Fractal Softworks Forum

Starsector => General Discussion => Topic started by: SCC on April 13, 2021, 02:45:16 PM

Title: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: SCC on April 13, 2021, 02:45:16 PM
Stirring *** up elsewhere has been fun, let's try it again!
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vqMil0EaPwMdpC2GI5o-0GbACh4yZnqVN27Q7s5lpvI/edit?usp=sharing
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Jet Black on April 13, 2021, 03:35:47 PM
What, no modded ships? I'm appalled. Shame on you sir, good day!
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Alex on April 13, 2021, 03:40:30 PM
Where's the Falcon(P)? Did 5's across the board crash your spreadsheet?
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: pedro1_1 on April 13, 2021, 04:10:31 PM
Where's the Falcon(P)? Did 5's across the board crash your spreadsheet?

From my testing SO Gryphon removed some of the viability for Falcon(P), specially in the Strike departament.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: intrinsic_parity on April 13, 2021, 04:17:57 PM
While I mostly agree, I don't really understand how the scarab and tempest get 2's for strike, especially while omen gets a 3. They can both use all the same weapons as the omen and have better ship systems for bursty damage.

Also, I think you overrate the falcon a lot.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Hellya on April 13, 2021, 04:18:52 PM
Yup, that looks about right.

Every high ranked ship is what my fleet is exclusively constructed of. Mostly just Dooms.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Soda Savvy on April 13, 2021, 04:26:25 PM
Apogee is clearly a 3/5/3/5/4. Doom's overrated, it's just an Afflictor with a 'Press F to blow things up' button.

And how are some of the frigates so high on Sustained when frigates run out of PPT so fast?


No Prometheus MK2?
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Sutopia on April 13, 2021, 04:40:49 PM
Monitor 2 on sustained? Seriously?
I’m sitting in a monitor with 12 minutes PPT that’s not sustainable enough?
It’s also the best player bait ship in the entire game, attracts 60-100 DP of enemy fleet without sweating.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Hellya on April 13, 2021, 04:50:22 PM
Apogee is clearly a 3/5/3/5/4. Doom's overrated, it's just an Afflictor with a 'Press F to blow things up' button.

And how are some of the frigates so high on Sustained when frigates run out of PPT so fast?


No Prometheus MK2?

The Doom is way beyond an afflictor with more than just a "Press F". However, that press F allows you separate ships from a blob (herding). The loadout options on a Doom are Chad, afflictor loadouts are minimal and so beta. Doom can take a hit, the afflictor is a joke here. The Doom can be used by AI because of the bombs, AI afflictor is dead. Doom is faster than any non-phase frigate, hit phase and speed around for 3 minutes at a time.

So no, Doom is god, the afflictor is flaccid. Get a Doom already. There is no ship better. It has all the speed, way more punch, more OP for more selection, more armor, amazing herding (bombs), an ability to hit wherever it wants (bombs), fighter disintegrators (bombs), more flux for longer phasing, more hull, and your mom thinks its hot.

 The afflictor is not even worth capital letters.

Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Soda Savvy on April 13, 2021, 05:04:11 PM
The Doom is boring to play specifically because of all of those things. With the Afflictor you at least have to do some planning for a fun fight.

Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Hellya on April 13, 2021, 05:07:49 PM
The Doom is boring to play specifically because of all of those things. With the Afflictor you at least have to do some planning for a fun fight.

Maybe so, but that doesn't make then the same or even on the same play field. You can win a 200+ k bounty with a Doom alone. You cannot do that with an afflictor.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: intrinsic_parity on April 13, 2021, 05:17:12 PM
I can't speak from personal experience, but there were people who soloed everything with afflictors last release, and they only got better. I'm pretty sure you can still solo most of the fleets in the game with afflictor.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Sarissofoi on April 13, 2021, 05:18:53 PM
Pather Cerberos > all
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Sutopia on April 13, 2021, 05:19:39 PM
Laughs in harbinger triple phase lance delete enemy without thinking. What doom.

Non-officer afflictor is actually a very effective support vessel. For some reason the F range is very far and can easily light a target into pain and suffer.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Hellya on April 13, 2021, 05:30:26 PM
I can't speak from personal experience, but there were people who soloed everything with afflictors last release, and they only got better. I'm pretty sure you can still solo most of the fleets in the game with afflictor.

That is not the discussion, I will entertain the thought though. Since the update we have been introduced to mega fleets full of officers. As a guy that has piloted many afflictors in the day I can tell you they won't be soloing this. They were worth the effort prior to the good Doom.

The discussion was about how the afflictor is like the Doom. It is not. It is a one trick pony where is the Doom is the cream of the crop swiss army knife. The Doom can take on anything and everything. You will need to change it out for a fresh one on the massive battles though. There is just nothing else that can fill its role, it can fill all the others though.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Histidine on April 13, 2021, 07:14:29 PM
Doom, lineholder 4? Ah, a disciple of the "they can't push our line if they're dead" school of thought.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Ad Astra on April 13, 2021, 07:25:04 PM
Well...I mean it does hold a line, a line of purple dots of (as the name clearly puts it) DOOM
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Low Settings on April 13, 2021, 09:35:21 PM
Thanks for the playerbait statistic. Now I know what to pilot
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: SCC on April 13, 2021, 10:43:53 PM
Doom's overrated, it's just an Afflictor with a 'Press F to blow things up' button.
Doom's press to win button is the main reason for its rating. I was even tempted to make it straight fives across the board.

And how are some of the frigates so high on Sustained when frigates run out of PPT so fast?
I rated all ships in relation to their size type.
No Prometheus MK2?
Prometheus in the chart is the Mk II. First column was too narrow and I didn't notice.

While I mostly agree, I don't really understand how the scarab and tempest get 2's for strike, especially while omen gets a 3. They can both use all the same weapons as the omen and have better ship systems for bursty damage.
I think I rated all frigates according to their missile slots, then forgot to include special circumstances. Omen's probably just a mistake, though. I changed Omen's strike to 2, Tempest's strike to 3 and Scarab's strike to 3.
About Falcon, eh, maybe.

Where's the Falcon(P)? Did 5's across the board crash your spreadsheet?
I just copied ships_data.csv, as I was too lazy to put all the names myself.

Doom, lineholder 4? Ah, a disciple of the "they can't push our line if they're dead" school of thought.
Doom is just dumb.

Monitor 2 on sustained? Seriously?
I’m sitting in a monitor with 12 minutes PPT that’s not sustainable enough?
It’s also the best player bait ship in the entire game, attracts 60-100 DP of enemy fleet without sweating.
Sustained damage. Perhaps I should just explicitly spell that out, but it's going to make that one column longer, hmm.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: TaLaR on April 13, 2021, 10:53:39 PM
That is not the discussion, I will entertain the thought though. Since the update we have been introduced to mega fleets full of officers. As a guy that has piloted many afflictors in the day I can tell you they won't be soloing this. They were worth the effort prior to the good Doom.

The discussion was about how the afflictor is like the Doom. It is not. It is a one trick pony where is the Doom is the cream of the crop swiss army knife...

Afflictor's "trick" is deleting any ship in 1-2 attack passes (can be 3 with sub-optimal attack passes), while being pretty much unstoppable no matter what enemy fleet tries to do. That's good enough to solo any fleet with, given enough player-piloted Afflictors (2-3 for single endgame enemy fleet).
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: MrFluffster on April 14, 2021, 07:37:11 AM
Sustained damage. Perhaps I should just explicitly spell that out, but it's going to make that one column longer, hmm.
I'd recommend making a small table to the side with a solid definition of each archetype to avoid any further confusion like that
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Daynen on April 14, 2021, 12:01:09 PM
Atlas mkII has three 1s?   >:(NOW LISTEN HERE YOU LITTLE--

Support 1?  HAH!  Have you ever SEEN an atlas mkII with two locusts and two gauss cannons?  What more support do you WANT, man?  And lineholding?  Go ahead: walk up and butt heads with an Atlas mkII with two mjolnirs, two hurricanes and an ammo feeder ready.  Lemme know how that shakes out.

Harasser 1?

...

I'm...going to allow that.  It's not exactly a phase skimmer. :P

Seriously, though, am I the only one with any love for the atlas mkII?  All that logistics space, all those weapons, cheapest capital in the game and still hangs with the big boys.  ATLAS2 4LIFE.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Hellya on April 14, 2021, 12:59:07 PM
That is not the discussion, I will entertain the thought though. Since the update we have been introduced to mega fleets full of officers. As a guy that has piloted many afflictors in the day I can tell you they won't be soloing this. They were worth the effort prior to the good Doom.

The discussion was about how the afflictor is like the Doom. It is not. It is a one trick pony where is the Doom is the cream of the crop swiss army knife...

Afflictor's "trick" is deleting any ship in 1-2 attack passes (can be 3 with sub-optimal attack passes), while being pretty much unstoppable no matter what enemy fleet tries to do. That's good enough to solo any fleet with, given enough player-piloted Afflictors (2-3 for single endgame enemy fleet).

Doom does what the afflictor does but way better, it also does every other ship better.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: RemnantAI on April 14, 2021, 02:03:16 PM
You are lowballing the Odyssey with
2 Lineholder
3 Strike
3 Sustain
The shields are efficient, it's point defense game is insane, and it's layout means it can hold hold center with a low profile or take advantage of broadsides on the flank.
The Bonk let's you ram Cruisers and smaller ships with impunity, and use your shield like a sword to clip and spin out enemies. You can also sandwich enemy ships between each other.
3,4,4 if you are utilizing it's strengths, which you should be.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: SCC on April 14, 2021, 02:10:40 PM
Odyssey's shields aren't really efficient and neither is its flux capacity big. Strike capacity is alright, but it isn't something that Onslaught (4 medium missiles, TPCs), Legion (5 medium missiles, 4 fighter wings) or Conquest (2 larges, 2 mediums... Though, I wonder if Conq shouldn't get downgraded). Its sustained damage might be fine, but it would have to be as good as Legion's ballistic larges and 4 fighter wings or Paragon's 4 large energies and 2 medium universals, and it just isn't.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings
Post by: Hellya on April 14, 2021, 02:12:45 PM
Atlas mkII has three 1s?   >:(NOW LISTEN HERE YOU LITTLE--

Support 1?  HAH!  Have you ever SEEN an atlas mkII with two locusts and two gauss cannons?  What more support do you WANT, man?  And lineholding?  Go ahead: walk up and butt heads with an Atlas mkII with two mjolnirs, two hurricanes and an ammo feeder ready.  Lemme know how that shakes out.

Harasser 1?

...

I'm...going to allow that.  It's not exactly a phase skimmer. :P

Seriously, though, am I the only one with any love for the atlas mkII?  All that logistics space, all those weapons, cheapest capital in the game and still hangs with the big boys.  ATLAS2 4LIFE.


The MK 2 just lacks PD. Other than that it is a decent early game capital. I don't see it lasting long against these monster fleets.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: Amoebka on April 14, 2021, 02:13:10 PM
Odyssey is garbage, more buffs please. Don't listen to anyone saying it's good, just buff.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: Thaago on April 14, 2021, 02:25:32 PM
* cough * same with the onslaught, those free op and flux just weren't enough, buffs plz
<.<
>.>

[edit] Less memey, could I ask for a definition of "support"? I've been looking at the columns and I just can't tell what its supposed to mean. In particular, why does a Paragon have a 5 in support when it has no mobility, missiles, active helper system, or fighters? Is it the "zone" around it because of its large range?
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: intrinsic_parity on April 14, 2021, 02:31:36 PM
I think odyssey should be at least one of 4 sustained or 4 strike. It has a large missile and 3 medium missiles, and IMO it has nearly the sustained damage of paragon as it can support 2 plasma canons at full ROF, which is maybe 10% less than what paragon can support (based on dissipation). I probably wouldn't give it 4 in support to be fair though.

Also, atlas mk2 is super slow and squishy, and lacks the flux stats to back up it's weapon compliment. It definitely doesn't hang with other capitals, and I feel comfortable fighting them in cruisers.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: Mordodrukow on April 14, 2021, 02:34:20 PM
Quote
Don't listen to anyone saying it's good, just buff.
+1
very bad ship indeed
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: Ad Astra on April 14, 2021, 03:43:01 PM
Less memey, could I ask for a definition of "support"? I've been looking at the columns and I just can't tell what its supposed to mean. In particular, why does a Paragon have a 5 in support when it has no mobility, missiles, active helper system, or fighters? Is it the "zone" around it because of its large range?

I think they are going for the "support" definition used by default builds in the game, they are usually long ranged builds used to support brawlers when they are clashing against an enemy ship, beam builds fit here mostly.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: RemnantAI on April 14, 2021, 03:53:04 PM
Odyssey plasma burn absolutely claps cheeks of anything sub capital.

Oh a 2v1 I don't like?  * Taps F twice and watches enemy ship fly across the screen*

Looks like a 1v1 now.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: SCC on April 14, 2021, 11:43:24 PM
[edit] Less memey, could I ask for a definition of "support"? I've been looking at the columns and I just can't tell what its supposed to mean. In particular, why does a Paragon have a 5 in support when it has no mobility, missiles, active helper system, or fighters? Is it the "zone" around it because of its large range?
Support is mostly everything that isn't all other scores, so I probably need to rethink it. Paragon's high support score is mostly because of its range.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: Maethendias on April 15, 2021, 10:03:54 AM
[edit] Less memey, could I ask for a definition of "support"? I've been looking at the columns and I just can't tell what its supposed to mean. In particular, why does a Paragon have a 5 in support when it has no mobility, missiles, active helper system, or fighters? Is it the "zone" around it because of its large range?
Support is mostly everything that isn't all other scores, so I probably need to rethink it. Paragon's high support score is mostly because of its range.

isnt paragon an excellent harraser tho? especially because of its range? it is pretty hard to not get fired on by the paragon...

speed isnt everything when you want to harrass enemies, dont need speed when you can fight across the whole map
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: RemnantAI on April 15, 2021, 11:48:56 AM
[edit] Less memey, could I ask for a definition of "support"? I've been looking at the columns and I just can't tell what its supposed to mean. In particular, why does a Paragon have a 5 in support when it has no mobility, missiles, active helper system, or fighters? Is it the "zone" around it because of its large range?
Support is mostly everything that isn't all other scores, so I probably need to rethink it. Paragon's high support score is mostly because of its range.

Yeah that 100% Range boost is substantial. well over 4000SU diameter coverage. The short fall is a low turn speed, but that reach is opressive.
isnt paragon an excellent harraser tho? especially because of its range? it is pretty hard to not get fired on by the paragon...

speed isnt everything when you want to harrass enemies, dont need speed when you can fight across the whole map
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: Daynen on April 15, 2021, 01:21:20 PM
  Also, atlas mk2 is super slow and squishy, and lacks the flux stats to back up it's weapon compliment. It definitely doesn't hang with other capitals, and I feel comfortable fighting them in cruisers.

Naaahh.  I blow up capitals in my MkII regularly.  It is slow and yes if you pilot poorly it can be wrecked, but that's part of its greatness: it makes YOU a better pilot.  As for flux?  I dunno what you're talking about; I've been running double mjolnirs since forever.  As long as you know when to go in with ammo feeder and when to back off to keep from getting flanked, it has enough flux to get the job done.  If you're really concerned you could downgrade to dual Hephaestus which is almost as good against most targets and perhaps a little better against smaller ones due to the denser field of fire.  Just don't go chasing frigates.  Enemy MkII's are a bit more of a threat than they used to be too; no matter what you're running, you don't just ignore two large ballistics on an ammo feeder.  That kind of pummeling can wreck you if you're careless.

The MK 2 just lacks PD. Other than that it is a decent early game capital. I don't see it lasting long against these monster fleets.

Whaaaat?  It's got six small ballistics spread out around the ship--ten if you decide to use the middle medium mounts for PD.  If it's fighters you're concerned about, just load up a locust or two on the missile slots and have some popcorn.  I last all day against monster fleets--though I tend to refer to them by other names, like... "non-consensual salvage" or "charitable donations to my cause."

I guess I need to do a video or something; people just seem unconvinced of the MAJESTY of the Mk2.  Perhaps they must BEHOLD its glory first hand...
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: intrinsic_parity on April 15, 2021, 01:52:41 PM
Atlas mkII has worse dissipation than several destroyers lol, and pretty much every combat cruiser has more dissipation and better capacity. There are many higher impact player ships.

However, I was referring to AI control. Under AI control, atlas Mk2 just dies very easily. I honestly just fly up to them and kill them in my aurora, AAF doesn't matter. I basically consider them as cruisers when evaluating enemy fleet strength, but easier to outmaneuver.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: RustyCabbage on April 15, 2021, 01:54:23 PM
I appreciate that the thread title is becoming more clickbaity over time. Here's to more histrionics!
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: Thaago on April 15, 2021, 02:00:21 PM
In enemy fleets I consider Falcon Ps and Atlas Mk IIs to be about the same strength. Falcon is a tanky burst skirmisher, but in the end only has missiles and I've got PD. Dangerous to my backline ships. The Atlas Mk II has excellent gun and missile firepower, but if I can reach it without being interfered with I can pop it.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: Maethendias on April 16, 2021, 10:23:45 AM
oh, while we are at it, why do people hate the shrike so much?

i never understood it... i found the shrike quite usefull
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: Thaago on April 16, 2021, 10:35:24 AM
No idea. It was a good ship last version with some strong points (high speed, excellent shield strength, excellent missiles) to balance its weaknesses (very fragile, reliance on energy weapons, only moderate flux, loses gun duels vs other higher cost destroyers), and then it got buffed this version with more OP. And Pulse Laser and IR Pulse got buffed as well via reduced flux cost.

If I were to hazard a guess though, its a combination of the default Shrike not having a kinetic weapon for anti shield and then builds using Heavy Blaster, an extremely poor anti-shield weapon, as its only gun. And then being disappointed in the anti-shield performance. Combos such as Pulse Laser + AM Blaster, Pulse laser + ion + ir pulse, 2x ir pulse + phase lance... etc etc all work a lot better than a heavy blaster.
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: Maethendias on April 16, 2021, 10:40:30 AM
No idea. It was a good ship last version with some strong points (high speed, excellent shield strength, excellent missiles) to balance its weaknesses (very fragile, reliance on energy weapons, only moderate flux, loses gun duels vs other higher cost destroyers), and then it got buffed this version with more OP. And Pulse Laser and IR Pulse got buffed as well via reduced flux cost.

If I were to hazard a guess though, its a combination of the default Shrike not having a kinetic weapon for anti shield and then builds using Heavy Blaster, an extremely poor anti-shield weapon, as its only gun. And then being disappointed in the anti-shield performance. Combos such as Pulse Laser + AM Blaster, Pulse laser + ion + ir pulse, 2x ir pulse + phase lance... etc etc all work a lot better than a heavy blaster.

but ir pulse, some ion cannons, sabots, and a mining blaster are enough shield damage to not care about shields...

i always have 2 so shrikes in case i have to fight these low volume remnant fleets, cause they are really good against remnant, despite in lack of kinetic weapons

not to mention 8 dp
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: Thaago on April 16, 2021, 10:52:58 AM
Right, I was talking non-SO where flux is still a concern... yeah built in SO shrikes just pile on the heavy weapons and go to town!
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: SCC on April 16, 2021, 11:03:28 AM
Mining Blaster is even worse than a Heavy Blaster.
Anyway, I think that especially with IR Pulse Laser, Pulse Laser and Ion Pulser buffs, Shrike is ok now. I probably need to take a look at destroyer strike scores.
I added the spoiler thing, Radiant and Brilliant to the list now, with other Remnant ships coming whenever I actually use them.
I should also rename "Harasser" to "Mobility" and "Lineholder" to "Durability", so that all the categories are properties, instead of half of them roles, the other half properties. Well, besides support.
I appreciate that the thread title is becoming more clickbaity over time. Here's to more histrionics!
Thanks!
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: intrinsic_parity on April 16, 2021, 11:30:30 AM
I suggested this in my skill post, but I think the phase skills should be removed, and some of the bonuses should be nerfed and worked into other skills. I think the idea of an over-specialized skill like that is kinda flawed because the skill has to be really strong to justify taking it over generally useful skills. I think the phase cooldown reduction should just be removed, and the speed boost while cloaked could be halved and moved into the elite helmsmanship perk or something.

Meant to post in the doom thread

I will say that energy weapon mastery plays  a big part in energy weapons working better as well
Title: Re: 1337 Starsector Ship Rankings [SHIP TIER LIST GONE WRONG]
Post by: Retry on April 16, 2021, 04:17:27 PM
oh, while we are at it, why do people hate the shrike so much?

i never understood it... i found the shrike quite usefull
As someone who had a visceral dislike in 0.91 and found it to be a respectable warship in 0.95, there's several reasons why my opinion of the Shrike significantly changed between the two versions.

-0.91 Shrike had suicidal tendencies with its plasma burn; 0.95 Shrike is much less likely to get itself face-first in an Onslaught's frontal arc if I let it off the leash
-0.91 had 5 less OP than 0.95 shrike, and didn't compare well to 0.91 Shrike (P) which lost OP but received a critical Hybrid turret that could mount kinetic ballistics.  0.95 Shrike (P) stayed at essentially the same strength, but 0.95 Shrike received enough of an OP injection that I don't consider it to be a de facto downgrade to the pirate version.
-Many energy weapons relevant to the Shrike itself were significantly buffed in various ways.  IR Pulse received a large flux discount, Pulse Laser received a smaller flux discount, Ion Pulser received a damage+EMP boost on top of a slight range buff, Burst Lasers received a significant flux discount.  Taken with the Shrike's OP buff and excluding officer buffs, a 0.91 Shrike with 0.91 weapons is much weaker than a 0.95 Shrike with 0.95 weapons.
-Fighters are significantly weaker in 0.95 (Sparks & Thunders especially so), so Shrikes (or other destroyers/frigates) melting away the moment I turn my head doesn't really happen nowadays.
-New officer skills synergize well with smaller ships, as well as energy-dominated ships like Shrikes.  Energy Weapon Mastery in particular is no joke: Up to +50% damage to energy weapons at the Shrike's most common range brackets; no equivalent existed in 0.91.  T5L is also a slight upgrade over 0.91's System Expertise, yielding 6 extra vents in comparison, even if one doesn't take advantage of the S-mod system on the shrike itself.