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

[WR3ND]

It's a consequence of 400t hull mass, m8, versus the FSD class. FSD range is a calculated value based on the ratio of FSD class and hull mass. It's one of the few genuinely calculated values. The reason it's a defining mechanic, is because the hull mass of the anaconda is 400t.

It's the only ship that is less than 900t hull mass with a class 6 FSD. The defining characteristic of the Anaconda, is the developer used the incorrect sized FSD drive. Congratulations. Thanks for pointing out the obvious.

Wrong in a sense. I agree that it seems a little off, but am not convinced that isn't what they were going for.

Would have generally preferred they use a more consistent ship model and designed ships around that, but we are where we are. I don't mind specialization, but I think it would make sense if it were within more consistently comparable perimeters that make sense in the game.

With out the grind to meta elite builds and the like, people would have to be content playing the game more for what it is rather than what they hope it to be.

 

[ManRightChea]

@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.

Vast majority of my discussion has been people lying or trying to apologize for how broken the Anaconda is. Then they want to get mad at me for calling them what they are. They are dishonorable. Not the kind of pilots I would ever want to hang out with. Only about 8 people were willing to be honest.

I'm glad that I earned my Corvette and my Cutter nice and slow. Survived the scumbags etc. However this community represents FD, and these are the kind of people they defend. Dishonest, dishonorable, zealous people, different rules for some over others. Pretty immature to be honest, I wouldn't have expected it when I made the thread earlier today. It's a broken ship, just as broken as it's pilots. Let them sell their dignity for it, weren't worth the words in hindsight.

The Anaconda will ruin any future big ship, all because of the bottom feeders.

 

[Mengy]

It's a consequence of 400t hull mass, m8, versus the FSD class. FSD range is a calculated value based on the ratio of FSD class and hull mass. It's one of the few genuinely calculated values. The reason it's a defining mechanic, is because the hull mass of the anaconda is 400t.

It's the only ship that is less than 900t hull mass with a class 6 FSD. The defining characteristic of the Anaconda, is the developer used the incorrect sized FSD drive. Congratulations. Thanks for pointing out the obvious.

Yep. For comparison sake, the multipurpose large Anaconda at 400T is lighter than:

- The Federal Assault Ship (a medium ship, 480T)
- The Federal Dropship (a medium ship, 580T)
- The Federal Gunship (a medium ship, 580T)

And it's hull mass is equal to the Imperial Clipper. Ever compare an Imperial Clipper side by side to an Anaconda? The Clipper is much smaller in size not to mention far lesser in internals and hardpoints, as are the three Fed ships above.

Ideally the Anaconda's hull mass should sit somewhere between the Clipper and the Corvette, but a bit less than the Corvette. Around 700-800T would be about right when taking the rest of the fleet into consideration. Heck until today the T7 had a heavier hull mass than the Anaconda, ever sit a T7 next to an Anaconda?

 

[kofeyh]

Wrong in a sense. I agree that it seems a little off, but am not convinced that isn't what they were going for.

Nothing else at the same mass has a class 6. Nothing. Not even true exploration ships. In fact, we have to exceed 900t to get to the next ship with a class 6 FSD. Which is more than twice the base mass. The reality is; it's too light for the FSD class elected. 500-600t would have dropped it about in the right spot and not been so laughable compared to physically smaller medium ships, that have more mass.

Meanwhile, the Python was handed about the most aggressive nerf Frontier has ever done. Apparently if a ship is too good, Frontier will fix it. Except Anaconda. Which is sacrosanct.

 

[ManRightChea]

Nothing else at the same mass has a class 6. Nothing. Not even true exploration ships. In fact, we have to exceed 900t to get to the next ship with a class 6 FSD. Which is more than twice the base mass. The reality is; it's too light for the FSD class elected. 500-600t would have dropped it about in the right spot and not been so laughable compared to physically smaller medium ships, that have more mass.

Meanwhile, the Python was handed about the most aggressive nerf Frontier has ever done. Apparently if a ship is too good, Frontier will fix it. Except Anaconda. Which is sacrosanct.

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.

 

[WR3ND]

Nothing else at the same mass has a class 6. Nothing. Not even true exploration ships. In fact, we have to exceed 900t to get to the next ship with a class 6 FSD. Which is more than twice the base mass. The reality is; it's too light for the FSD class elected. 500-600t would have dropped it about in the right spot and not been so laughable compared to physically smaller medium ships, that have more mass.

Meanwhile, the Python was handed about the most aggressive nerf Frontier has ever done. Apparently if a ship is too good, Frontier will fix it. Except Anaconda. Which is sacrosanct.

Sorry for the late edits on my post, in case you missed them. I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just wondering about the motivation and progression in the game and the like and what Frontier have intended by it.

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.

Not sure what you mean, but you might try by having a reasonable conversation instead of talking about silly "bottom feeders" or some such.

 

[GraXXoR]

Well. It’s too late to fix the Mary Sue now. Look at its armour value.

500 year old militia freighter aka Anaconda : 945 @ 400T
Newest flagship navy vessel of the line aka Corvette : 666 @ 900T

Yep. Not broken.

 

[kofeyh]

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.

Stick to the topic, play the ball, not the people.

 

[ManRightChea]

Well. It’s too late to fix the Mary Sue now. Look at its armour value.

500 year old militia freighter aka Anaconda : 945 @ 400T
Newest flagship navy vessel of the line aka Corvette : 666 @ 900T

Yep. Not broken.

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.

 

[kofeyh]

Sorry for the late edits on my post, in case you missed them. I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just wondering about the motivation and progression in the game and the like and what Frontier have intended by it.

Motivation? There's no logical, consistent reason for Anaconda's stats. And if we take the game at face value, there's no end-game. So no reason for an end-game ship. Apart from the fact Anaconda is so end-game ship. Holy god it's broke as sin. Frontier, bless them, love the thing to bits. So really the only motivation we can attribute, is because they wanted an end-game ship as a credit sink and like everything else made it irresistibly broken.

And they went on to compound this foolishness, by giving it a military slot no less! Oy. There's a reason it's the go-to ship for virtually every new player.

That lapse in judgement, has, and will damn every single ship frontier add, for the entire lifecycle of the game. Anaconda should have been hit with the same bat the python was, and Frontier probably still kick themselves occasionally over that hindsight.

It'll never change; Frontier would never get any rebalance across the line. They can only bring everything else up via power creep.

 

[Exluna]

Stick to the topic, play the ball, not the people.

S'really good advice there. It's a good argument. Don't let the negativity and personal attacks drag you down and spoil what is otherwise a good discussion. Stay on point.

 

[WR3ND]

Motivation? Because they could. There's no logical, consistent reason for Anaconda's stats. And they went on to compound this foolishness, by giving it a military slot. There's a reason it's the go-to ship for virtually every new player. It's broken.

That lapse in judgement, has, and will damn every single ship frontier add, for the entire lifecycle of the game.

Misguided, perhaps, but a lapse, I remain to be convinced. They play the meta and players, some of us play the game, for what it's worth. There will inherently be some discrepancy between the two, I think. It's a shame with having to deal with these sort of ramifications. I think it speaks to a larger issue than the Anaconda. Either way, it is what it is and it might well be too late for that, but not for building and progressing the game forward around it.

 

[Commdor]

Just throwing this out there. According to Sandro back in October, "The Anaconda is a bit of an overpowered ship, but we can't change it now, as it is very popular. Players wouldn't like us changing their favourite ship."

Source: http://www.elite-dangerous-blog.co.uk/post/Ship-skins-and-thargoids

 

[WR3ND]

Just throwing this out there. According to Sandro back in October, "The Anaconda is a bit of an overpowered ship, but we can't change it now, as it is very popular. Players wouldn't like us changing their favourite ship."

Source: http://www.elite-dangerous-blog.co.uk/post/Ship-skins-and-thargoids

"Overpowered" is looking at things too simplistically, in my opinion. The Engineers are too overpowered too regarding a sense of game balance and what I think makes sense in the game, and yet here we are. I have a hard time believing this wasn't at least somewhat intentional.

If it isn't balanced, it provides motivation for some players who want to grind up to the "end game content" and get that elite whatever.

 

[kofeyh]

Misguided, perhaps, but a lapse, I remain to be convinced.

Be convinced; Frontier has said before they recognise it's not consistent and a bit OP. The developer knows this. It was likely designed as an end-game credit sink and was just too good, but by the time this became overly apparent, it was too late to change. And it's only ever gotten more difficult to address over time. Now? Impossible.

It's broke; we all know it's broke; it'll stay broke. They recognise it should have had the Python treatment. Unfortunately now, it just means infinite power creep to bring everything else into contextual relevance with it. That's not great, but it is, what it is.

Best that can be done; is accept, and move on, and remember that when new ships are added with really compromised outcomes, that go too far in the opposite direction, because Frontier are over-compensating. Because they have, ever since.

Might put some things in perspective, perhaps.

 

[Good Death]

Would it not be nice to have different classes of the same ship? Careful attention would have to be given to modules so that we don't have another situation like the Anaconda. I don't really care about Anaconda I just want more options for exploration. That ignore list tho. Love it. [rolleyes]

 

[WR3ND]

Be convinced; Frontier has said before they recognise it's not consistent and a bit OP. The developer knows this. It was likely designed as an end-game credit sink and was just too good, but by the time this became overly apparent, it was too late to change. And it's only ever gotten more difficult to address over time.

It's broke; we all know it's broke; it'll stay broke. They recognise it should have had the Python treatment. Unfortunately now, it just means infinite power creep to bring everything else into contextual relevance with it.

The boldface refusal to accept a very obviously broken ship, isn't, because surely Frontier wouldn't, ignores that they did, because they are human and make mistakes and sometimes they just don't get to fix them. It's broken, friend. It's okay to accept that.

And the beat goes on... naturally. Goes back to my point of them playing a somewhat different game than the players. Power creep is what keeps the game relevant to some. It's an excuse and a poor substitute. I've wondered more than once if Frontier bother playing their own game. Evidence would suggest that it isn't so much the game they're playing. Sorry for being a little pessimistic here. And don't get me wrong, I have high hopes for the game, but I'm not going to let it get in the way of enjoying the game for what it has to offer.

 

[Han Zulu]

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.

Balance. To be better exploring ship, you lose on the combat side. So it's a matter of balancing that you don't end up having combat-exploring ships. Next would be to make all combat-exploring ships with 1000 T cargo space, so they're combat-exploring-trading ships. And then we add mining and passenger transports. And then we only need one ship doing everything.

 

[NW3]

Fundamentally, the Anaconda is not properly balanced, but we all know that it will never be nerfed, so the only viable approach is to do a proper rebalancing of all the other ships. Here's my take:

• Multi-role ships should be mediocre-to-good at most tasks, but not excel at any. That means that (because of the Anaconda) all of the other ships need some tweaks, so that the best ones are better than an Anaconda in 1 or 2 metrics.
• Explorer ships should have very-good jump ranges and have dedicated slots for exploration tools like scanners and scoops, with enough free slots for SRV hangers, AFMUs, hull repair limpets, etc.
• Trader ships should have good jump ranges when empty and be able to haul a lot of cargo.
• Mining ships should be much like a Trader, but come with a built-in mining laser and a master limpet controller that can program/control several different kinds of limpets. It should also allow multiple limpets to unload at the same time.
• Combat ships should have decent jump ranges, but a fully-armored and weapon-fitted ship should not be able to jump as far as a multi-role ship, because it's HEAVY. It should have a jump range similar to a laden trade ship. Perhaps engineers could offer light-weight mods for armor, shields, and weapons, so you could jump further, but with some sort of a tradeoff.

As for improving jump ranges, one approach would be to have an engineer who can lighten your hull; that would help a lot. It could also explain the Anaconda: Its magical-lightweight hull has already been engineered to the max and cannot be lightened any further, but other ships can be buffed to a similar extent. As for materials, I'd suggest gathering pieces of anacondite from USSes, where an Anaconda was reduced to scrap.

 

[Exluna]

In his own words, the lead designer thinks the ship is a bit OP... It might not be a big problem yet, but leaving things as is will be damaging to the game. Players like choices and to feel like their choices made a difference to the way they play. I'd rather have the choice between a Porsche, Ferrari or Lamborghini than have a single one be head and shoulders above the competition. If by design there is only one logical choice, that's kind of... Boring. I believe they want to change it, but can't see a solution. They aren't hesitant to balance other outliers - Look at the recent passenger mission reward adjustments... They were not afraid to pull the plug on that. I think a case can be made that the Anaconda is the same... Except it's gone on for years. Seems to me like the designers are putting it aside only because like us, they can't seem to find an amicable solution that wouldn't set the galaxy on fire? Or cause a deluge of angry "I quit!" posts on the forums.