I see you're recovering well from your triple-sarcasm bypass operation.
Rank lock the 'Conda to expert or master?!
- Thread starter Strangepork
- Start date
Please, quadruple-sarcasm bypass, I don't do things by halves.
The purpose of the gameplay is to entertain the player(s).
ED has no endgame, so that's irrelevant.
A multi role ship like the Anaconda improves income across the board, regardless of profession. It's better at trade, exploration and combat than most other ships below it's class, so it can't be about profession balancing.
Where did you get that information from? Can you link me to the official source for this statement, or are you just stating your opinion as fact?
That was your experience. Other people don't want your experience, they want to have their own.
This is a video game, not real life. Trust funds don't come into it. It's also worth bearing in mind that, while you might get a sense of achievement from grafting for months to "earn" your big ship, other players might get an equal sense of achievement from discovering the latest "exploit" or get rich quick scheme, or just maximising their cr/hr by following advice offered by other players. It's not your place to dictate to others how the game should be played. You also have no idea what goals FD had for the game beyond making it a success. If you have sources to back up any of the claims you've made here, please link to them.
Yes, both of those things and nothing more, because that's how history remembers him. Douglas Bader, that legless dead guy.
No, no and no!
This is just silly! [yesnod]
Right on commander! Congrats on the conda! Now, you'll see why a lot of us sold ours.
Right on commander! Congrats on the conda! Now, you'll see why a lot of us sold ours.
Still have mine. Only ship I've ever sold was a Vulture, and that's because, at the time, I wasn't skilled enough for it, didn't really grasp a lot of concepts that have since become nearly second nature, and since then I've bought one, outfitted it, engineered it and enjoy it where appropriate.
And that's something there is no way to shortcut - experience.
That's the real End Game. That's the real Progression.
So, you rebought the vulture too? *cough hoarder cough*
I did, and I'm not ashamed to admit it - my fleet contains 37 ships, and will likely continue to grow over time.
Only ship I ever sold was my first Clipper, done so to accelerate my move up to Python. I didn't expect I'd want or need a Clipper anymore, as I was upgrading performance (generally speaking), cargo space and flexibility. And at the time (2 years ago), the Python was just a better ship for all intents and purposes thanks to shield bank stacking back then for combat.
I ended up rebuying the Clipper. I still have my original Sidewinder parked in Evaarte.
At least twice now the argument has been presented that Anacondas were intended to be rare.
I'm genuinely curious about where this idea originated? Is there some official or developer related source? Or just an idea extrapolated from the barriers put in place?
Also, I'd like to know how it was expected that they would remain rare over time? Player attrition? Increased losses counteracting positive wallet balances long term? Moving goalosts as the op suggests? What would maintain their scarcity?
I'm genuinely curious about where this idea originated? Is there some official or developer related source? Or just an idea extrapolated from the barriers put in place?
Also, I'd like to know how it was expected that they would remain rare over time? Player attrition? Increased losses counteracting positive wallet balances long term? Moving goalosts as the op suggests? What would maintain their scarcity?
How does this bother you?
Not sure it was implied that it did bother me, but since the idea of intended scarcity is being used to condemn the current time to obtain one, that claim should be fair game for scrutiny, right?
Right on commander! Congrats on the conda! Now, you'll see why a lot of us sold ours.
Sold?
Are we being sarcastic?
Too many years have gone by for me to remember that and it's difficult to find those discussion threads (I just did some searching but really don't even know where to start looking). We're talking literally years ago (a couple of springs ago in my case), with discussions about why the Anaconda was more or less the best ship at every role (including exploration) in the game at the time: Because it was designed and intended to be the end-game ship. The big dog. That was discussed as part of the reason why it was so agile despite its size. It was the ship that would take several months and hundreds of hours of play to acquire due to the low credit/hour state of the game then. This is when ship progression (owning several ships along the way) was the only way to play because income was low ($1m cr/h was considered quite good). It was slow and methodical and you had to scrape and claw to move to the next ship. It was too slow for many and has regularly been tweaked and usually increased.
The game has changed considerably since then. Ships are no longer the end game experience. It's shifted to Engineering which can't be fast-tracked (and a much lesser degree military rank). That's why I'm very apathetic in general to credits and ships; by increasing average income and related options by several fold, FD has generally declared credits worthless. While we see occasionally nerfs to mechanisms that grant $30m cr/h+, we have been given access to single missions with payouts up to and above $20 million. Sometimes people overlook these since they're not making $100 million in an hour, but there is no reason to struggle for money for any reason in ED other than lack of rank or general burden of knowledge for available and perfectly legit activities.
In fact, I'd be in favor of them making all the ships largely free or relatively low cost. Credit inflation is just a round-about way of doing exactly that.
Anyway, you might find the discussions in some of these threads entertaining if nothing else. Different era when we were all poor:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/55428-E-D-Ship-Progression-in-a-Nutshell
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/143416-Ship-progression
I'm sure you can find discussions on it if you look.
I get the feeling that quite a few commanders that could move on to a Corvette/Cutter/both did so.
Personally, my Anaconda gets the least flight time of any of my big 3...and none of the big 3 get all that much flight time for me personally, as I've gone back to small ships that are less likely to make me fall asleep in while in combat. It's a great and well-rounded ship, but I think a lot of people that have owned one for awhile have moved away from it being their daily driver.
Last edited:
+1 excellent post.
Where is the problem? Most of them complain that they are back to sidey a few hours later because they thought, a stock annie is the uber duber^^
If you like it, you can kill those harmless Anacondas but be careful, there are Elite Exlorers/Traders out there who refused to fight and therefor appear as harmless even that they are old veterans.
The most satisfying ship is anyways the Python
Last edited:
I got mine in April of 2015, in 1.x economy. There is no achievement now that comes even close. In dedication, time, trade calculations...
You oldtimers here will know what I'm saying now: I wish FD reinstate 1.0 economy for a month. With ammo more expensive than the bounty, expensive fuel, astronomical repairs, great income of 300K per run, the works.
Just for a month. After that 90% complaints would stop.
Sure, and that seems to be the preferred strategy for much of the content, have an activity barrier in place that acts as a time gate. but long term that can't work to ensure scarcity. Assuming it takes a year on average to get a conda, in 5 years 80% of your playerbase is in a conda.
Cost driven scarcity simply doesn't work unless the game is decidedly hostile enough to cause regular, significant setbacks.
Bringing up the engineers is an interesting point. I mentioned moving goal posts to keep peaks "rare", which of course still fails long term, but that was from a perspective of costs and requirements. Now they've obsoleted the old currency in place of needing various other effective currencies in mats and rank.
Given that we've been told to expect another thargoid related power spike I suppose you could say today's anaconda is yesterdays cobra, a nice ship in it's own tier, but has tiers of ships lording over it in raw capability. Though all the more reason to not view it as needing additional locks.
On a more general note it seems the game intends to evolve by obsoleting past power ceilings, with the engineers hitting PvP hard and the Thargoids potentially segmenting PvE in a possibly similar fashion.
Last edited:
Old timers? Played this since beta and played FE2 to death on the Amiga. In fact, in FE2 you could go from the ELRF to a Panther Clipper in about 8 hours of play and now you want it to take a thousand hours to get to an Anaconda?
Also, if bounties weren't worth the cost of the ammo, what's the point in bounty hunting? Might as well have a barbecue using your credits as fuel.
I think people get a bit carried away with all this kind of nonsense. It's supposed to be entertaining, not a full time job. There is no benefit to the game having an overlong grind for credits and thereby ships. Sure, it might make the small, masochistic percentage of the player base happy, but most other players would likely quit once they realise how unattainable the late game ships are and once the game gets a reputation as a pointless grind fest it will simply die through lack of support.