Star Citizen Asgard vs Valkyrie: Which Dropship Should You Choose?
The Anvil Asgard and Anvil Valkyrie solve different versions of the same battlefield-transport problem.
Choose the Asgard if the mission revolves around a heavy ground vehicle, a small flight crew, strong pilot-controlled firepower, or using the bay for up to 180 SCU when no vehicle is aboard.
Choose the Valkyrie if the mission revolves around infantry. Its defining advantage is accommodation for up to 20 soldiers, substantially more weapon storage, and broader crew-operated turret coverage around the ship.
CIG's own Asgard Q&A makes this distinction directly: the Asgard trades the Valkyrie's crew accommodation and dedicated drop seats for a bay designed around a Nova-sized vehicle or an Atlas-family platform, while shifting more of the weapons under pilot control.
Alpha 4.10.2-LIVE.12881860 is the current LIVE build. The implementation-level ship values used below come from version-locked Alpha 4.10.1-LIVE.12660092 records rather than being relabeled as 4.10.2 extracted data.
Asgard vs Valkyrie at a Glance
| Specification | Asgard | Valkyrie |
|---|---|---|
| Primary strength | Heavy vehicle deployment | Infantry deployment |
| Current Ship Matrix / vehicle-data crew | 2 | 5 |
| Dedicated troop-drop focus | No dedicated Valkyrie-style drop seats | Up to 20 soldiers |
| Cargo | 180 SCU | 90 SCU |
| Dimensions — Ship Matrix / 4.10.1 comparison layer | 48 × 38 × 12 m | 48 × 38 × 12 m |
| SCM speed — Ship Matrix / 4.10.1 comparison layer | 203 m/s | 207 m/s |
| Max / NAV speed | 1,075 m/s | 1,110 m/s |
| Hull HP | 77,000 | 90,053 |
| Shield HP | 21,120 | 21,120 |
| Beds | 1 | 4 |
| Rifle slots | 5 | 20 |
| Standard ship value / MSRP | $350 | $375 |
| Recorded in-game price | 17,860,500 aUEC | 19,845,000 aUEC |
For an apples-to-apples comparison, the dimension row above uses the current RSI Ship Matrix / Alpha 4.10.1 implementation layer. Both publish 48 × 38 × 12 m for the Asgard, and the Valkyrie's 48 × 38 × 12 m agrees across the current Ship Matrix and cited implementation record.
Asgard dimension source boundary: RSI's separate current Anvil Asgard feature/technical specification publishes a different set: 48.7 m length, 34.1 m width, 15.5 m height landed, and 14.1 m height in flight. Current RSI surfaces therefore do not provide one fully consistent Asgard dimension set. This comparison does not silently reconcile the discrepancy or assume that either current first-party surface has authoritatively superseded the other.
Asgard SCM-speed source boundary: the current RSI Ship Matrix and the cited Alpha 4.10.1 implementation record both report 203 m/s SCM, which is why the comparison table uses 203 m/s. However, RSI's separately published Asgard technical sheet lists 207 m/s SCM. Current first-party Asgard sources are therefore not fully consistent on SCM speed, and this comparison does not silently treat either value as universally authoritative.
The table makes the broad choice look simple, but the most important differences are not the small speed differences or the raw hull-HP gap. They are what you are transporting, how many players you have, and who controls the weapons during the approach.
The Core Difference: Vehicles vs Troops
The Asgard is the stronger choice when the operation begins with:
"We need to bring the vehicle."
The Valkyrie is the stronger choice when it begins with:
"We need to bring the squad."
CIG specifically states that the Asgard can accommodate a single Nova-tank-sized vehicle or an Atlas-family vehicle such as the Ballista, Spartan, or Centurion. That capability comes at the expense of the troop accommodations and dedicated drop seats found in the Valkyrie.
The Valkyrie, by contrast, is explicitly designed around personnel deployment. RSI describes it as carrying up to 20 soldiers as well as a vehicle, while the original Valkyrie Q&A states that each of its twenty troop seats has a weapon rack for one primary weapon. Current Alpha 4.10.1 implementation data separately exposes 20 rifle-storage positions.
That produces two very different ground operations.
A Valkyrie can arrive with a sizable infantry element ready to dismount and fight.
An Asgard arrives with fewer people but can deliver a piece of heavy armor that changes what those people can do after landing.
Neither is universally better. The payload determines the winner.
Vehicle Transport: Asgard Wins
For heavy vehicle deployment, the Asgard is the clear choice.
Its defining bay was designed around one Nova-sized vehicle or an Atlas-family platform such as the Ballista, Spartan, or Centurion.
That matters because "vehicle capable" can mean very different things in Star Citizen.
A bay suitable for a supporting ground vehicle gives infantry mobility after landing. A bay built around a Nova-sized asset allows the transported vehicle itself to become the centerpiece of the ground operation.
This makes the Asgard better suited to:
- armored assaults;
- deploying a Nova to a surface objective;
- transporting a Ballista for anti-air coverage;
- moving a Centurion or Spartan as part of a small combined-arms group;
- missions where the spacecraft mainly exists to get a serious ground asset into position.
Those first-party examples establish the intended vehicle role; they should not be extrapolated into unsupported claims about exact combinations of multiple heavy vehicles.
The Valkyrie remains useful when troops need a supporting vehicle, but if heavy armor is non-negotiable, the Asgard is the more direct Anvil solution.
Winner: Asgard
Troop Transport: Valkyrie Wins Easily
The result reverses when the payload is people.
CIG explicitly says the Asgard gives up the Valkyrie's crew accommodation and dedicated drop seats. Its current Ship Matrix and Alpha 4.10.1 implementation reference both list a ship crew of two.
The Valkyrie is built around infantry deployment and is described as transporting up to 20 soldiers. Current Ship Matrix and Alpha 4.10.1 data separately list a ship crew of five, so the twenty-person troop role should not be confused with operating Crew Size.
Its equipment storage supports the same mission. CIG's Valkyrie Q&A specifies a weapon rack for every one of the twenty troop seats, and the current implementation record exposes 20 rifle slots. The Valkyrie also has four beds in the cited 4.10.1 data, compared with one on the Asgard.
For an organization moving a squad to a bunker, settlement, contested landing zone, or PvP ground objective, the Valkyrie's interior capacity is not wasted space. It is the reason to bring the ship.
If your group only has two or three players, however, much of that capacity will remain empty.
Winner: Valkyrie
Cargo: 180 SCU vs 90 SCU
The Asgard carries 180 SCU, exactly twice the Valkyrie's 90 SCU in both the current Ship Matrix comparison layer and the cited Alpha 4.10.1 implementation records.
That does not mean the Asgard has a separate 180 SCU freighter hold alongside its vehicle bay.
CIG states that the Asgard's 180 SCU grid occupies the same physical area as the vehicle storage, so loading a large ground vehicle reduces usable cargo capacity. The full heavy-vehicle payload and the full 180 SCU should not be treated as simultaneously guaranteed capacities.
This makes the Asgard unusually flexible rather than secretly turning it into a dedicated cargo ship.
On a vehicle mission, the bay serves the vehicle.
On another night, that same volume can become a meaningful 180 SCU cargo area.
The Valkyrie's 90 SCU remains useful for supplies, mission equipment, recovered material, or mixed ground operations, but the Asgard has the stronger cargo fallback when no large vehicle is being transported.
Neither should be chosen over a purpose-built freighter purely because of SCU capacity. Both devote significant hull volume and design complexity to battlefield deployment rather than maximizing freight efficiency.
Winner: Asgard
Solo Use: Asgard Is Much Better
This is one of the largest practical differences between the two ships.
The current Asgard first-party specification gives the pilot one dual-gimbal mount carrying two Size 3 weapons plus four additional single Size 3 mounts, for six pilot-controlled Size 3 weapons total. It also lists a bespoke missile rack carrying 16 Size 3 missiles.
That allows one player to retain most of the ship's forward offensive identity.
The Asgard also has a manual/manned turret with two Size 4 weapons, but that is a separate crew-operated position and should not be treated as pilot-controlled in the same way as the six forward Size 3 guns.
Solo engineering still creates additional workload, but the Asgard does not lose nearly all of its offensive utility simply because a second player is absent.
The Valkyrie distributes far more of its weapon coverage across additional stations.
Its current architecture includes:
- a pilot-controlled dual Size 3 mount;
- two manned turrets with two Size 3 weapons each;
- two remote weapon turrets carrying one Size 4 weapon each;
- additional side/door weapon positions.
That is useful with crew and inefficient without them.
A solo Valkyrie pilot still gets the transport hull, cargo, troop capacity, vehicle space, and pilot guns, but much of the ship's broader combat coverage becomes inactive.
The Asgard therefore gives a solo owner a much larger share of its offensive capability directly from the pilot seat. This is an editorial gameplay judgment, not an official minimum-efficiency rating.
Winner: Asgard
Small-Crew Use: Asgard Again
With two players, the Asgard closely matches its current two-person crew specification.
CIG defines the basic roles clearly: the pilot handles the pilot-controlled weapons, while the second operator can use the lower manual turret or deal with engineering work as needed.
The lower turret carries two Size 4 weapons and provides coverage the pilot's forward-biased battery does not.
The Valkyrie's current Ship Matrix and implementation data list five crew, alongside substantially more distributed weapon infrastructure. Two players can certainly operate it, but they cannot exploit its broader turret network simultaneously.
That makes the Asgard easier to justify for a regular duo.
This does not make two players an official minimum-efficiency threshold; it is a practical comparison based on how much of each ship's current architecture two people can operate at once.
Winner: Asgard
Larger Crew and All-Around Defense: Valkyrie Wins
Give the Valkyrie the players it needs and its distributed weapon architecture becomes an advantage.
CIG directly contrasts the ships by explaining that the Asgard concentrates significant firepower forward, while the Valkyrie's turret arrangement gives it greater coverage outside the front arc.
That makes the Valkyrie better at maintaining defensive pressure without constantly rotating the entire spacecraft toward the threat.
During a hot landing, one player can fly while other operators cover different directions. During extraction, gunners can continue tracking threats as the pilot concentrates on terrain, positioning, and getting the ship out.
The Asgard's lower dual-Size-4 turret remains useful, but the overall philosophy is more forward-biased. Its 16 Size 3 missiles give the pilot another option against threats, although CIG notes that missile lock still depends on the pilot's view before launch.
The Valkyrie therefore makes better use of a larger combat crew.
Winner: Valkyrie
Firepower: It Depends on Who Is Aboard
A simple gun-count comparison misses the most important gameplay difference.
The Asgard puts more authority in the pilot's hands.
The Valkyrie distributes more of its weapon coverage across the crew.
For a solo pilot, the Asgard has the clearer advantage because its current first-party specification places six Size 3 weapons and the missile rack under pilot control.
For a properly crewed dropship, the Valkyrie's two manned dual-Size-3 turrets, two Size 4 remote weapon turrets, pilot dual-Size-3 mount, and side/door weapon positions give it broader distributed coverage around the hull.
The Asgard still has substantial multicrew firepower. Its lower manual turret carries two Size 4 weapons, but those weapons remain distinct from the six pilot-controlled forward guns.
The decision is therefore not simply "which ship has more guns?"
It is:
Do you want concentrated pilot firepower or distributed crew coverage?
Solo or duo: Asgard.
Larger combat crew: Valkyrie has the more useful coverage model.
Survivability: Closer Than the Roles Suggest
Both ships have 21,120 shield HP in the same Alpha 4.10.1 version-locked implementation layer.
The extracted hull HP figures are:
These are raw implementation-level hull figures, not a complete model of real combat durability.
That gives the Valkyrie the raw-hull advantage.
It does not justify turning the HP difference into an overall survivability percentage or claiming the Valkyrie is proportionally harder to kill. Both are battlefield transports whose real survival depends on positioning, crew response, component damage, threat suppression, and the circumstances of the engagement.
The Asgard's current Alpha 4.10.2 ownership picture also includes a known engineering bug: RSI lists Asgard coolers among components that may be more flammable than intended. This is explicitly a current known issue rather than intentional permanent balancing, so it should not be treated as evidence that the Valkyrie is inherently designed to be more survivable.
Raw-hull advantage: Valkyrie
Flight Performance: Valkyrie Has a Small Edge
Using the current Ship Matrix / Alpha 4.10.1 implementation comparison layer, the Valkyrie records 207 m/s SCM and 1,110 m/s maximum speed versus the Asgard's 203 m/s SCM and 1,075 m/s maximum speed.
RSI's separately published Asgard technical sheet still lists 207 m/s SCM, so current first-party Asgard sources are not fully consistent on SCM speed. This article therefore does not claim that every current official source agrees the Valkyrie has a 4 m/s SCM advantage.
The Valkyrie still retains the higher cited maximum speed in the Ship Matrix / implementation layer and slightly higher extracted pitch, yaw, roll, forward-boost, and reverse-boost values in the cited 4.10.1 records.
These differences are real within that comparison layer but minor compared with the payload and crew distinction.
Both are large dropships, and neither becomes the better purchase simply because one has a small mobility advantage.
Winner: Valkyrie, narrowly — based on the current Ship Matrix / Alpha 4.10.1 implementation comparison layer.
PvE: Asgard for Vehicle Missions, Valkyrie for Group Ground Operations
For PvE, the correct choice depends on what happens after landing.
Choose the Asgard for:
- Nova or Atlas-family deployment;
- bunker missions where a serious ground vehicle is part of the plan;
- solo or duo combined-arms sessions;
- cargo-plus-vehicle flexibility;
- operations where the pilot must retain meaningful firepower without a large crew.
A one- or two-player group can access more of the Asgard's current weapon architecture than it can from a Valkyrie. That is an editorial recommendation based on the control layout, not an official crew-efficiency claim.
Choose the Valkyrie for:
- larger FPS groups;
- coordinated bunker assaults;
- infantry transport with supporting vehicle capability;
- extraction missions involving many players;
- operations where several gunners are available.
A Valkyrie with twenty empty troop positions and unoccupied turrets is an inefficient use of its specialization.
A Valkyrie supporting a genuine infantry operation is doing exactly what it was designed to do.
PvE winner: depends on payload.
PvP: The Payload Question Matters Even More
In organized PvP, these ships should be judged by whether they accomplish the objective, not whether they win a prolonged dogfight.
The Asgard is the stronger choice when the ground plan depends on getting a Nova, Ballista, Centurion, or Spartan into the fight. Its two-person current crew specification also means fewer players are required to remain in core ship roles than aboard the Valkyrie.
The Valkyrie is stronger when a coordinated infantry element needs to arrive together and the flight crew can keep several weapon stations active during insertion or extraction.
The Valkyrie's broader turret coverage is particularly valuable when enemies attack from multiple angles, while the Asgard has more reason to keep its nose oriented toward the threat.
An escort improves both ships substantially.
A dropship forced to chase enemy fighters is no longer concentrating on its primary job: getting the payload to the objective.
Price: Asgard Costs Less
The Alpha 4.10.1 version-locked records list:
The same version-locked acquisition records list:
Both are recorded at Astro Armada, Area18, ArcCorp in that data layer.
The Asgard record also contains $325 Warbond SKU records, but those are separate promotional/version-recorded price entries. They should not be treated as its normal $350 reference value or as evidence of a permanently available current Warbond offer.
On both reference ship value and the cited in-game purchase data, the Asgard costs less.
That makes the Valkyrie's value case heavily dependent on actually using its infantry capacity and broader multicrew architecture.
Winner: Asgard
Asgard vs Valkyrie: Which Is Better for Solo Players?
The Asgard.
This is one of the least ambiguous parts of the comparison.
Its current crew specification is two, and the pilot retains six forward Size 3 weapons plus the missile rack. The Valkyrie lists five crew and spreads far more of its weapon coverage across additional turret positions.
Neither is an ideal substitute for a dedicated solo combat ship.
But if the buyer specifically wants a dropship or vehicle transport and normally plays alone, the Asgard wastes less of its offensive architecture.
That is an editorial ownership recommendation, not an official claim that the Asgard has a one-player minimum or that the Valkyrie cannot be flown solo.
Asgard vs Valkyrie: Which Is Better for an Org?
The answer depends on what the org is deploying.
A large infantry group benefits much more from the Valkyrie's twenty-person troop role, twenty weapon racks, multiple crew-operated weapons, and broader coverage.
A smaller combined-arms team may get more from the Asgard because its core ship crew is two while the heavy vehicle becomes the main ground asset.
An organization may reasonably use both.
A Valkyrie can move the infantry element.
An Asgard can bring the heavy armor.
That is a better way to think about the pair than trying to crown one as the universally superior Anvil dropship.
Choose the Asgard If...
Choose the Asgard if your priorities are:
- transporting a Nova or Atlas-family vehicle;
- operating with a small crew;
- keeping most offensive firepower under pilot control;
- having 180 SCU available when the shared vehicle/cargo bay is used for freight instead of a large vehicle;
- spending less in reference ship value or the cited aUEC acquisition data;
- running vehicle-first bunker, ground-combat, or combined-arms missions.
For deeper specifications, vehicle fit, cargo behavior, engineering, and ownership details, see LTI Hangar's existing Star Citizen Asgard Guide.
Choose the Valkyrie If...
Choose the Valkyrie if your priorities are:
- transporting a large infantry group;
- using dedicated troop accommodations;
- equipping that group from twenty weapon-storage positions;
- having several players available to operate distributed weapon stations;
- broader weapon coverage outside the forward arc;
- using a supporting vehicle alongside infantry rather than making a heavy vehicle the centerpiece of the mission.
The Valkyrie remains the more traditional infantry-first dropship, while the Asgard occupies the heavy-vehicle role.
For a broader category comparison, see LTI Hangar's Best Dropships in Star Citizen.
FAQ
Is the Asgard better than the Valkyrie?
The Asgard is better for heavy vehicles, solo/duo-oriented use, cargo flexibility, and concentrated pilot-controlled firepower. The Valkyrie is better for large infantry deployment and multicrew defensive coverage. CIG designed the Asgard around a different payload and crew philosophy rather than as a universal Valkyrie upgrade.
Can the Valkyrie carry a Nova like the Asgard?
CIG explicitly confirms Nova-sized capability for the Asgard. The same Asgard Q&A presents that larger vehicle capability as a major distinction from the Valkyrie, so the Valkyrie should not be treated as having equivalent Nova transport capability without separate current evidence.
Which has more cargo, the Asgard or Valkyrie?
The Asgard has 180 SCU, while the Valkyrie has 90 SCU in the current Ship Matrix and cited 4.10.1 implementation layer. The Asgard's 180 SCU grid shares the vehicle-storage area, so carrying a large vehicle reduces the cargo space available.
Which is better solo?
The Asgard. Its current first-party specification gives the pilot six Size 3 weapons and the missile rack, while the Valkyrie relies much more heavily on additional turret operators for broader combat coverage. This is an editorial recommendation based on the current control layout rather than an official solo-efficiency rating.
Which ship carries more troops?
The Valkyrie. RSI describes it as carrying up to 20 soldiers, while CIG states that the Asgard gives up the Valkyrie's dedicated drop-seat accommodation. The twenty-soldier figure is troop capacity, not Crew Size 20.
Which one costs less?
The Asgard. The cited Alpha 4.10.1 records list a $350 standard/reference ship value and 17,860,500 aUEC purchase price for the Asgard versus $375 and 19,845,000 aUEC for the Valkyrie.
Final Verdict
The Asgard is the better ship for most solo players, duos, and vehicle-first groups. It asks fewer players to fill its core ship roles, gives the pilot far more direct firepower, carries twice the current cargo capacity when the shared bay is being used for freight rather than a large vehicle, costs less in the cited reference data, and has explicit first-party support for Nova-sized and Atlas-family ground vehicles.
The Valkyrie is still the better troop dropship. Twenty-person deployment capacity, twenty weapon-storage positions, more crew-operated weapon stations, and broader turret coverage give it capabilities the Asgard intentionally trades away rather than universally improving upon.
So the decision remains straightforward:
Choose the Asgard if the mission is built around the vehicle.
Choose the Valkyrie if the mission is built around the squad.
For players comparing the wider category rather than only these two Anvil ships, see LTI Hangar's Best Dropships in Star Citizen.
