Anaconda vs Asp Explorer for Exploration

[Some1else]

I also preferred the old way. It wasn't random, for the record, you arrived pointing at the star from the direction you came from. Few seemed to figure this out...

Z...

While I liked the old way, I find that sense the update, I can scoop farther out from the star, with much less heat build up. Maybe it's just me?

Back OT. I have used both, and ended up selling my Conda. While the jump range is nice, it did not out weigh the sluggish handling and terrible viability. For large ship exploring, I use a Cutter. For distance and time exploring, Asp all the way.

S1E

 

[Steyla]

You build is ok, but you could probably reduce the power distributor if you don't mind losing boost.

Be careful with the PD. As I already mentioned before, loosing the boost got my ship destroyed (sort of) on a planet. I used a 1D PD and I could not dismiss my ship when I was in an SRV. I don't know whether this was an isolated incidence. I'd say yes, until someone else is testing this and comes to the same conclusion.

Regarding Annie vs ASPX. AspConda all the way.

 

[GG7]

I would say the VISIBILITY aspects between the two ships being rather significant would make the Asp X a far better suited ship for exploration. At least if sightseeing makes up a large part of your exploration activities.

We all know the Asp X has one of the best full view cockpits in the game, if not the best. Where as the Conda has a very restricted view cockpit with the bulk of the ship out in front of the main windows which obviously obscure your view of anything directly in front and below your ship's center line etc.

The main reasons I would take my Anaconda over my Asp X would be based on the threat level of the flight plan. I am pledged to Patreus at the moment, so I have to be aware of enemy threats from opposing powers while traveling around the bubble and even out a distance from it.

I think if I were to ever make the trek out to Colonia, I would choose my Conda over my Asp X for safety reasons, and the Asp X for focused exploring/sightseeing trips.

 

[GJ51]

Can I ask why you feel the Anaconda would "get there fast"? It seems to me that the fewer jumps off a single tank would require more time spent fuel scooping.

This is my main query really - does the bigger fuel scoop offset the smaller fuel tank? Especially now that we have to navigate around a (scoopable) star to get to the next star system in a jump route anyway?

All the Bucky Ball records are held by the Anaconda. Nothing covers 1 KLY faster when set up properly. A 7A fuel scoop keeps the tank full on every jump. Others may differ, but I always scoop and fill between jumps. I also take an extra 16T tank with me on the Conda so I don't have to re-plot very often when you hit a stretch of unsoopable stars. Stopping to re-plot to fill up the tank slows you down considerably.

When I outfit an Anaconda for extreme range, I'm looking to cover distance quickly to get to a specific region for a specific purpose.

I must admit - I do like scouting planet surfaces up close, but if a fighter can fill this role, then I don't *need* the AspX for that. Also a second SRV hangar is good, especially as I killed my SRV on my last expedition.

I haven't tried using a fighter for exploration, I guess there could be some fun there, but does the fighter really do something the Asp can't? The fighter can't carry an SRV. I doubt I would pay the hit on the jump range to have the luxury of taking a fighter on board, but it is an option.

That's why your choice boils down to your individual play style and what you like to do. I'm a bit of an objective driven player that sets specific goals I want to achieve when I head out. Others prefer to wander and take in the sights. There are multiple compromises between each style and the only way you get a better feel for assessing what it is that YOU want to do is to try different variants to see what works best in a given scenario.

I suggest that anyone trying to get their exploration experience, try a few 5 - 10 KLY runs to test things out before attempting the really long range stuff. When you decide it's time to head to Beagle Point and beyond, it really helps to be in the ship you'll be most comfortable with for the task.

Both the Asp and the Anaconda have a place. You can also do a lot with a Hauler, Cobra, DBX or many other ships now that they can all be Engineered for decent jump range. There are CMDR's who have been to the far side and back in Sidewinders including at least one that did so before Engineers were a thing.

It all comes down to how you want to do it. There's no single "right" way.

 

[Ydiss]

I agree. The Asp 'sips' whilst fuel scooping, the Anaconda takes huge great glugs.

I'm not sure I agree with this. The 6A scoop goes up to 8xx/s. That's hardly sipping. If you scoop right, you should be charging your next jump by the time the cool down ends, so the benefit of the 7A is only for players who aren't interested in scooping efficiently and want the scoop to remove the need to apply an efficient approach every time. It used to be different (if you skipped one or more scoopable stars) but now we can filter scoopable stars so fast travel is equally viable with either scoop size.

The advantages of the Anaconda extend only to fast travel. If that's your only concern then that's the better option, if you can afford it.

The Asp is better for everything else. And some explorers explore, rather than zip from a to b as fast as possible. For many of those players, the greater canopy, higher top speed and agility make the Asp (or indeed any other smaller ship) the best choice.

Both ships are the optimal choice but it comes down to personal preference as to which is best. Neither is inherently better than the other for everyone.

 

[OLd_Sarg]

Asp for me, (it fly's almost as good as a Sidewinder )
I am not very interested in RNG of upping any ship to make it usable if that is needed for the Anaconda it ends it for me, and in stock "A" form an ASP is a great ship (I will do one class 5 FSD upgrade just to say I have done it).

but the biggest reason for the ASP is I have it and can't afford an Anaconda in any kind of usable setup to even try one out...
I think I have 200 million, after well over a year in the game, so I don't see having the credits any time soon, maybe in a year.

 

[Mengy]

I haven't tried using a fighter for exploration, I guess there could be some fun there, but does the fighter really do something the Asp can't?

Not really. I’ve used the fighter a lot for planetary exploration while flying my Anaconda, it’s faster than an Asp but with less visibility, but in the end I just prefer flying the Asp over the fighter + Conda combination.

 

[Peter Thompson]

This might be really petty of me, but I just can't stand the fart noises the Asp does while flying in normal space. I don't mind if the Conda is a bit hard to turn about, and I find if you have a joystick you can twist around easier in a way to make it turn faster. But sometimes I do miss the Asp's manueverability. The cockpit's view doesn't bother me, as I tend to use my orbital camera often to get a better view of anything in front of me.

Overall, I'd say go with what you feel more comfortable in.

 

[NinjaNinja]

I agree with you here. A fly by of a scoopable star and you are full up. Even when close to empty. I love my exploraconda...specifically for the fighter bays and amount of buggys it can hold. I can afford to stop and have a little reckless fun and not really worry about blowing up a fighter or buggy while hotdogging on the surface.

 

[Starlanced]

For a large ship the beluga isn't bad exploring, mine engineered gets 33lys but that damn 4a scoop is a killer, though the huge tank means 10-11 jumps at a time, I can get to the California nebula with only 2 refills but a refuel is 6 min long lol

 

[Boff'in]

i did the 10'000ly round trip in my engineered asp, fully tooled with ClassA everything and grade5 FSD. I had over 40lys. I can make it more by selling off weapons, and degrading my thrusters, etc etc.

And GAWD how boring the experience was - the asp is so sterile and boring.

I did a little run with my Adder giving me my first taste of exploration.
And it was far more a potent experiece.

I'd take the anaconda just for the star-ship feel, and with SRV's and Fighters, there is fun things to do. Just flying and scanning is just that. The SRV gives a change of perspective.

Being able to fly into atmopsheres and scoop from Gas-giants....
AND
When we can move round our ships, and EVA so there are more "game" and more sandbox galaxy, to enjoy whilst exploring. Also add in module degradation, and engineer tools to repair hull and modules properly, so the ship needs to be maintained.

 

[GG7]

Not really. I’ve used the fighter a lot for planetary exploration while flying my Anaconda, it’s faster than an Asp but with less visibility, but in the end I just prefer flying the Asp over the fighter + Conda combination.

Its definitely a nice alternative method of checking out planet surfaces! [up] Get your mother ship in a nice cruise altitude and launch the fighter and enjoy the sights!

I've gotta say... I am really warming up to the whole ship launched fighter "thing". I played with it a bit in Beta, but since the audio for beam lasers was bugged at that time resulting in SILENT lasers when fired (fixed now), I didn't do much with it and never even equipped a ship with a fighter bay until just recently. I decided to put one on my Anaconda after joining PowerPlay and it has been GREAT for that! Not to mention the other creative uses for the fighter like what we are talking about here.

Now when I am flying one of my larger ships and I don't have a fighter bay loaded up, you definitely feel like part of the ship is missing. The whole thing really grows on you over time, and at least I have reached a point where I really don't want to do any serious combat work without the fighter bay equipped!

Speaking of fun uses for the fighter...

(When I get interdicted by a pirate or a Power Play enemy, I really enjoy deploying the fighter with my AI pilot in control of it, give him/her the ATTACK MY TARGET order and then fly off to a safe distance and observe the one on one between the attacking Pirate/Enemy and my AI pilot. Once the AI controlled fighter has whittled down the attacker a bit, I swoop in with the mother ship all guns blazing and finish the job! - I like how FD has setup this whole scenario so that the fighter can do a really good job of distracting the attacker and keeping them from focusing their attention on me and the main ship)

 

[Non Grata]

Since this is an Anaconda vs Asp thread, I won't mention either the Clipper or the Courier.

 

[Allitnil]

Cons:

• Slow/weak thrusters (around 30% slower than an AspX)
• Fewer total jumps per fuel tank (4 vs 7).

I've done a huge amount of exploring in a Conda and I don't see either of those as necessarily being actual negatives. If you have the ability to assign your vertical thrusters to an analogue control, then the Conda can safely land on any planet. However, if you have to rely on on/off controls then the Asp's better thrusters would help - although there is never any actual *need* to land on higher G planets. It does take a little longer to escape the mass lock of a planet in a Conda but it's a very minor issue.

As for the fuel, it is very easy to take on a full 8T of fuel with every jump in the Conda without losing any time. Many experienced Conda explorers don't even bother with the standard 32T fuel tank as a result. I've been using 18T (16T standard and 2T extra) ever since it was possible. Now we've got modded FSDs and can even filter out the non-scoopable stars about the only circumstance where you might even need a 32T tank is if you are intending to do a lot of neutron boosting or are trying to get as high as possible above the galactic plane (or as low as possible below it) since those are the only times you will be forced to encounter more than a couple of non-scoopables in a row.

nb: I'm not especially advocating using a Conda over an Asp. It's just that these are not necessarily practical negatives when it comes to choosing the Conda. For me the main negatives are:

- poor SC manoeuvrability makes a lot of scanning a pain
- lack of visibility means it is a very poor choice if you want to survey for surface feature such as geysers

 

[nanite2000]

Blimey! Great to see all the different perspectives people have here.

I should have done a poll - we haven't one of those for a while.

I hadn't thought about the Anaconda's poor SuperCruise manoeuvrability - it's something to bear in mind.

I think I'll just try the 'conda on some mid range passenger science missions initially and see how it feels.

 

[koop26]

Asp over Anaconda for sanity sake. The Conda needs to lay off the KFC.

But the Asp is a rather dull affair too, with its trapezoidal frame, empty cockpit with just plain ol glass and some lousy engine effects. The Diamondback Explorer doesn't fare much better either.

An engineered Clipper at or around 30ly would be my preferred explorer, and i'd probably A-rate those thrusters too. Winter is coming and all that, better be prepared to run even when 15,000ly from home.

 

[Backelaer]

While I can understand some people find the Asp suffers from flatulence, the horrible turnrate in supercruise in a Conda really turns me off it for long exploration trips.
I tried it twice in the Anaconda, and it just felt liberating when I got to explore in my Asp again. When completely maxed out you can squeeze a bit more LYs out of a Conda, but those LY's are completely negated by the extra time you spend in SC manoeuvring the damn thing in my opinion.

(Disclaimer: I actually love the Anaconda as a ship in general, but only for use in the bubble or on short exploration trips)

 

[RuriaK]

ASP forever <3

True explorers do not need fighters, shields, weapons. Everything must be light. I usually collect materials for jumponium before going into deep space, so I do not need the SRV hangar (besides landing on planets is a dangerous distraction when it's full of data).

So ... ASPX for pure exploration (better turning SC, cockpit field of view, concentration on what is really needed for exploration.
Conda to fill with junk and fly with style.

I think I prefer the old ASP tortoise shell

Tip: Modify a class 2A Power plant for more hitpoints: you can reach the bubble with a hull close to zero ... but with a Power plant below 80% you already start to have problems.

Here is my 52 Ly modified ASP: https://eddp.co/u/YNkrG79K

 

[teradmc]

Since this is an Anaconda vs Asp thread, I won't mention either the Clipper or the Courier.

He says mentioningly...

 

[GTB]

ASP for me over Conda. With the ASP you can turn off AUTO SPEED that stops the ship after each jump (from flying into the Sun) and is nimble enough (as you go auto to full throttle) after each jump to easy line the ship up to fuel scoop around a sun for the next jump. Conda is too sluggish to have Auto Speed stop after each jump disabled. And when you're doinbg something like 200 + jumps heading somewhere - you don't want to be using manual throttle with every single jump