Both the T9 and the T10, no matter how strange it sounds, are the easiest to land, then the corvette and then the anaconda, in terms of large size of course, the cutter is a pain in the balls until piloting it, imagine the AI trying to put the wings , like the beluga the fin, it is better to enter and once inside let the AI go down, now on the planet I never recommend AI with large ships, my AI ate a drone and I almost lost my transport cutter for that reason
bareback? what module was it?, because I don't even remember anymore, I think that once I landed alone, but it's been so long that I don't remember if it was with the advanced module, if you confirm it I'll put it for the anaconda until they fix it in exchange for the super cruise
The advanced docking module will do planetary landing yes.
when the T10 came out it had the hitbox in china where the nose and the landing gear on mars, you had to use AI in stations and crash in planets to land it, I suppose it will be something the same now, but in its day I reported it and in 2 days they put it in a patch, but we already know what FD is like now
Last edited:
I will try it again, to see if it pulls, because when asking for the ship the AI lands it yes or yes and next to the thargoid
It's 400t hull mass, that's lighter than a lot of the mediums. It should be more around the 800t range. T9 is 850t, Vette is 900t.
I doubt it is a bug, my jump has not changed since the anaconda became real, it only changed with engineering, I would say that the number you see is not the real one, that already happened with modules like the weapons that said they were fixed and they were guided
The Conda always had mithril armour. From the start of ED. That’s not going to change. Just had to live with it. But the “not being able to land” is pure update 12. And there is no way I can get an auto dock 36k lyrs away from the nearest station,
Something as big as the Anaconda would never weigh only 400t anyway. I think in early days, that number was double duty as front and back end. It only makes sense for smaller ships. What it should be for large ships realistically was unnecessarily complicated as a balance mechanism touching the back end part. I ignore it now and I just heacanon that the Anaconda weighs thousands of tons.
No, it's a well known fact that the Conda has a hull mass far lower than it should have for its size, it's been like that since the day it was released, it's a thing like Mitterand Hollow, it's now to deeply embedded in ED to change it, if they were to adjust it now to the correct hull mass for its size it would strand a lot of explorers and they would have a very unhappy player base, so it stays the same and hence remains the best jump range ship in the game due to an unnaturally low hull mass, however that's pretty much irrelevant now with Fleet Carriers.
so I refer, it's not a bug, it's on purpose, it's probably even implemented in the lore in the long run, it may be because it's weaker than the others, etc, that gives less weight, also good ones motors compensate the weight and it becomes relative, if the real mass does not change, but it may be a bad calculation I refer to what was said, it is on purpose, it is not a bug
https://www.elitedangerous.com/update-notes/4-0-12-01
I don't think so, it seems that if they realized the giant mistake they made
I don't think so, it seems that if they realized the giant mistake they made
That still doesn't make it a purposeful action, it can be a bug and still continue as an accepted part of the game, which is what it has been all along, a bug that can no longer be removed due to player considerations, just like Mitterand's Hollow.
Pretty sure it was acknowledged early as a data input error, just like Mitterand's Hollow.
Have added a report to issue tracker , please add you contribution to confirm the issue.
if you saw my last post, you would see that it is supposed to be fixed, before creating a ticket make sure that the problem is still there