What gives it the designation “Stealth” on the ship page?

This is an error on the webstore due to a mix up on the internal design page and it should say Light Fighter and has been corrected. However the Stealth part is still valid, in reference to the class of components with which the Arrow can be fitted. Utilizing stealth components could allow the Arrow to be used as a patrol craft without being seen, or in an ambush to surprise one’s enemies.

The commercial states that this ship is one of the fastest and most agile in its class. However, once you try it in game, it handles like a turtle. Is this a bug?

It is intended to have agile handling as described. The current handling is a result of a bug in the current IFCS system that affects all ships randomly. The Arrow seems particularly prone to this bug, but cycling the landing gear often fixes it. We’re working towards making the Arrow true to its intent.

How does the Arrow compare to Aegis’ Gladius and Anvil’s own Hawk in the light fighter role?

The Arrow is more maneuverable than the Gladius, but isn’t as fast. The Hawk is slightly harder to compare, as it is intended to have above-average maneuverability and speed but not in an extreme capacity. Therefore, the Hawk will also be faster than the Arrow (to chase down its bounties), but not as maneuverable.

Given Anvil’s boast that the Arrow is the “most agile fighter in its class”, and that it is smaller and cheaper than the Gladius, with identical maximum hardpoints and components, why would I want a Gladius instead?

Anvil Aerospace built the Arrow to compete with the Gladius for a lucrative military contract. Anvil’s marketing team would have you believe it outperforms the competition in every way, but that isn’t exactly the case. The Gladius has superior missile hardpoints and its dual engines should out-accelerate the Arrow in a straight line. To get the price that low, Anvil included a cheaper turret mount with Size-1 weapons, and users may want to purchase larger weapons to get the most from the Arrow’s hardpoints. As always, balance is still being worked on and is subject to change.

Which ships will the Arrow fit in and how many could each ship carry (Carrack/Idris/Javelin/ Bengal-carrier)?

The Arrow was designed to have a small form factor and folding wings to accommodate fitting them in a carrier. Any ship that is built to be a dedicated carrier, such as the Idris, Kraken, or Bengal, will be able to fit an Arrow. Many other ships will be able to carry at least one such as the Javelin, Endeavor (with Hangar module), 890 Jump, and Polaris. The folding wings prevent it from being stored in a Carrack as that bay is designed specifically for the Pisces. As always, until the parent ship has been completed it is always tricky to confirm/deny some of the older options.

Is the Arrow tuned with the new FM in mind?

The Arrow was tuned and built in the IFCS 1.0 system and will need to be converted to the new IFCS flight model when it is released to the public, as such its current handling (bugs aside) is not fully representative of the finished product.

Will the Arrow have storage space for personal items such as a survival kit, weapons and armor?

In the future, we would like for each ship to be able to store a personal weapon for the player. Currently, the Arrow does not allow for these items, but may include a slot for a personal weapon or emergency kit in the future.

How do you plan to create meaningful balance for light fighters considering the class now has 9 ships: Arrow, Gladius, Hawk, Aurora LN, Reliant Tana, Mustang Delta, 125A, Blade and Khartu-al?

The Arrow, Gladius, Mustang Delta, and Blade are all dedicated fighters and their flight characteristics and loadouts differ. The Aurora LN and 125A can both carry cargo while having combat capabilities. The Hawk can carry a prisoner and packs an EMP, making it ideal for bounty hunting. The Reliant Tana is meant for long range combat and features multi-crew gameplay. The Khartu-al is a scout ship meant to get in and out and use its agility rather than firepower. The light fighter category encompasses many ships, but the role and capabilities of each of these ships vary. We hope each one will fill a niche for different play styles.

What options will we see from the turret? Will there be utility options such as stor-all?

The top turret mount was designed to only accommodate weapons. Currently the attached turret can hold two Size-1 weapons, but it can also be removed to add either a single fixed Size-3 weapon or a gimballed Size-2 weapon. The mount was designed to be flexible in this aspect. There are no plans to allow other utility options.

The ship matrix indicates that the Arrow has 8 joint maneuvering thrusters, against the Gladius 8 gimballed thrusters. The shipyard post on thrusters, however, only discuses gimballed and fixed maneuvering. What are Joint thrusters?

A gimballed thruster has multiple vectors of thrust whereas a fixed thruster has a single vector of thrust. A joint thruster is a subset of gimballed thrusters and refers to the range of movement. A few examples of gimballed thrusters we use are joint, roll, and flex. The Arrow uses joint thrusters, which means the thrusters can change their pitch in a 90-degree arc. The Aurora uses roll thrusters, which pitch in a 180-degree arc. The Hornet uses flex thrusters, which pitch and yaw in 90-degree arcs. There are more configurations of thrusters, but these are the most common. The more vectors a thruster can hit, the more complexity it adds, and generally reduces maneuverability.

Please state which of the component lines (civilian, industrial, stealth, performance, military) the Arrow can equip and what it comes equipped with stock. Are certain components limited to X line while others are limited to Y line (example being: powerplant can be industrial or civilian but the rest of the systems can only be civilian).

The Arrow can use Military, Stealth and Civilian components and comes stock with Military components.

Can we blade the turret for pds?

Yes you can use a Computer Blade to turn the turret into a AI Controlled Turret akin to a Point Defense System, however on such a small ship you may be using up all (or more than 50%) of the blade slots to do this leaving you with no other options to upgrade.

Is the very limited fuel capacity something actively being looked into, or is this the dev team’s intent?

The Arrow was built to be a short-range fighter and mainly to act as a ship deployed from a carrier where it can refuel and restock.

What can the San’tok.yāi do that the Khartu-al cannot and vice versa? What are the advantages and disadvantages? What are the main differences?

In the Xi’an order of battle, the Khartu-al serves principally as a light fighter, scout, and skirmisher, whereas the San’tok.yāi is a medium fighter and direct combatant. Just like the UEE Military, the Xi’an military employs various types of fighters with different strengths and performance characteristics. The comparison between a Khartu-al and a San’tok.yāi is similar to the comparison between a Gladius and a Hornet – one emphasizes firepower and the other emphasizes speed and agility. Particularly due to its lower mass and lighter weapons complement, the Khartu-al is faster, accelerates more quickly, and is even more responsive than the San’tok.yāi. However, the San’tok.yāi carries considerably more weaponry. That said, the Khartu-al and San’tok.yāi are both Xi’an designs through and through, set apart from other fighters by the exceptional maneuverability afforded to them by their distinctive maneuvering rigs. In the hands of a capable pilot well-versed in the ship’s capabilities, the San’tok.yāi is a difficult target. The Khartu-al, maddeningly so.

Is this a true Xi’an military ship or a civilian export?

Similar to the Khartu-al, the San’tok.yāi is a civilian version of the Xi’an military ship designed for export and sale in the Human market. Like the Khartu-al, the San’tok.yāi is an original Xi’an-produced export by Aopoa, and not a replica, reconstruction, or a product of reverse-engineering.

How does this ship handle, maneuverability wise?

In terms of maneuverability, the San’tok.yāi is one of the best-handling ships of its size and weight class – in this case, the proper point of comparison is other medium fighters, such as the Hornet or Sabre. The design of Xi’an fighter craft revolves around their unique thruster configuration, which relies on highly articulated main thrusters. When compared with the typically human thruster setup, which relies on one or more main fixed thrusters with yaw, pitch, and roll delivered through additional small maneuvering thrusters, the Xi’an approach provides superior strafe-movement capabilities and lateral acceleration. The ability to deliver main engine performance on multiple axes also affords some other benefits. For example, many ships have finite VTOL endurance or exert heavy wear on their maneuvering thrusters while engaged in VTOL. Xi’an fighters, like the San’tok.yāi, barely notice such activity, it being nearly as natural to them as forward flight.

Will the Xi’an tech that introduces this new strafing maneuverability be applied to any other ships?

Theoretically it’s possible, but it will likely remain exclusive to Xi’an ship designs. While Xi’an thruster technology plays a large part in delivering this unique strafing flight capability, the overall design of the ship’s entire spaceframe and power infrastructure is also integral to providing the full range of articulation and point reinforcement needed to utilize it to its fullest. It is not something that can be effectively or efficiently retrofitted to ships not designed with them in mind from the ground up. Furthermore, the resulting structural arrangement, with main thrusters located outside the ship’s main fuselage and borne articulation joints that may be exposed from multiple angles, is less durable under fire than contemporary ‘bricky’ human designs. Xi’an engineers still make their fighters as strong and durable as they can without compromising the ship’s other capabilities, but this requires accounting for these requirements from the get-go. An attempt to retrofit a Xi’an thruster rig to a ship that wasn’t designed with one in mind from the start would result in something downright rickety.

Is this a common ship in the Xi’an empire?

As a mainstay medium fighter in the arsenal of the Xi’an Empire, the San’tok.yāi is about as common a sight in Xi’an space as a Hornet or Sabre would be in UEE space. It serves prominently in the Xi’an fleet and may also occasionally be found serving civilian security forces of some of the more powerful Xi’an houses.

Are we getting any cool Xi’an weapons? Xi’an missiles maybe?

The Yeng’tu S3 Laser Repeater that comes with the San’tok.yāi is manufactured by Torral Aggregate and uses Xi’an technology to provide a higher rate of fire than traditional human-produced laser repeaters of comparable size. While powerful, the design that produces this increased rate of fire comes at the expense of a lower maximum heat threshold, leading to a reduced firing duration before overheating.

Will Xi’an ships get their own UI style? (They currently use VNCL UI)

Yes, as noted they currently use a recoloured Vanduul ship UI as a temporary stand-in. We have plans in the future to make all the Alien manufacturer ships feel different UI wise.

Will the ship have a Xi’an branded ship-computer-voice? If yes, will we be able to switch between English and Xi’an?

That’s certainly an interesting idea and while we have plans to record new cockpit audio for all the alien ships, we hadn’t planned on doing them in alien languages specifically, assuming that the export version of the fighter would use human language. Now that you mention it, we’ll try to gauge interest for this feature.

In terms of combat capability, how does it compare to ships like the Anvil Super Hornet or Aegis Sabre?

The San’tok.yāi resides within the same medium fighter weight class that the Super Hornet and Sabre inhabit, so it is designed to be competitive with them. As noted above, the San’tok.yāi’s design makes it less resilient to damage than either of those two ships, and its weapons loadout is lighter than these two specific contemporaries, but not by much. It’s the Xi’an thruster design and arrangement, of course, that make it superior to either of those two fighters in terms of lateral acceleration and strafe-focused flight, while its Xi’an-designed weapons are designed to capitalize on relatively brief windows of target vulnerability. Each fighter is capable in a variety of scenarios and yet each matches particularly well for certain types of pilots: We expect that the Super Hornet will be favored by sluggers and endurance fighters who can maintain steady firing solutions and use their ability to shrug off minor hits to press an advantage. The swift, stealthy Sabre may be favored by pilots who prefer ambush and boom-n’-zoom tactics, using momentum to strike and fade. We anticipate that the San’tok.yāi may be the favorite of consummate dogfighters and sneaky pilots who thrive in furballs and crowded, tricky environments, never giving anyone more than a few seconds to fire before ducking behind cover. Of course, how it all bears out depends greatly on how you, the players, decide to use these ships in practice. We’re eager to see what you can do with them!

What amenities will pilots find on board the ship?

The San’tok.yāi is a military medium fighter, so while it’s big on maneuverability and firepower, it’s short on creature comforts – same as you’d expect from other military medium fighters. If you’re looking for cargo, storage, or living space, you won’t find it here; but then, if you’re designing a ship specifically to go up against Super Hornets and Sabres, you’d best keep your head in that game and focus the ship’s edges on combat!