How do jump range limitations make the game better? Anaconda's unrealistic hull mass.

[Sylveria]

I'm afraid that I don't own an anaconda and so I cannot check, but just out of curiosity... what is the armour rating of the anaconda given its lower mass and what would be the rating on a Corvette? This is where I would nerf the Anaconda based on other stats and where Frontier might have too.

Easiest way to compare ships is with Coriolis then you can see how things balance out stats-wise. The most important thing to note regarding the Anaconda is its mass reduction doesn't affect the amount of armor it's capable of equipping... in fact, the mass doesn't affect the armor at all.

I love my fer-de-lance and as much as it frustrates me, I understand that to travel long distances I need to travel in a ship dedicated for this and not kitted out for combat. If I want more fuel, I have to give up an internal and if I want a bigger FSD then I should really be giving up a couple of weapon sizes to squeeze it in as I'd probably need a bigger power plant to power it too... And then the weight will go up and manoeuvrability will suffer and all of a sudden I've become a Python. This way we have a nice variety of ships, otherwise we just make them all perform the same but look different. And if I do want to do a little exploring in my fer-de-lance, I shouldn't be able to get it to Colonia at the same speed as an Asp Explorer.

I think the Fer-de-lance could definitely use a fuel upgrade- perhaps bumped to the next level at least so its overall range isn't as limited but it's jump-range stays the same. For a "medium-class combat ship" it's a bit hampered in this arena. I also agree there should be a tradeoff, and the example you gave is a good one.

 

[E-L-Y-S-I-U-M]

... in fact, the mass doesn't affect the armor at all.

Kind of (ish) off topic, but isn't Armour Rating what decreases the damage done to the hull by weapons. I would have thought that to increase the strength of the hull you would have to use more material (increase mass) or use a much more expensive material or manufacturing process (reduce mass and massively increase the price)... If we were to then take two similarly sized ships and discovered that they had the same armour rating, but one was twice as heavy... I would expect the lighter one to be much more expensive than the heavier one. I think mass should count towards armour rating... especially on an older model like the Anaconda.

 

[Titler]

As the springtime of Elite recedes into the past, these forums are more and more dominated by people who have fallen out of the natural pace of life, and as such no longer realise just how unrealistic their perspectives are.

This thread for instance? The Anaconda is excellent at all 3 primary roles, even dominant in jump distance? Yes it is. But so what? The game already requires hundreds of hours to get to it. But once you do, at least anyone can use it. To use the Cutter and Corvette you then need to do the Naval rank grinds ON TOP of that, which might alienate those who want to roleplay for one particular faction or... shock horror... those who don't have the kind of lives where throwing hundreds MORE hours into the bottomless pit of the Elite grind isn't a factor, because time means nothing to you.

So let everyone have an awesome ship to aim for, and the best one to move quickly around in. It's true equality of gameplay to time ratio; every one and every faction can have a Taxiconda. At least, everyone prepared to put up with the ALREADY pandering to the lifeless obssesives who mistake time wasted for supposedly being skilled, and stay with Elite long enough to at least afford one of them.

I'd actually be much happier if the best jumping ship over-all was something tiny and cheap. And it once WAS, it was the Asp Explorer. I wouldn't care if it was made the Sidewinder or one of the Eagles in fact. I'd also add being able to send your ships to places instead of just call them in to where you arrive at and then wait; that NPC sitting around on my roster, eating up my profits can earn their keep and start flying my ships for me when I want them somewhere else maybe. Open up gameplay for everyone!

But this thread is all about sulking that having thrown so much of your life, and your own emotional sense of satisfaction into one specific, extremely rare ship, you can't stand the fact other people can do better than you at ANYTHING. If you'd just argued the Corvette and everything else should have a bit more range, so getting to where this week's version of the cut and paste content, or the cash earning exploits were, wasn't so damn slow for everyone you might have a point... but instead it's just a lot of selfish complaining that you hate the Anaconda, because it reminds you of how self centred your choices were, but simultaneously, how irrational they were with regards to efficiency.

I own every ship in the game by the way. And have my own combat fitted Corvette (21ly, and the AI can't even get through my shields, so I don't need to bother with hull tanking), trading Cutter, and yes, Exploraconda with 69.2 LY range, carrying all the scanners, an SRV and a tiny shield to avoid taking hull damage when docking and landing on planets... Having the Corvette move a bit easier would be nice, but I AM NOT MY CORVETTE. It's part of a fleet, with different strengths and weaknesses, and they all have different ways to make our time together interesting. I build them with that end in mind, and I certainly don't get jealous and angry if someone else can do better than me, or one particular ship isn't the be all and end all.

 

[RagingxPenguin]

Easy answer
Conda has softer armor than the Cutter and Vette.
Its also slower, carries less cargo, lower max shield numbers, mid range in terms of maneuverability, yes, it can get higher DPS but against a fully engineered Vette it won't matter.

Literally the only thing the Anaconda can beat the other two on is jump range and a fully combat fit the Anaconda jumps ever so slightly further than a Corvette. Not sure what people are squealing about.

Combat ships should have shorter ranges. I fly them all the time and it makes sense. They aren't built to go far. They are combat oriented and when combat is the main goal sacrifices are made to meet that goal.

If your jump range is that sacrifice so be it.

Get over it. Add fuel tanks if you don't like scooping or fly a multipurpose.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

Don't worry guys, I got this.

There's a group of fun hating players in this game. Frontier does everything this fun hating group wants. This group likes nothing more than depriving other people of fun. Including limiting FSD range of combat ships.

You think I'm talking rubbish? Wait till this thread reaches page 10

Someone should point out to them that they are having fun by hating and depriving others of fun, which includes their own membership, then they can start hating and depriving each other of fun until they implode. I nominate Ziggy for this task.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Sir, yes Sir.

Guys! You are having fun by hating and depriving others of fun! You now must hate yourselves or stop having fun this instant! Yes, that includes you at the back. You're still having fun and not hating yourself! Cut it out.

I'm gonna stand back for the implosions.

 

[RagingxPenguin]

Sir, yes Sir.

Guys! You are having fun by hating and depriving others of fun! You now must hate yourselves or stop having fun this instant! Yes, that includes you at the back. You're still having fun and not hating yourself! Cut it out.

I'm gonna stand back for the implosions.

What's the point in having jump ranges. Might aswell just instant transfer around the galaxy. If it's for the sake of "fun".

 

[killemded]

My problem with the Conda's jump range is that is it the highest in the game once modded. Its a bit ridiculous that it can out jump a fully maxed out exploration ready DBX. The DBX's unladden hull is 730t smaller with only one size smaller FSD. An unmodded 5A FSD has an optimized mass of 1,050t and a 6a has 1,800t. That leaves the Conda optimized at 734t; 714 for DBX
Bottom line, the Conda should not have a higher jump than either of the 2 DEDICATED explorers in the game. It should either be nerfed a 100- 200t or the ASPX and DBX buffed to lower hull weight.
its out of balance.


*RABBLE*

 

[RagingxPenguin]

My problem with the Conda's jump range is that is it the highest in the game once modded. Its a bit ridiculous that it can out jump a fully maxed out exploration ready DBX. The DBX's unladden hull is 730t smaller with only one size smaller FSD. An unmodded 5A FSD has an optimized mass of 1,050t and a 6a has 1,800t. That leaves the Conda optimized at 734t; 714 for DBX
Bottom line, the Conda should not have a higher jump than either of the 2 DEDICATED explorers in the game. It should either be nerfed a 100- 200t or the ASPX and DBX buffed to lower hull weight.
its out of balance.


*RABBLE*

Doesn't the conda use more fuel per jump than the Asp/DE?

I think I can usually only get 4 or 5 big jumps where the Asp can do quite a few slightly smaller ones

 

[xaisis]

I kind of thought that the new engineers increased the jump range of our ships even further than the old ones.

Is this not the case ?

 

[Pielander]

I personally don't have an issue with the performance of the Anaconda. As one of the premium ships in the game, and as the top 'generalist' ship, I would expect it to be capable of being pretty good at everything, which it is, subject to outfitting.

As for the unrealistic hull mass - who cares? It's only a parameter in a largely unrealistic pseudo-physics based game model. It's the bottom line performance characteristics that count, and I wouldn't say that any of the Conda's stats are excessively good for its price point (i.e. 3 x python/FDLs) and its status in the game.

What I do have an issue with is the fact that the Cutter and the Corvette are not that much better at their specialist roles, yet their drawbacks are nigh-on crippling, in spite of them being much harder to get hold of than the Conda. It should be the other way around - significant benefits over and above the Conda's 'pretty good' baseline, but with some minor drawbacks.

You don't expect to spend the best part of a billion credits on a fully kitted out end-game ship just for it to be so bad at one particular thing that it actively sucks the fun out of it and/or makes it almost entirely impractical to use. It's not necessary for balance. It's fine for a second tier ship like the T9 to handle like garbage, for example, but that's exactly why it's second tier.

I find the Corvette's derisory jump range particularly irksome as it's supposed to be a 'long range' naval vessel. It doesn't need the legs of a thoroughbred explorer, but then why on earth a long range Naval patrol vessel would have a shorter jump range than the cheapest ship in the universe is beyond me. It doesn't fit in with the lore, and more importantly, beyond a certain point, (below around 20-22 ly) it stops being a 'performance' issue and just becomes a quality of life issue.

As for the Cutter, even fully engineered, its agility is so poor that there's just no joy in flying it. It's a game - it's supposed to be fun - billion credit ship - basic quality of life issue - nuff said.

 

[AdriánGuth]

I have had this discussion numerous times with my alliance/wing. How does limiting the jump range of combat ships make the game better? Really..

The Anaconda has a hull mass of 400 tons, despite being only slightly smaller than the Corvette and Cutter. It has the same hull mass as a Clipper, despite being the fourth or fifth largest ship in the game. It has a better DPS than the Corvette, more maneuverability than the Cutter and because of its unreasonably low hull mass, can achieve better jump ranges than both. It is the ship that we all pretty much have to purchase.. and owning a couple does not change how I feel about it. People should be able to enjoy their Corvettes and Cutters more, and visit remote locations in the galaxy without having to pull their hair out.

The Anaconda is the one ship allowed to be unbalanced. Which brings me to another point, how does limiting the jump ranges of combat oriented ships specifically make the game better? Where does the combat bias come from? If a person wants to fly a Corvette everywhere because it is their favorite ship, why must the game be more tedious for that person? Really there is no benefit to the stinginess of jump range that combat ships are targeted with. It basically limits fun factor for no real reason.

Especially the likes of the FDL and Vulture. Combat ships are either given unrealistically heavy hull mass, poor fuel tank volume, under-sized FSD or a combination of multiple. I have never understood the bias that allows multi-purpose ships to have superior DPS AND ease of mobility.

I do not feel that stifling jump range makes the game better. I think people should be able to fly any ship they want pretty much anywhere. It should not take somebody that has a favorite ship that happens to be combat oriented hundreds or thousands of more jumps to reach the same areas that some ships can reach far easier.

I know that Frontier has collectively turned a blind eye towards the Anaconda but why not buff others? Every combat ship should be buffed by no less than 10 to 15 light years in my opinion.

That looks like FSDcomunism to me xD
I DONT LIKE IT. xD

 

[ManRightChea]

I'm afraid that I don't own an anaconda and so I cannot check, but just out of curiosity... what is the armour rating of the anaconda given its lower mass and what would be the rating on a Corvette? This is where I would nerf the Anaconda based on other stats and where Frontier might have too.

Moved to pg 14.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

However people being as selfish as they are, would do anything to protect their broken ship. It will be the ship that ruins every new ship brought into the game, especially any big ship. Is a ship for hypocrites and dishonest people with no actual concern for any balance within the game. They will move goalposts in whatever way possible to try to justify the fact that it exists.

Can you please stop being a parody of yourself?

I got nothing to work with this way.

edit: I'll save you an assumption, I don't like the Anaconda. Got one parked at Colonia, told them to turn it into a museum.

 

[ManRightChea]

Can you please stop being a parody of yourself?

I got nothing to work with this way.

edit: I'll save you an assumption, I don't like the Anaconda. Got one parked at Colonia, told them to turn it into a museum.

No you're just another person with no actual rebuttal so you need to address me instead.

 

[ilo]

No you're just another person with no actual rebuttal so you need to address me instead.

If you count me in, this make us two thinking the same, so you can stop using the singular you to use the plural one, but I waited for ziggy to talk first since he is the diplomatic one.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

No you're just another person with no actual rebuttal so you need to address me instead.

I'm just another person who wouldn't enter this discussion if it was 50% off just this weekend and came with free rubber duckie.

But considering:

A dishonest ship for dishonest pilots.

So aside from the majority of posters on these forums being zealots that seek to censor criticism, I can add liars and dishonorable to the list of qualities.

@Exluna. Thanks for your response, to be honest it kind of came full circle for me. I already knew that the majority of people on this forum are zealots that seek to censor criticism, today's discussion pretty much proves that a lot of this community are scum. That is why it has kind of made me realize that the Anaconda is a dishonest ship for dishonest people. We have these threads where people wonder why there is so much griefing and seal clubbing etc. Because most of these people are not good people.

[...] all because of the bottom feeders.

Don't waste the articulation, they are bottom feeders man it doesn't matter about balance. They don't give a damn about balance or what's proper.

Why are these bozos trying to have conversation now? Most of them aren't intellectuals and they don't care about balance. They represent exactly what is wrong with the gaming community, kind of people that spend 10 pages apologizing for and defending a broken ship. Dishonorable. Let them go find somewhere else to talk.

As evidenced here, the ship appeals to dishonorable people or hypocritical people that will defend their own supposed pursuit of fun factor while embracing a glitch that ruins fun factors for so many others and will continue to compromise any future ship.

So yeah, I am addressing you. I'm advising to tone down a couple of notches because it's becoming a little bit ridiculous and I don't think you're doing yourself a favour.

since he is the diplomatic one.

There will be peace for our time!

 

[znôrt]

I'm just another person who wouldn't enter this discussion if it was 50% off just this weekend and came with free rubber duckie.

you would say no to a rubber duckie??? nah, you're bluffing ...

 

[ilo]

So, trying to make a TLDR; version of these 14 pages:
- the anaconda this
- the anaconda that
- the anaconda is
- the anaconda can
- the anaconda has
- and this is why I want a buff in my corvette.

I think we reached a point where we need a new thread.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

you would say no to a rubber duckie??? nah, you're bluffing ...

Am I that transparent? [sad]

You guys are brutal.