Top Starship Sublight Speed[]
So, does anybody know just what the max operating speed is for a starship? That is, assuming it's equipped with all max stat X-Class Upgrade Modules in both the General and tech Inventories, as well as having all blueprint tech, including the Photonix Core, outfitted in the best possible arrangement, what then, is a starship's max operating speed?
Currently, although I do not use X-Class Tech, my Silver Specter Fighter and Breath of Infinity Exotic bot top out at 15,964u/s. So, anybody got something better than that? Brickticks (talk) 19:19, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Starship Damage Calculations[]
All the calculations for the damage bonuses are completely wrong; for a starter the base damage is (if the explorer is a reference point) 36.7 and its fairly easy to find a fighter with 7x that (i.e. 700%)... I would like to propose an overhaul is looked at for each of the starship class % damage modifiers. I am playing survival on PC if that makes any difference and have not checked other play styles.TheNad42 (talk) 01:09, 6 April 2021 (UTC) Then I would encourage you to pursue that overhaul! The wiki is a community project; all research is good research. Ddfairchildd (talk) 01:27, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Starship spawn locations/timers Beyond[]
I'm fairly certain after save scumming for a ship that I liked the look of to get it S-class recently that the thing about spawn locations and timers is no longer true. Just go to a trade depot and reload twice. The first 6 ships that land will not be the same every time. Going to remove this unless someone can prove it's wrong.
- Same as over yonder, new topics in discussions go TOPSIDE. Aside again: "Going to remove" is not the same as "removing right now"... so you are VERY impatient and didn't wait for feedback. Not a good idea. The information from NEXT was from me. And normally that holds true. The problem with planetary ports - especially after the recent changes - is that the ships are still there... in the air. They just don't land in the same sequence. A further problem could be where your ship is placed each time (if you relanded or it switched port) as blockage makes certain ships come. This phenomenon is MUCH easier to observe on a space station... or was. I need to check if it is still viable. That being said... don't be so hasty with edits. You left next to no time to review your input. Not good. Thamalandis (talk) 17:45, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
- You are doing it again. The TIER is NOT random but design locked. The tier describes the inventory sizes from small, medium and large... I have no time to moderate all edits right now. I check on it later and revert as necessary.Thamalandis (talk) 17:49, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
- Notsononymous36483, I reverted your changes for now. As you intended, please discuss first and make a well thought edit on the page later. Please note with every major changes made to a feature, the wiki intends to keep a history of previously documented information as well.
- Also as we experienced with the wiki documented multi-tools and starships, the classes are no longer the same since the Beyond update. Unfortunately Hello Games makes so many hidden changes, it is better to indicate your findings and let others to test it as well, so a better conclusion can be made from more result. Gorla (talk) 18:08, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
- After some tests the answer is a resounding... ye~no. I can reliable make the same ship land down to the same captain in Beta Polaris (greetings Vy'keen captain Horo). The ships inside the initial armada are also the same... but the order they land in and when is misaligned. I think this has to do with the new NPC behavior and patterns, so the longer the event chain goes on the more unreliable it is. And on a planetary port the variables involved can be massive, planet included. The ships that spawn above are ALWAYS the same in wave 1. If and when they land is random. The first ship to land... is practically always the same. So it didn't change per se... but it got less reliable. Only ship number 1 is 95-99% guaranteed and the latter are guaranteed in their existence... not the order. Thamalandis (talk) 02:01, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- I am happy to defer to you RE starship landing order. But no, I was reloading a save on the same trade depot with the starship in the same landing pad (not sure what is confusing you about reloading a save, everything should be the same, right?). You've admitted it's not true for landing order; why have you reverted the edit to its original (wrong) state? As an aside, I've never been able to get starships to land consistently in a space station (as in half the time starships just don't land). What platform are you playing on? If you can give some tips as to how to actually get starships to land at a space station that would be greatly appreciated (:
- As for "starship tier", that is not term defined anywhere in the page. If someone reads through the entire page from start to finish, they might be able to glean that "tier" is used as a synonym for "inventory size category", but that definition is never made explicit. They way people actually use a wiki (i.e. quickly looking something up and reading a single relevant paragraph) "tier" is just an unnecessary extra barrier to understanding. I would like to rework the page to either make the definition explicit or (preferably) remove "tier" and replace it with something more verbose such that the meaning is obvious at a glance. Notsononymous36483 (talk) 09:21, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- Okay, it seems like I missed the definition of inventory size tier, it is defined after all. The definition, however, comes after the term "tier" is first used. Not good practice. I would still argue that someone just trying to find some information quickly would not immediately realise what "tier" on its own means, and could easily confuse it with "Class" (like I did). "inventory tier" or "inventory size tier"? Cheers Notsononymous36483 (talk) 10:36, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- After some tests the answer is a resounding... ye~no. I can reliable make the same ship land down to the same captain in Beta Polaris (greetings Vy'keen captain Horo). The ships inside the initial armada are also the same... but the order they land in and when is misaligned. I think this has to do with the new NPC behavior and patterns, so the longer the event chain goes on the more unreliable it is. And on a planetary port the variables involved can be massive, planet included. The ships that spawn above are ALWAYS the same in wave 1. If and when they land is random. The first ship to land... is practically always the same. So it didn't change per se... but it got less reliable. Only ship number 1 is 95-99% guaranteed and the latter are guaranteed in their existence... not the order. Thamalandis (talk) 02:01, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- You are doing it again. The TIER is NOT random but design locked. The tier describes the inventory sizes from small, medium and large... I have no time to moderate all edits right now. I check on it later and revert as necessary.Thamalandis (talk) 17:49, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
- I am on PC. As mentioned before the seed always spawns the same ships in the same regions of space the first time the system is initialized. So the reason you don't get the same ships in your port you had the first time is because it reloads the trade port as if you weren't there. It is thus more likely the second and third reload are equal than the first time you visit. Reason is the game reloads ALL positions of ALL ships in the system and moves them along their trade paths. Ships actually fly from point A to B sometimes between planets. So if you wait an hour... I think you get the point by now. Star ports are much easier to use for this phenomenon as wave 1 spawns right outside and lands bit by bit with the same as before than a planetary port. Down there you already start with a "corrupted" timeline due to landing there X minutes after the system was initialized. So to have a clean test you can't use your first screening. And even then we have no idea how NPC planetary behaviors (they now have more) interferes with consistency "down there". The rule still holds mostly true for SPACE STATIONS and will at least be upheld for that. I might test a planet port later.
- Regarding the tier explanations... I did fight forced "sorting changes" on the Exotics page because I know "people don't scroll", so I am not entirely against your point. We can take a look on how build the page to maybe clarify beforehand. Most of the time this is explained more in detail on the catalogue pages actually... this was mostly ignored for reworks often times.
- I didn't revert your edits (although I would have realtered them heavily if Gorla didn't). One or two formulations were good, like the poor economy exotic note that was missing and I didn't mind the slightly for rich systems... also 2% instead of 1% is actually a doubling of chance. Not that slighty.Thamalandis (talk) 13:29, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- Fair enough. It's true you will have to wait roughly half as long in a rich economy compared to a middle economy. Would you agree that replacing "tier" with "inventory tier" would be an easy enough fix to the terminology? I'm loading the game now and plan to test trade depots a bit (I still can't get ships to land very often in space stations though). Notsononymous36483 (talk) 14:55, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- The main change I noted in Beyond is that stellar battle events like pirate attacks on capital ships are now persistent. So if you don't finish it (and then reload) the NPC will still be fighting that one or land in the freighter fleet. So you won't be able to make them land at all. Finish that damn event first.
- And no, I don't think calling it inventory tier is smart at all. The term tier replaces the word "inventory size". If the normal term is inventory size (or class but it would be confusing), then adding inventory in front of it again and thus making it LONGER than the original term makes it POINTLESS. Most veterans know the tier list of ships, especially if they use the catalogue pages. We do not unilaterally change it on this page. There might be room to restructure the article to make the disambiguation clear early on... but no change in terminology.Thamalandis (talk) 15:20, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
- Fair enough. It's true you will have to wait roughly half as long in a rich economy compared to a middle economy. Would you agree that replacing "tier" with "inventory tier" would be an easy enough fix to the terminology? I'm loading the game now and plan to test trade depots a bit (I still can't get ships to land very often in space stations though). Notsononymous36483 (talk) 14:55, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
Captain Horo 1
Captain Horo 2
"Say hi, Captain!" Captain Horo 3
Pre Beyond[]
This whole page needs a rework. As is evident from the game at release, there are no distinct classes of ships. Any ideas? Brdy724 (talk) 03:58, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
- Agreed, and it seems as though you've made some really beneficial edits to change out the "class types" to visual cues, since it seems as though that's the only thing that's really different about them as far as we know. --Z3ther (talk) 08:38, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
- I have flied many ships during my repair-to-48-slots quest and there are definitely differences, most notable the ship hp. Hitpoints: Trader>Fighter>Explorer; Speed: Fighter>Explorer>Trader. Can't test if there are differences in shield strenth and maneuverbility. --TakaNoYaiba (talk) 17:07, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
- I have added these comparative references to the page. Ddfairchild (talk) 22:37, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
- I have flied many ships during my repair-to-48-slots quest and there are definitely differences, most notable the ship hp. Hitpoints: Trader>Fighter>Explorer; Speed: Fighter>Explorer>Trader. Can't test if there are differences in shield strenth and maneuverbility. --TakaNoYaiba (talk) 17:07, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Tried to add a reference link to the tips I added to the purchasing a starship section, but as I am a new user 'computer say no'. Someone who has link privelages please reference to tinTin15's post 'PSA: Upgrades affect the cost of purchasing a new ship (self.NoMansSkyTheGame)'. Thanks, Johnnyherb (talk) 09:57, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
- The tips have been moved to the Buying a starship page, with a note added on the original page about "for more tips, See...". The reference link you requested has been added on that new page. Ddfairchild (talk) 16:25, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
If the ingame values are rounded down, putting forth a perfect 5 or 0 percentage might be tempting, but it is misleading people, especially perfectionists looking for a true masterpiece. Those poor souls hoping to find a 39.5 without knowing they need a double or triple perfect 40. Oh well the absolute number is the truth I guess. Hello Games is just a perfectionists nightmare. Thamalandis (talk) 06:04, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Technology links need looking at The toastkid (talk) 16:18, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
- Can you elaborate on what you mean? Thanks! Knottypine1979 (talk) 22:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
- Just click on them in the article. He is right, those are stubs or outdated... all 5! The Health Upgrades talk about suit upgrades not the ship shields even. The Hyperdrive area lacks the freighter versions. The one the least "out there" is the weapons page. Thamalandis (talk) 00:22, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- Can you elaborate on what you mean? Thanks! Knottypine1979 (talk) 22:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Launch Cost in Next[]
Concerning the Shuttle's launch cost: I don't think it's a perfect 1/6. After refueling Launch Thruster to 100% on a Shuttle one time in Normal mode, I did 6 fuel-consuming launches (without Efficient Thrusters) and had 1% fuel remaining. Quaestcomm (talk) 02:54, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- I believe you. The game might be rounding it to the nearest .5 perimeter. It is without doubt that it was intended to be 1/6 though. To be sure we need a second test - to see 16.5% vs 16.6666% - so could you do the same with efficient thrusters on a shuttle?Thamalandis (talk) 03:28, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Questcomm, I need proof for this: "additional shield absorb from bonuses is calculated using a base value of 0.5"! The lowest bonus given is 10% ingame by modules and even less for some ships. If that is used you wouldn't see a 0.1 increase at all as 0.05 and below would be rounded down. While a 0.15 of 1.5 would still be seen as if only 0.1 increased at least. Look for a 7-8% ship. By 1.5 that is exactly around 0.1. If it is 0.5 it isn't close to 0.1. If the bonus is visually applied to be 0.1, you claim is disproven.Thamalandis (talk) 12:42, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- I checked several ships now. While some could go either way (depending if you only round down or up), once you reach the HUGE numbers of %, your point is correct. It definetly does not use the default shield value of 1.5. If it uses 0.5? Not sure. But for now that is the closest truth we have.Thamalandis (talk) 15:05, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Questcomm, I need proof for this: "additional shield absorb from bonuses is calculated using a base value of 0.5"! The lowest bonus given is 10% ingame by modules and even less for some ships. If that is used you wouldn't see a 0.1 increase at all as 0.05 and below would be rounded down. While a 0.15 of 1.5 would still be seen as if only 0.1 increased at least. Look for a 7-8% ship. By 1.5 that is exactly around 0.1. If it is 0.5 it isn't close to 0.1. If the bonus is visually applied to be 0.1, you claim is disproven.Thamalandis (talk) 12:42, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
16% would mean 1.5x1.16 = 1.74 (which is wrong) or 1.5+0.5x0.16 = 1.58 (which is possible if it rounds up unlike in ship %) or it could mean 1.5+1x0.16 = 1.66 (rounding down). The game LOVES to round down, it hates rounding up like the plague. Case a) is fully disproven. Case b) is likely due to 6% potentially being 6.74% etc. which would bring it over the 1.6 mark and allow rounding down to 1.6 instead of 1.5. Case c) is also plausible. However a second test with a +27% ship didn't show 1.7 as needed for case c) (~1.77) but did show 1.6 (~1.635) for case b). We go with 0.5 for now!Thamalandis (talk) 15:13, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- The original ship that made me consider the weird shield absorb scaling was the Gravity Mother BS8, which, without any shield upgrades, had a value of 1.8 for shield absorb by virtue of a +58% Shield class bonus. The three cases for that ship would be a) 1.5x1.58 = 2.37 (definitely not that), b) 1.5 + 0.5x0.58 = 1.79 ~ 1.8 (closest so far), and c) 1.5 + 1.0x0.58 = 2.08 (not that either). If we want to really pin down the base used for shield absorb bonuses, I imagine messing around with Deflector Shield Upgrades and Ablative Armour could help with that. Quaestcomm (talk) 19:06, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- The problem is the ship % are rounded down... all of them. So for a neutral test enviroment you really need to focus solely on shield modules in a 0% ship, like my C-class legendary ship Elendis. There the only buff is definetly what you install.Thamalandis (talk) 19:18, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Technology Upgrade Synergy Bonuses[]
The "Starship components and technology" section should benefit new users if Synergy Bonuses are mentioned, along with an example of Upgrades which receive this type of bonus. Kaizensan (talk) 23:50, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
- It is 5% per link of any part that boosts ly (base tech + modules, not the colour engines). I wrote this down on Hyperdrive Upgrade. The real problem is actually the main page... it is antique beyond compare, linking to abandoned pages. No one uses the technology pages at all. Just rework the section and link current contemporary pages... not pathfinder relics.Thamalandis (talk) 02:15, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
Starship tier clarification[]
Does anyone know if the ship tier (S, A, B, C) is fixed or if it is randomised each time the ship lands (like inventory size)? The page as written is very unclear about which it is. Notsononymous36483 (talk) 21:48, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
- Semi-Random. The ship as long as it is in your instance doesn't change. If it lands after a reload of the game it will be different. It is randomly generated but persistent.Thamalandis (talk) 01:49, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Using watermarked images/promotional links[]
It seems some contributions on this page are referring to an external group on a popular social medium in a way to promote it.
Is this kind of habits wished for over here? Shouldn't contributions made here belong to the Wiki, hence refusing resources for which license cannot be used without watermarks? For text/tables, it seems obvious one shouldn't be able to insert the website of his wish whenever (s)he wants... Otherwise, this Wiki would be a gigantic advertisement platform for everyone's petty project. -- Beerbelott (talk) 16:50, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- This harassment is becoming truly pathetic now. I was invited here & asked to put all this up. The first few things taken from my website, the admin here cited that it came from that group. I did the research on it all & we always cite where our contributions have come from. Grow up and move on. Keep this up and I will be looking into legal options, as at this point your targeted harassment may just qualify.
- I took the liberty of properly indenting your reply, another standard across the Wiki (and Wikis in general). Also, please sign your contributions.
- Avoid trolling every comment you do not like and stay true to the matter at hand; here discussing whether content contributed to this Wiki shall be used for promotion of other places, which seems generally insane to me. -- Beerbelott (talk) 19:12, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
- Stop the targeted harassment & defamation of character. Also, you don't get to call my comments trolling when they are not. You are the troll here, not me. You are being extremely petty & pathetic. I have never met anyone like you before. I feel genuinely sorry for you that you have nothing better to do with your life. Leave me alone & go do something better with your time, like actually contributing something here.Atlantisking1985 (talk) 21:29, 4 August 2020
- This harassment is becoming truly pathetic now. I was invited here & asked to put all this up. The first few things taken from my website, the admin here cited that it came from that group. I did the research on it all & we always cite where our contributions have come from. Grow up and move on. Keep this up and I will be looking into legal options, as at this point your targeted harassment may just qualify.
The following is addressed to both of you. Your name-calling, arguing, and bickering WILL stop. And it will stop now. It has reached the point where the admin team at Gamepedia has noticed your activity. They are very close to issuing temporary bans on both of your accounts due to your disruption of normal wiki activity and flouting our wiki rules of decency as posted in our No Mans Sky Wiki:Explained - General Rules. I don't want this to happen as both of you provide good content. So please take this as an honest request for you both to take the high road and end this NOW. Otherwise, I have no doubts that Gamepedia will step in. Ddfairchild (talk) 22:29, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Maximum fighter size outdated?[]
Hello there, maybe someone can change this? I've got a fighter with 48+21 inventory slots. "EG8 Gayas"
- Is this a ship that randomly spawned with those slots, or is it one that you have upgraded? Ddfairchildd (talk) 20:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- I don't know how many slots it got on spawn, but when i read the page correct, it says, maximum on fighter is 38+14 - or are this maximum spawn values?
- Yes - these are the "stock" values when a ship first spawns. Any ship can be updated with extra slots after the fact. Ddfairchildd (talk) 06:36, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
- I don't know how many slots it got on spawn, but when i read the page correct, it says, maximum on fighter is 38+14 - or are this maximum spawn values?
- Is this a ship that randomly spawned with those slots, or is it one that you have upgraded? Ddfairchildd (talk) 20:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- Here is image of starship size limits copied from Discord. I haven't double checked it myself but it's probably accurate. To clarify Fighters, Explorers, Shuttles, etc, all have the same max inventory sizes at S-Class, the image is slightly confusing with that.
Silverwilver (talk) 21:53, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
- Not sure which update changed it but ship inventory sizes changed when inventories were overhauled. Notably Solar ships have less technology slots than other ships.
:^(
Silverwilver (talk) 21:55, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- Not sure which update changed it but ship inventory sizes changed when inventories were overhauled. Notably Solar ships have less technology slots than other ships.
Starship data dump[]
I've been cataloging many of the ships in the systems I've visited, so much information I don't want to bother with putting them on the starship catalogue pages. So I am linking my Google drive folder of ships images and a Google spreadsheet that has a bunch of ship data in it.
For clarity the majority of the image names follow the format "Galaxy#.SignalBoosterCoords - SystemName - ShipName" and the photo mode images have the portal code at the bottom.
About the spreadsheet, it is where I record everything about NMS so it is a bit messy with extra sheets. Also I do not record every ship I come across so this is not good for statistical analysis between ship types and classes, you might be able to analyze the info for ships of the same type and and class though.
Mad_Hat99 (talk) 17:50, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
Bad Math in the Spawn Chance Based on Economy Table[]
Math says that if you have a finite number of items that can occur in an event, the percentage of all things occurring must add up to 100%. The Outlaw Economy chance currently adds up to 20%. What is the fifth event that takes the other 80%? Someone put Large Bold Text around the table to not change without PROVIDING ACTUAL PROVE. Well, I am here going Change the Table so that the Math works first! or put question marks if you don't actually know the correct spawn percentage, because it can't be 5% for each of the 4 class types. IF you have 4 items that can occur at equal value, then that would mean there would be a 25% chance for each. (Doesnt really seem likely since an S-class doesn't spawn every 4th landing.) Personally, I think 85% for C is very likely, but I have no definitive proof.
- The 5% are in place because that is written exactly like that in the game files (proof), and that's also why all the edits got rolled back. Given that there have been numerous reports that it seems like all the unused percentages are going to C, the table has been adjusted to 85%, as it is definitely closer to reality than 5%. Thanks! Lenni (talk) 08:03, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Waypoint Update Mod Changes[]
This along with several other mages related to mods are going to need to be updated, as the max capacities of most mods has increased and the current info is no longer accurate. However I don't think the new max nubmers have been confirmed so I am more just bringing to light that this page is now out of date and will need to be updated as we gather numbers. –Preceding unsigned comment was added by Alkmayix (talk • contribs) at 17:17, 14 October 2022 (UTC). Please sign your posts with ~~~~