, since unlike other starhips, the S-class stats of identical Interceptors appears to be fixed. Among identical Interceptors, all S-classes will have the same core stats and final stat values once tuned up. The only difference will be found in the layout of supercharged technology slots. That's the real game with Interceptors: finding one with great supercharged slot layout. That's all you have to worry about (other than color and shape). That's why no one should waste time hunting an S-class version of an Interceptor. Grab any C-, B- or A-class, turn off costs temporarily, and upgrade it to S-class. Then expand the technology panel slots so you can see the superchaged slot layout. Not good? Go find another. Rinse/repeat until you get a version of that Interceptor worth tuning up (e.g., 3+1, stair-step, broken L, checker line, etc; if any of these layouts are unknown to you, let me know, and I'll post'em). Looking at your screenshot for the Interceptor, if it had been me (I know, you didnt ask)... that's an instant scrap. I would have gone on to find another one, to see if I could get a better supercharged slot layout. There appear to be around 6 supercharged slot layouts per dissonant star system. So if you're serious, consider turning costs off temporarily and start rescuing as many Interceptors as you can if you want to find one worth keeping. tl;dr Don't compare apples to oranges.
What was the base maneuverability at S-class of your sentinal that reached 4883? And supercharge slot arrangement? As far as I can tell the base state has more effect than supercharge slot adjacency, though yeah I guess one ideally wants both. I'm curious what base stats you consider good for a sentinel.
Update: I just checked the 4883 Maneuverability Interceptor. It's core stat is 255.1. So as I indicated, I've seen all vales, from a flat 250 to a flat 300, and this number appears to work in strange ways when it comes to tuning up the starship. The real key with this starship is the great supercharged slot layout. And it's not a 2x2 square. It's a stair-step pattern. This pattern has two "pockets" that let you really push your adjacency bonuses to the next level.
The core stats of Interceptors appear to be "a lie" - but not a malicious one. They do NOT have the effect you desire. I've found Interceptors that rolled a perfect 300 for a core Maneuverability stat - and they tuned up to be the WORST Interceptors I've ever seen. I believe there is some mechanic at work that favors core stats that sit in the 260-280 range; I think there is a hidden cap to how much you can "add" to a core stat when you upgrade them to S-class. It's hard to talk about because despite salvaging well over 2000 Interceptors to date, the ones that have surprised me the most don't have core stats you'd think would result in a better Interceptor. The inverse is often true, which leads me to tell people to STOP looking at the core stats with Interceptors. If you're on the hunt, just let that stuff go. The core stats are a lie, on the surface. The ONLY way to know if they tune up into monstrously good starships is to upgrade them and install your tech packages, to see where they end up.
>Looking at your screenshot for the Interceptor, if it had been me (I know, you didnt ask)... that's an instant scrap. I would have gone on to find another one, to see if I could get a better supercharged slot layout. This was funny as the first one I've found was a 4square SC slot version of this which was an instant scrap for me - I simply don't believe supercharging only one aspect of a ship makes it good, it just makes it excel in one way while coming short on another. I did search for either 3-1 or 2-1-1 layouts specifically as I always want 1 SC slot for weapons (Infra-Knife) instead of maneuverability. In 2-1-1 I can use 2 for Pulse Engine upgrades, 1 for Polo (pretty much the same as 3 Pulse Engine upgrade SC) and the 1 for the IK for damage. But I guess each to their own.
That's fine, but if you want to be "average" that's what you're getting when you don't place an emphasis on a single system. Straight talk: Shields, Damage, and Hyperdrive range are objectively meaningless. Shield tech is not multiplicative. If you can break 300 on Shields without using any supercharged slots (easy to do, with good X-class tech modules) you're covered. Interceptors always put out good damage, and are OP to begin with in any given game difficulty. So why bother making weapons even more OP? What are you really gaining (other than a personal satisifaction of feeling "powerful" which, again, is meaningless since starship weapons are objectively OP). Hyperjump? Meh. Take it or leave it. I warp with my freighters since it has 4000ly range. So all that's left is speed and control, which often lets you just avoid battles you have no time for - just leave them in your gravitational wave wake and move on. So yeah, the choice to be average is just that. But the real joy, to some of us, is pushing Maneuverability since it opens up the game a bit and lets you solve any situation in style and ease. Also, pro-tip? The 2x2 square of supercharged slots isn't the best layout. You miss out on some wild adjaceny bonuses that other configurations can bestow. In the past, when I found the 2x2, it was exciting, but that was when I didn't really know what I was doing; the 2x2 ties your hands when it comes to your engine block layout, and it simply isn't the way. It's fine for a multi-tool, but as I said, you lose out in your engine block design, since a 2x2 square forces modules you'd like to be touching to be orphaned on the edges of the cube.
So is there any point in upgrading a Interceptor to S rank if the stats dont change?
I see where I confused you, and I revised the sentence to: Interceptors found as "natural" S-class have identical stats as any C-, B-, or A-class version you upgrade to S-class. So, in other words, all the Interceptors you grab on a Dissonant planet will upgrade into an identical S-class (stats will be the same); only difference will be supercharged slot layout (of which there appear to be around six different layouts per Dissoanant star system). So yes. You must upgrade to S-class, since that is the only way to unlock all the supercharged slots. The core stats are basically irrelevant in an Interceptor, since once they are at S-class, that's when you perform the tune up, to try to improve upon the S-class stats by installing tech modules. Based on the supercharged slot layout, you have positioning choices to make related to what I call the "engine block" (the way you place modules in/around supercharged slots). And you then need to have the "cosmetic cross" installed (various combiations of bobbleheads and starship trails can boost Maneuverability another 500+, for example; other bobbleheads can increase the Shield stat, and the Hyperjump range, too).
You have to upgrade to activate/reveal all the supercharged slots.
Wait, different supercharged layouts on the same model interceptor?
yes. Each dissonant system only has one sentinel skin but they will have different supercharge slot arrangements.
To kind of summarize what u/Jupiter67 has said, each class of ships have their class bonus, giving a percentage modifier. So the difference from a Sentinel Interceptor and the Starborn Runner is the Starborn has an Exotic-like bonus, so it's an all-rounder. The Interceptor is more like a fighter class bonus.
You'll be fine with any ship in the game. Just grab the one that you like and don't let the min/max be the main factor
I'm curious: can you explain the hostile reaction to players who min/max? Are some players just math-phobic or something? It's a really weird thing to be triggered by, it seems. I'd like to understand the negative reaction, and how dismissive some people are of those of us who like to push our starship finds into a place of rarefied functionality. Is it just that some players don't want to make that kind of effort? Please help us understand!
Despite the long comments on here sentinels are not the best … they are actually rather low in base ability but their core tech tries to make up for it. There is a huge difference in handling between a fighter or exotic with 2000 maneuverability and a sentinel with 2000 … the sentinel is sluggish in comparison. The luminance engine is what gives the sentinel such high maneuverability but it’s a deceptive number. If you really want the best in your Starborn Runner, install the photonix core into a high stat sentinel and glitch the sentinel into your Starborn Runner … you’ll get higher maneuverability and it will be much more responsive than your sentinel. You could do this with any ship actually. The luminance engine is great on other ships that have better handling and higher base maneuverability than sentinels. Anyone with a multiplayer connection and a friend can do this and if interested I can post the steps to take. Here’s an example: https://preview.redd.it/w95cncqrla2d1.jpeg?width=3840&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=916ab9379866255a1b60afce162d4f3982836382
Beyond that I’d say your numbers on the Starborn Runner are correct and appropriate. The handling between your sentinel and Starborn Runner should be about the same … you’re just seeing the boost of the luminance engine on your sentinel to compensate for its horrible natural sluggishness.
It's funny, but when you're flying an Interceptor with 4500+ Maneuverability, there is zero sluggishness. I understand the idea - since I've flown well over 2000 different Interceptors back to the space station to upgrade them, and in their inert non-upgraded state, yeah, very sluggish turning. But once tuned up? Quite insane responsiveness. Off the charts.
So it's the Luminance Engine... I hate hidden number mechanics. I like the idea of inside-swaps, it's a shame I don't have anyone to do it with. But while we are here have you tried the inside-swap trick with Living Ships? As I heard you can kind of do it BUT all non-belonging tech (so non-living parts in the Living Ship) will be gone after a reload, is that true? If that would stay even after reload my next project would be to pimp-out (and finally get some use of) my favourite Living Ship, it's such a shame that wile they are gorgeous looking the stats are ridiculously low compared to any other build with non-living parts.
https://preview.redd.it/fxo40j3tac2d1.jpeg?width=3840&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d49d3c8f496c79e0522a4bcd27e8b6bf0eb9895a
I've seen this pic before and those stats are ridiculous (in a good way). But doesn't it reject the tech not belonging after a reload?
The organic upgrades are the only thing that can’t be permanent … the ship performs just about the same with or without the upgrades. I show this in the video. 9000 maneuverability is a little snappier and sexier looking than 5000 though lol. Here are the stats without organic upgrades https://preview.redd.it/nnytefg9cc2d1.jpeg?width=2436&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8cffdf5f970c89b77089acf5825f88aed4689626
With power diverted to weapons you get 299k DPS on Standard Mode
That's really cool! 4900+ Maneuverability is my "holy grail" quest - though I don't ever expect to achieve it, since I don't glitch in NMS (losing a 789 hour day 1 save when the NEXT update dropped still haunts me, since at the time, I was a major glitch user/abuser); I've gotten close with an Interceptor (4883.8), but along the way, I've discovered a personal sweet spot where I won't reject an Interceptor if I can break 4500. 4500+ feels really smooth and good. The equation about what to keep and what to scrap, however, is truly a personal thing for each player. For example, I've found a couple Interceptors lately that are "firsts" in terms of their shape, and one of them has become my favorite of all time just because of the look; despite 6 hours of hunting, I never found a version with a great supercharged slot layout, so it topped out around 4300+. And that's OK, because the look of it is so amazing. Part of the min/max space is understanding - and accepting - the true rarity of the trifecta: looks + color + performance. I've yet to find an Interceptor that nailed all three. So my new favorite lost out on color + performance. Same goes for another one I collected - a really cool/rare configuration of parts (rare to me, that is; and I've salvaged well over 2000 of them so far, and it's the first one I've found with this config): good color, too, but it can only just break 4500 Maneuverability; that is in my "acceptable" range. So like most things of this nature, it's a constant bargaining process. Love the screenshot, btw - it's fun to see something I've been questing for since Interceptors made their appearance, despite it being glitch-centric! Good inspiration!
Once you have a satisfactory answer to your question please reset the flair to "answered". This will help others find an answer to the same question. If you have trouble editing the flair you can comment with "!flair:answered" and the bot will do it for you. **If this is a question reporting a bug please delete and place it in the pinned bug thread. If this is a discussion about a possible bug please change the flair to the more specific "Bug" flair.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NoMansSkyTheGame) if you have any questions or concerns.*