I think you are.
The T10 appears to be an 8-engined version of the T9 on steroids which is seemingly finished and ready to be put into the game.
The Cheftain and Krait are works in progress which are arriving sometime next year.
Never again the T-9
- Thread starter Snarfbuckle
- Start date
I think you are.
The T10 appears to be an 8-engined version of the T9 on steroids which is seemingly finished and ready to be put into the game.
The Cheftain and Krait are works in progress which are arriving sometime next year.
Again, life isn't abour "balance" and "opti" or anything in the same way... If ppl stop to be axed on performances only, many should enjoy Ed a lot more...
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
I agree the anaconda should be rebalanced. Imo she needs mass increasing by 200t at least. (And if only 200t then should also have base armour reduction)
Ooo hang on, did I miss some screenshots? Do you have a link please (and I am happy to be wrong moar ships is always better
)
Would still like to see the introduction of trader-specialised slots - i.e. military slot style internals that allow for addition of only cargo racks, corrosive cargo racks, and perhaps fuel tanks for flavour.
They have the exact same issues combat ships did against multiroles - multiroles perform as well or better simply because they inherently have lots of internals, and typically a better jump ability to boot.
They have the exact same issues combat ships did against multiroles - multiroles perform as well or better simply because they inherently have lots of internals, and typically a better jump ability to boot.
Guys, do you know life and pleasure aren't about optimisation ? T9 is slow, massive, poor jump range, but it provide great feelings if you like industrial design... Stop thinking about "credit by hour" and begin to find something more deep. Mining and tradin in T9 are really excellent memory for me, and i'm on the road to buy and engeneer a new one dedicated to mining, only because it's a beautiful ship
Oh i was not thinking credits by the hour but rather tonnage delivered by the hour.
If it takes me 1 hour to deliver 500 tonnes in one trip and 500 tonnes in the same time span in two trips I rather take the two trips.
Yeah, T9.
Bought one after the Kamadhenu campaign to play following ones and fully A-graded it.
It resulted in me being unable to run away from interdictors, unable to outmaneuver interdictors, outlast damage made by or deliver proper damage to aggressors fast enough.
The jumprange was >>MEDIOCRE!<< at best, taking me thrice the time I could have used when flying an IClipper: Transporter-Configuration, notwhithstanding the time the T9 needed to dock.
The only way to survive even single encounters above "Competent" was to High Wake out of the target system and then to return and try again (sometimes twice in a row).
Sure the cockpit is awesome, the boost sounds mighty and you feel like a an oil greased titanium snowflake amongst all the goldrushed Cutters and Condas. But that was all there was to it.
It ended up with me being blown up by an "Expert" Diamondback with a torpedo to my Power Plant. An opponent I usually brush aside with ANY ship I fly...!
So, I switched to Anaconda for combined transporter-passenger runs finally.
And - while I have fond memories of wishing my shrimp coloured T9 to work properly - I never looked back.
Pity, that...!
Bought one after the Kamadhenu campaign to play following ones and fully A-graded it.
It resulted in me being unable to run away from interdictors, unable to outmaneuver interdictors, outlast damage made by or deliver proper damage to aggressors fast enough.
The jumprange was >>MEDIOCRE!<< at best, taking me thrice the time I could have used when flying an IClipper: Transporter-Configuration, notwhithstanding the time the T9 needed to dock.
The only way to survive even single encounters above "Competent" was to High Wake out of the target system and then to return and try again (sometimes twice in a row).
Sure the cockpit is awesome, the boost sounds mighty and you feel like a an oil greased titanium snowflake amongst all the goldrushed Cutters and Condas. But that was all there was to it.
It ended up with me being blown up by an "Expert" Diamondback with a torpedo to my Power Plant. An opponent I usually brush aside with ANY ship I fly...!
So, I switched to Anaconda for combined transporter-passenger runs finally.
And - while I have fond memories of wishing my shrimp coloured T9 to work properly - I never looked back.
Pity, that...!
Last edited:
Ooo hang on, did I miss some screenshots? Do you have a link please (and I am happy to be wrong moar ships is always better
Rather than screenshots, give this a watch:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdzaqBNeYlg
[up]
T10 appears to be just what I was hoping for so I'm happy.
I lost 40 million in rebuys for my t9, shield made of paper, speed of a turtle and whilst it has a fighter Bay, my expert npc gunner mashed the mothership before I could kill anything. Going to change for a python...
Absolutely no ship is undefendable in PvE.
Give me an intention to use it for, a budget and the PSMs you've unlocked and I'll give you a build that'll last.
Last edited:
Always wanted a T9 right from the beginning. I worked and saved to get one but when the time finally came, it was obvious that the Anaconda was a far better choice in every way. Then the cutter came along and made the Anaconda somewhat useless as far as hauling. I think its a sad sad day when the top hauling ship isnt a dedicated hauler. It was time to change that a LONG time ago. So the one ship I wanted most doesnt sit in my bay with my other ships even though I could easily afford it. I almost bought one anyway but the truth is, it would just collect dust as a nostalgic piece of art.
It's not a question of "balance".
It's a question of the Anaconda apparently being made out of some material which isn't available to any other ship or manufacturer in the game.
I'd love to see somebody try and argue that the Anaconda isn't an aberration or, at worst, simply the result of a typo' when the ship stat's were being compiled.
Rather than screenshots, give this a watch:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdzaqBNeYlg
[up]
T10 appears to be just what I was hoping for so I'm happy.
Wow ok I stand corrected. I watched that as well and somehow missed it
I wouldn't mind so much if the Cobra was also made of the same magical top secret material DeLacy use on the Anaconda.
To be frank, since long time, i don't really think about a conda nerf, but more in favor of a T9 massive cargo capacity upgrade. We need all T-X ships be better in trade than others ships in the same category.
That should be an advertisement for the Anaconda
Upgrade from a Lakon and instantly mask all your inabilities as a Cmdr lolTBH I was stunned the conda got military slots. This was the perfect time to start putting this right
Yes I know some poorer militaries use it but it's a v old ship so logically could easily write in why the conda did not get them.
Also add in extra exploration slots for explorer class ships and locked down cargo slots for the T X trade ship (give a % boost for using the slot as cargo). This all has a logic behind it AND if multipurpose ships like conda and python don't get them it reels them back inline without actually nerfing them
Yes I know some poorer militaries use it but it's a v old ship so logically could easily write in why the conda did not get them.
Also add in extra exploration slots for explorer class ships and locked down cargo slots for the T X trade ship (give a % boost for using the slot as cargo). This all has a logic behind it AND if multipurpose ships like conda and python don't get them it reels them back inline without actually nerfing them
Sure!
The reason the 'conda is so light is because it allows for unique mass balancing. It has a low hull mass with low class FSD - an exploro-conda seriously outjumps an exploro-cutter despite the iCutter having a C7 FSD.
This all falls apart when you add mass. As you utilise the 'condas internals, the light hull means far less against the C6 FSD. So it loses jump range very quickly compared to other ships. A combat laden 'conda jumps basically the same distance as a combat laden iCutter, despite the cutter having a 700T heavier hull.
The T9 itself suffers unduly because it utilises the same C6 FSD as the 'conda despite a 600T heavier hull. If ya ask me, that's not adequate.
IMO the real typo was giving the 'conda a C8 FSD. Why is it deserving of the same distributor as the game's biggest military/combat ship?
Last edited:
Problem there is that the T9 is fairly consistent with all the other big ships such as the Beluga, Corvette and Cutter.
It's obvious that the Anaconda IS the "problem" so that's what needs fixing, rather than monkeying around with all the other ships just to hide to disparity.
Start by doubling the weight of the Anaconda and then, if necessary, give it a bigger class of FSD/PP/PDist if it is to retain it's position as "super-explorer".
But then all you've done is retain its insane jump range, but made it LESS sensitive to mass changes - i.e. it'll jump as far, and jump further than it does now with weight added, especially during trading etc.
Pointless arguing about numbers and trying to make sense of it as weight in all cases are just figures that in part are used as balancing tool for ship performance such as speed, jumprange, agility etc. You do notice all modules follow a pattern when looking at weight, right? And you're asking for realism when this exists?
But sure, add mass to the Anaconda, and watch FDev tweak the hidden numbers that we cant see on the UI to make it perform roughly the same minus the jumprange. But at least we can celebrate it makes sense now, right? Just like the 128T 7A Collector limpet controller.
But sure, add mass to the Anaconda, and watch FDev tweak the hidden numbers that we cant see on the UI to make it perform roughly the same minus the jumprange. But at least we can celebrate it makes sense now, right? Just like the 128T 7A Collector limpet controller.