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

[Chaparral]

My theory is that FDEV loves ugly.

The bottom half of the conda is a 1950's crystal radio set.

The DBX is a rusty looking katydid that sounds like an unbalanced washing machine.

They are rewarded for their social awkwardness.

Myself, I'd rather bask.

 

[crushdepth]

.. have a little think about what you wrote.

The jump range of the corvette is simply the price for flying the most powerful warship in the game bar none. That is balance in action.

Viewed as a package the corvette is clearly the better warship by a large margin and a better short haul fighting trader too. The only metric where the anaconda has a significant advantage is jump range, but removing that would be 'balanced'? I think the OP needs to realise that game balance is not done by cherry picking isolated stats.

 

[GraXXoR]

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.

Holy moly! What a gem of a post. I wish there was a +10 REP button that could only be used once a week.

And with one message, the anacondas’ ridiculous hull weight is explained plausibly!!!

This is perhaps the best suggestion to fix the Anaconda I’ve seen in a way that hurts nobody!!!
I’m still in shock that the solution is so simple.
Let’s push to make this a reality.

As for the materials, we can discuss that later. Anacondrite. Lol.

 

[Numenor1379]

Holy moly! What a gem of a post. I wish there was a +10 REP button that could only be used once a week.

And with one message, the anacondas’ ridiculous hull weight is explained plausibly!!!

This is perhaps the best suggestion to fix the Anaconda I’ve seen in a way that hurts nobody!!!
I’m still in shock that the solution is so simple.
Let’s push to make this a reality.

As for the materials, we can discuss that later. Anacondrite. Lol.

Yep, a simple and elegant solution which would let FDev do that mass balance pass, yet not touch the Anaconda.

Make the Engineer somewhat challenging to get, perhaps requiring Ranger or Pioneer Exploration rank. Then give them up to what the Anaconda has from the "base" it should really be at, say 600T. That would let people drop their hull mass by 1/3. Perhaps a negative effect of doing so is decreased hull hardness by 5.

Boom, mass and jump range issues in game solved.

 

[space voyager]

Seems like a no-brainer to me.

If combat ships had the same jump-range as other ships, everybody would travel everywhere in combat ships and all the other ships would be redundant.

This. And most players that go around interdicting other do NOT fly Anacondas but Corvettes and FDLs.

 

[Exluna]

It's a good suggestion. The maximum amount that a certain ship's hull can be lightened by the engineer would need to be closely tuned. I would add a further suggestion that a ship's mass reflects it's performance when hit by ballistic or explosive weapons. Would make the sacrifice for a lighter weight ship mean something. Want a lighter ship with a longer jump range? Sure! But now when a torpedo hits you or you're getting drilled by 3 class 3 multicannons, your ship will start to drift. Difficult to code perhaps? I don't know I'm not a coder, just offering my 2 cents. I think it would be awesome if the ship's tonnage influenced how much it was affected in combat by explosive or ballistic ordinance!

 

[GraXXoR]

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*

One elegant solution by NW3 made on page 10 of that thread here states

On 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.

 

[GraXXoR]

It's a good suggestion. The maximum amount that a certain ship's hull can be lightened by the engineer would need to be closely tuned. I would add a further suggestion that a ship's mass reflects it's performance when hit by ballistic or explosive weapons. Would make the sacrifice for a lighter weight ship mean something. Want a lighter ship with a longer jump range? Sure! But now when a torpedo hits you or you're getting drilled by 3 class 3 multicannons, your ship will start to drift. Difficult to code perhaps? I don't know I'm not a coder, just offering my 2 cents. I think it would be awesome if the ship's tonnage influenced how much it was affected in combat by explosive or ballistic ordinance!

Lighter ships do less damage and receive more damage in collisions... and can have their course altered more by engineered weapons.

 

[GraXXoR]

I've just started a thread to separate the discussion from solutions... and get this thread back focused on the OP... WHY does short jump range ruin the game?

Keep the discussion here, post proposed solutions without the discussion and vitriol below... Cheers.


https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...ERFING-IT-(-Jump-range)?p=6462725#post6462725

 

[Exluna]

Lighter ships do less damage and receive more damage in collisions... and can have their course altered more by engineered weapons.

Indeed! You get the idea! It would be awesome and add a whole new array of choices for players to make!

Edit - Admittedly I don't know if the game engine's flight model can be modified in that way. A lot of work might need to go in to something like that.

 

[Good Death]

I have often wondered why my Courier has the same hull mass as an Anaconda? Don't read too much into FD Physics

Courier or Clipper?

The Millennium Condom oops I mean Conda. The fastest hunk of junk in the galaxy, a bucket of Modular Terminals, and the ship that made the Beagle Point run in less than uhh, what was it called again, anyways the Millennium Conda the most over powered ship in the galaxy yeah yeah. David and Sandy made many modifications to the hull and FSD so that they could...... yeah I'm done lighten up people for crying out load. Seriously though no more nerfs.

 

[Rubbernuke]

The easy Ana nerf would be to reduce its hull hardness right down so it's paper thin to reflect the weight.

 

[Valorin]

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:






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.


There will be peace for our time! https://forums.civfanatics.com/images/smilies/old.gif

Can't rep you anymore right now, but feel repped.

 

[through the hole backwards]

I wish the Anaconda had double the jump range and more guns.

 

[lokvette]

A dishonest ship for dishonest pilots, it honestly should never have been added to the game.

I normaly take things said on the internet with a pinch of salt, as most of it is hot air from internet warriors who think forums are the place to do battle, been there done that, but this sort of cuts me to the bone. It shouldnt as its a off the cuff remark from somone on a gaming forum, or if this is how the poster really feels then well what can you do, the ignore button comes in handy somtimes.

I love my Annaconda I realy dont give a flying fudge if its unblanced or not. I care nothing for stats in most games I play its not why I play them. But calling anyone who flys one dishonest is a bit like calling me a liar, wait Im sure that was added to another post.

I know none of you know me in RL but one thing I can say hand on heart is one Im not dishonst and I dont lie. I learnt at an early age it was better to tell the truth, that and I follow a few of Buddhas teachings and apply them to my evey day life.

Sorry normal service can now resume, somtimes I vent if I dont it would then muster all day which is never good. Oh nerf the damn ship for all I care Id still use it. As for the OP, I like the fact that ships have limets to thier jump range but some are a bit low, looking at you FDL.

EDIT:

Oh my. You are for real

So sorry to have butted in. Please proceed with the constructive debate I so rudely interrupted.

Oh dear I just read some more of this thread I somtimes start at the end and go backwards jumping to quotes, and then I saw more of his words of wisdom. Yeah dont need people like that in me life. I know as with some people here I could just skim or skip thier posts but I knew this forum had that ignore button for a reason.

 

[NW3]

But it's probably a lot less work than constantly buffing and power-creeping every other ship in the game to match something the developers freely admit is broken, and there'd be no need to design a new model.

Unfortunately, since the Anaconda is unnerfable, the only sensible approach is to thoughtfully buff the other dedicated ships, so that they make some sort of sense.

Still no-one complaining about Anacondas has explained what "balance" actually is.

Does "balance" mean that if I want to choose a ship for particular purposes it will always be a hard decision as all ships are equally good?
(That would be a boring game. But if it doesn't mean that, what's wrong with one ship being better than another at a role?)

The problem is that a very few ships are better at nearly everything. My take on balance is that there should be reasons to pick any of the available ships, not to have a few "go to" ships for every role.

Why should the Anaconda have a shorter jump range?

I don't think it should; I think other ships should be reworked, so that that the make sense in a universe that has an Anaconda.

All your complaints about the Anaconda make no sense. Pure envy.

The Anaconda was built with a rare high tech material of better quality than other ships. The manufacturer had found a metallic ring in a far away location they kept secret, where they were able to mine a rare metal called Handwavium. This is what gives the Anaconda its inimitable properties.

I don't envy the Anaconda. I hate it, for reasons I've expressed in other posts. I could buy several, so it's not a matter of credits. The high-tech material is a fine explanation, but some of the other ships should be similarly configured. It's boring to only have 1 or 2 really good ships (like the Anaconda and Python).

Multi-roles should not be the "go to" ships for everything- there should be some thought and consideration when choosing ships for activities, for which there really isn't at present time. People tend to favor certain ships above others (for whatever personal reasons) but for the majority of activities, you'll see most choosing a Python or Anaconda because they're exceptional at everything with very few cons to outweigh the pros.

When a Python can rival a T-7 AND carry weapons/armor and still land on Medium pads, it's a bit ridiculous. It's plain to see that there's a need for a re-balance/refocus, and if some can't see the writing on the wall they're either blind or willfully ignorant. (I'd choose the latter in most cases)

You can either accept a re-balance that includes a buff for activity-focused ships, or a nerf to the "exceptional" ones, but things need to change one way or another.

I completely agree, except that I don't think nerfing is the solution.

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.

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. Open up gameplay for everyone!

Respectfully, no ship should be the best at everything imo; it's far more interesting if there are tradeoffs. I'd like to see a galaxy filled with a variety of ships, that each make sense for their particular role.

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.

Bottom line, the Conda should not have a higher jump than either of the 2 DEDICATED explorers in the game. Its out of balance.

Yes, it certainly is.

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.

The problem is that it's so much better, that the other ships hardly make sense.

The Anaconda is a joke of a ship from a programming standpoint. It basically represents the kind of ship you would make if you just put numbers on a piece of paper with no actual regard to creating parity with other ships in the game.

When you consider that the ship is an older design, it represents that humanity has regressed since the ship was produced. It is a broken ship that cannot can be argued against, broken to the point where the developer admits it.

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 with no actual concern for any balance within the game.

As evidenced here, the ship appeals to dishonorable and 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. Despite supposedly being multi-purpose it is also given a military reinforcement and can equip a fighter bay.

The ship should honestly not be allowed within the game in its current state.

True, but there would be hell to pay if it were nerfed.

Frontier will not change Anaconda, they have already stated this.

The OP wants Anaconda brought in line with other combat ships, which isn't going to happen. A more constructive approach is to bring the two outliers, Corvette and FDL back into sane ranges.

Yes, but I'd recommend taking a hard look at all the other ships and tweaking them, so that we have a coherent shipyard.

Holy moly! What a gem of a post. I wish there was a +10 REP button that could only be used once a week.

And with one message, the anacondas’ ridiculous hull weight is explained plausibly!!!

This is perhaps the best suggestion to fix the Anaconda I’ve seen in a way that hurts nobody!!!
I’m still in shock that the solution is so simple.
Let’s push to make this a reality.

As for the materials, we can discuss that later. Anacondrite. Lol.

Thanks!

 

[GraXXoR]

Yep, a simple and elegant solution which would let FDev do that mass balance pass, yet not touch the Anaconda.

Make the Engineer somewhat challenging to get, perhaps requiring Ranger or Pioneer Exploration rank. Then give them up to what the Anaconda has from the "base" it should really be at, say 600T. That would let people drop their hull mass by 1/3. Perhaps a negative effect of doing so is decreased hull hardness by 5.

Boom, mass and jump range issues in game solved.

Grades 1 to 5:

Hull Mass -10% -20% -25% -30% -35%
Hull Hardness -1 -2 -3 -4 -5

 

[ilo]

Leading question; if you want to play semantics, and not actually consider the relevance of ships vis-a-vis range and purpose, that's fine. But the ipso-facto "see, I win!" discussions I had with young nieces and nephews were fun at the time too, I just don't think they have much value here, by comparison.

Fly safe!

Trailing one: funnily, the discussions I have with my kids use to finish arguing who is older.

 

[ilo]

There is FSD boost injection that increases the jump range quite a fair bit in all ships. You guys don't want to gather the materials for it, just want an insta boost for ever, but saying it is for 'fairness' is just childish. There is a trade-off for a combat ship, it is the jump range in all of them.

 

[Jack Schitt]

Unfortunately, since the Anaconda is unnerfable, the only sensible approach is to thoughtfully buff the other dedicated ships, so that they make some sort of sense.

It wouldn't be nerfing it so much as taking elements of its OPness (that sounds very odd when you read it aloud in your head) and spreading them among two or three variants. But your hull lightening Engineer solution is more elegant. It makes me uneasy from a fake physics POV but then so do many other things in ED. And the Anaconda has already set the precedent.

I also still like MadDogMurdock's "tethered jumps" solution to the bubble range problem (which is, lest we forget, what the first line of the OP is talking about). But since he and I seem to be the only ones talking about it, I guess it's doomed. To be fair, it would probably require a lot more coding on FD's part since it would effectively be a new travel mechanic and would need to tie into everything including galmap navigation. An Engineer who just tweaks the stats that the game is already using definitely seems like the least problematic solution anyone's come up with.