It makes sense in the context of the FSS as it's a relatively static POV, though I'd personally much prefer using my ships and exploring in first person overall instead or in addition to the FSS view. That's perhaps getting a bit off topic here though.
It's time for an Anaconda competitor
- Thread starter VR SenseiMatty
- Start date
Jump range is king if you just want to travel somewhere, if you are exploring the objective is to scan and maybe map systems so the ability to skip by more of them per jump is not necesarily a good thing.
However if you just want to explore the periphery of the galaxy you are right range will become more important.
While we're on the topic of jumps, there's always someone ready to jump on someone for their posts, not surprising.
A Corvette can be gotten to some OK jump ranges, tell me something I didn't know already. I've been exploring with various ships and I know EVERY SHIP IN ED CAN BE USED FOR EXPLORATION.
What has mentioned numerous times, is a desire for a reduction in the number of jumps required to get somewhere far, far away. I agree with that. So, the better the jump range, the less jumps, not rocket science. Talk of wormholes, interstellar gates and whatnot has come up as ways to make long distance travel less onerous.
I built a 60+ly Anaconda before Guardian modules and used it on trips that lasted for several weeks. Previous to that, used my 20ly Python on some medium trips and currently have a long-range DBX as well. My original comment was based on a Corvette reaching Anaconda-like jump capabilities 60ly+, not 30, 40, or 50ly, in combo with its better handling. On a long trip, even a few lys more range makes a big difference. It would be a sweet ship.
What was obvious to me on my explo trips (and to some others), is the number of eye-burning, mind-numbing jumps required to cover long distances.
Further, the intervening systems offer little or no variance to the scenery, which is true to their surfaces as well. After the first several 100 jumps, the game became a job, not play. I rarely leave the Bubble now, except for Thargoid/Guardian stuff. I dismantled/sold my explo Anaconda after reaching explo Elite (the last one of the triple), don't want to think of long range runs again.
If anyone enjoys jumping hundreds of times for days/weeks/months, great, blaze your own trail, I'll go on mine.
A 60 to 70ly jump Corvette? Just a desire. You don't like it?
Fine, you can have an opinion on that, everyone can have opinions, they're cheap and easy.
A Corvette can be gotten to some OK jump ranges, tell me something I didn't know already. I've been exploring with various ships and I know EVERY SHIP IN ED CAN BE USED FOR EXPLORATION.
What has mentioned numerous times, is a desire for a reduction in the number of jumps required to get somewhere far, far away. I agree with that. So, the better the jump range, the less jumps, not rocket science. Talk of wormholes, interstellar gates and whatnot has come up as ways to make long distance travel less onerous.
I built a 60+ly Anaconda before Guardian modules and used it on trips that lasted for several weeks. Previous to that, used my 20ly Python on some medium trips and currently have a long-range DBX as well. My original comment was based on a Corvette reaching Anaconda-like jump capabilities 60ly+, not 30, 40, or 50ly, in combo with its better handling. On a long trip, even a few lys more range makes a big difference. It would be a sweet ship.
What was obvious to me on my explo trips (and to some others), is the number of eye-burning, mind-numbing jumps required to cover long distances.
Further, the intervening systems offer little or no variance to the scenery, which is true to their surfaces as well. After the first several 100 jumps, the game became a job, not play. I rarely leave the Bubble now, except for Thargoid/Guardian stuff. I dismantled/sold my explo Anaconda after reaching explo Elite (the last one of the triple), don't want to think of long range runs again.
If anyone enjoys jumping hundreds of times for days/weeks/months, great, blaze your own trail, I'll go on mine.
A 60 to 70ly jump Corvette? Just a desire. You don't like it?
Fine, you can have an opinion on that, everyone can have opinions, they're cheap and easy.
Last edited:
Sure, you can always choose economic route plotting if that's what you want, and I have from time to time, so there is that.
It can be something like 100+ jumps to Colonia now using neutron stars and the like, so do we really need further jump ranges? Kind of takes away from the potential of those who might care to "earn" getting there though. Once it's trivial, there is no going back. For some, it may have already moved beyond that.
From my point of view, why bother with it in the first place if you don't want to? Leave it there for those who do.
...
For some context here, I mapped out and found the definitive shortest jump range route needed to reach the Crab nebula. And guess what? No one really cared other than me. Fair enough, but I think it speaks to a large issue within the game, the meta potential vs, immersive game-play. At least I had some of the best fun I ever have doing that playing the game. I'd just hope others get to have similar experiences as well.
Just auto plot all the way there and back again and get there as fast as possible in your 80+ Ly jump range ships, because why not when you can? It doesn't mean anything to you otherwise anyway, does it? So why bother?
Sorry, I don't really get it. I'd rather the game and game-play meant a little something more for those who care to play the game.
And yeah, I ADSed and DSSed every single rock within the 30 local systems of the Crab nebula region even though they were already discovered by others. Sorry if that meant something to me more than credits and the meta. Others miss out on ever knowing how many systems are actually there within a given range potential.
Is it just a means to an end, or do we actually care for it itself? I think this is the question that we need to ask ourselves.
It can be something like 100+ jumps to Colonia now using neutron stars and the like, so do we really need further jump ranges? Kind of takes away from the potential of those who might care to "earn" getting there though. Once it's trivial, there is no going back. For some, it may have already moved beyond that.
From my point of view, why bother with it in the first place if you don't want to? Leave it there for those who do.
...
For some context here, I mapped out and found the definitive shortest jump range route needed to reach the Crab nebula. And guess what? No one really cared other than me. Fair enough, but I think it speaks to a large issue within the game, the meta potential vs, immersive game-play. At least I had some of the best fun I ever have doing that playing the game. I'd just hope others get to have similar experiences as well.
Just auto plot all the way there and back again and get there as fast as possible in your 80+ Ly jump range ships, because why not when you can? It doesn't mean anything to you otherwise anyway, does it? So why bother?
Sorry, I don't really get it. I'd rather the game and game-play meant a little something more for those who care to play the game.
And yeah, I ADSed and DSSed every single rock within the 30 local systems of the Crab nebula region even though they were already discovered by others. Sorry if that meant something to me more than credits and the meta. Others miss out on ever knowing how many systems are actually there within a given range potential.
Is it just a means to an end, or do we actually care for it itself? I think this is the question that we need to ask ourselves.
Last edited:
I am in the "big ship? meh" category. I have had a Cutter and an Anaconda and didn't much like either. I am currently in the conda running rescue missions to rank up to the Corvette. I can only assume it's going to be the same meh. I personally enjoy the smaller ships... Vulture, Asp, Python, Kraigt ii... I haven't tried to Chieftain yet.
Until such time I can hire a full crew and tell them " make it so" the large ships are just... meh.
Until such time I can hire a full crew and tell them " make it so" the large ships are just... meh.
Satisfaction can take many forms. If you're enjoying yourself, that's what matters.
I remember early on when I was flying a Vulture, getting a mission to take out a Corvette, something I hadn't been able to do before. Re-buy screen flashed in my mind, yet I took it on and knocked it out. Same as you, no one cared, but I still remember that time.
I say we get a G5 short range baseball bat (with rusty nail experimental) and kneecap the Anaconda and the FdL which are the anomalies.
For me it was on the fringe of the Engineers. They had just come out and the meta was still in flux. When the dust settled, we find ourselves where we are now. Maybe I'm looking too much into that instead of where the game is now, but I think my general point still stands. I want these sort of opportunities to still mean something in the greater scheme of things, but perhaps it's too late for that anyway. Maybe how people care to approach and progress within the game has changed since then.
I completely agree - I just spent over a hundred mil on an exploration Conda and about 3 hours with the mining, selling the opals then material trading and engineering, plus the Conda needs competitors, not nerfs. I'd really love me some alternatives to the Conda that don't require rank grind, and I hate imperials and their need to be so condescending. Bask all you want but you'll get the sunburns of millions of revolting slaves. Oh, I meant I hate rank grind. It's satisfying at first but then gets stale.
The Anaconda actually flies pretty well IMHO for a vehicle literally bigger than the Saturn V, and the Saturn V would turn worse than a T9. Plus, you can fit it with a fighter bay, SRV bay and extra fuel tanks and still have a jump range of 40-50ly (with engineering), then still have extra space for flight assists, which can be important for keeping the ship aligned with distant targets.
For mining, it could be outfitted to do the job well like the Python and AspX, but its maneuverability isn't really ideal for blowing up asteroids on a time limit, but it can do the job like any other multipurpose ship.
For combat, it's not a great PvP ship considering its maneuverability and dependence on fighters for destroying smaller targets, but it makes an excellent PvE ship with its 8 hardpoints and fighter bay capabilities, especially if you take advantage of turret mounted weapons for full 360 aim, and the A rated power distributor and power plant which could power a city for years.
In conclusion, ships like the AspX, DBX, Cobra MkIII, etc. are deeply overwhelmed by the iconic Anaconda. These ships are good at many specific things but lack the flexibility and defence of the Anaconda. You don't need to make harsh compromises for good jump range or combat capabilities.
Shhh...don't say it so loud.
They might implement it that way - just like firegroups not being unique to modes, or the SRV being perfectly lined up to be magnetically pulled up, or guardian sites not providing any clues to needing a different key, or identical limpets needing different multi-ton controllers to do single tasks, or the corvette being described as a long-distance patrol craft at an 18ly jump range, or interstellar initiatives being voted on in forums where less than 5% of the population looks, or combat elite requiring straight grinding of ships when the other professions just measure credits, or stranding the Gnosis for no particular reason, or permit locking large swathes of space for years, or making it possible to support factions but not actually control their random (and often idiotic) expansion choices, or creating a leaderboard system that mostly just measures credit gains in specific professions, or developing a crime & punishment system but not addressing combat logging (or cheating hacks either, apparently), or...
Oh right, off-topic. Anaconda.
...or taking one of the slowest turning ships and giving it half the mass via 'space magic' so it can jump awesome, but still mass lock better than a Type-9...
I'd argue that the Clipper and Type-7 should have be medium ships from the start.I’m not against this, I like taking huge ships exploring...
The problem with large ships is the supercruise handling, if it handles like a dog many CMDRs simply won’t use it...
Rather than having the proposed ship directly compete with the Anaconda and its multi role capabilities I’d rather see a large explorer that looks and handles beautifully but with minimal combat potential...
Something like a T7 with a major face lift...
...or a Clipper with a huge FSD.
The clipper is the go to large ship for exploration with the advent of the guardian fsd booster and an extra slot.
The view, handling, internals and speed blows all the other big ships away, most medium sized ships too and jumping 50 plus isn't shabby.
I do have the dbx with its insane jump range for hopping around in the bubble. I'd never take it to the black.
Had an annie for all of 20 minutes. Well worth the 10% loss to sell it.
Unless your a fringe explorer which I am not. No other ship compares.
YMMV
The view, handling, internals and speed blows all the other big ships away, most medium sized ships too and jumping 50 plus isn't shabby.
I do have the dbx with its insane jump range for hopping around in the bubble. I'd never take it to the black.
Had an annie for all of 20 minutes. Well worth the 10% loss to sell it.
Unless your a fringe explorer which I am not. No other ship compares.
YMMV
No offence to anyone in particular.
Somehow I find it amusing to see whenever there's a ship that's consider 'overpowered', and somehow popular to use, there will always be the people that somehow proclaim to hate it, and swear off it, simply because it's 'broken'.
It's almost like a club of purists, or CMDRs too cool to use a "perfect ship". They want to use deficient or less capable ships to prove a point or something.
--shrugs--
I mean, if IRL, Honda suddenly made a Civic that could beat a Porsche, Ferrari or Lambo in performance and handling, but without any of the drawbacks like impracticality or fuel inefficiency, I wonder if these same purists would then rag on the Honda, and refuse to drive one simply for it being "too good"....
--hint hint-- that would probably be an Audi RS6 Avant, IRL....
Somehow I find it amusing to see whenever there's a ship that's consider 'overpowered', and somehow popular to use, there will always be the people that somehow proclaim to hate it, and swear off it, simply because it's 'broken'.
It's almost like a club of purists, or CMDRs too cool to use a "perfect ship". They want to use deficient or less capable ships to prove a point or something.
--shrugs--
I mean, if IRL, Honda suddenly made a Civic that could beat a Porsche, Ferrari or Lambo in performance and handling, but without any of the drawbacks like impracticality or fuel inefficiency, I wonder if these same purists would then rag on the Honda, and refuse to drive one simply for it being "too good"....
--hint hint-- that would probably be an Audi RS6 Avant, IRL....
I would prefer it was if they nerfed the anaconda instead.
No offence to anyone in particular.
Somehow I find it amusing to see whenever there's a ship that's consider 'overpowered', and somehow popular to use, there will always be the people that somehow proclaim to hate it, and swear off it, simply because it's 'broken'.
It's almost like a club of purists, or CMDRs too cool to use a "perfect ship". They want to use deficient or less capable ships to prove a point or something.
--shrugs--
I mean, if IRL, Honda suddenly made a Civic that could beat a Porsche, Ferrari or Lambo in performance and handling, but without any of the drawbacks like impracticality or fuel inefficiency, I wonder if these same purists would then rag on the Honda, and refuse to drive one simply for it being "too good"....
--hint hint-- that would probably be an Audi RS6 Avant, IRL....
Imagine having a car that's made of a material that's lighter than aluminium and stronger than steel, it can drive for longer and faster because of this magical alloy that no other manufacturer seems to be aware of and can't seem to reverse engineer even in hundreds of years.
The company that came up with this magical alloy also makes all sorts of cars, but only seems to use this magical stuff for trucks when they could use it for race cars as well, does that make any sense?
Why doesnt Faulcon Delacy just build pythons out of the same stuff so they would weight 100t but still would have a mass lock factor higher than a t-9?
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
Indeed .silly people for wanting internal consistency and balance in a game!.No offence to anyone in particular.
Somehow I find it amusing to see whenever there's a ship that's consider 'overpowered', and somehow popular to use, there will always be the people that somehow proclaim to hate it, and swear off it, simply because it's 'broken'.
It's almost like a club of purists, or CMDRs too cool to use a "perfect ship". They want to use deficient or less capable ships to prove a point or something.
--shrugs--
I mean, if IRL, Honda suddenly made a Civic that could beat a Porsche, Ferrari or Lambo in performance and handling, but without any of the drawbacks like impracticality or fuel inefficiency, I wonder if these same purists would then rag on the Honda, and refuse to drive one simply for it being "too good"....
--hint hint-- that would probably be an Audi RS6 Avant, IRL....
Well, before the great python-nerf, they were... But apparently people could not cope with them being superior to FDLs and the rest is history.
1st off anaconda needs a fix to its mass then u could talk about a "competitor", if not dont even bother.
But FD should and would be doing fixes and slight changes to some ships to be fair and work well, as it is there is things totally wrong with the big ships, more "locked" slots that can only take a certain type of thing in them would be advisable to make some ships become what they were intended as and not excel in areas that arent for them, or shouldnt be.
A true explorer ship, both large as medium, but with locked slots that cant be another thing than a true explorer would make alot of sense, and would be much appretiated, but i dont expect it to be done sadly...
But FD should and would be doing fixes and slight changes to some ships to be fair and work well, as it is there is things totally wrong with the big ships, more "locked" slots that can only take a certain type of thing in them would be advisable to make some ships become what they were intended as and not excel in areas that arent for them, or shouldnt be.
A true explorer ship, both large as medium, but with locked slots that cant be another thing than a true explorer would make alot of sense, and would be much appretiated, but i dont expect it to be done sadly...
Here's a Ferrari SUV. If Ferrari can make an SUV, I guess Core Dynamics wouldn't be committing sacrilege if they came out with a lightweight hull Corvette with Anaconda range. You need to find valid similes.