Serious proposals on how to reconcile the Anaconda WITHOUT DIRECTLY NERFING IT. (+Jump range)

[GraXXoR]

There is a monster thread brewing called... How do jump range limitations make the game better? Anaconda's unrealistic hull mass... which has degenerated into a Mos Eisley like bar brawl.

Background for those who haven't read that thread:

Spoiler

That thread has somewhat moved away from the OP question and become a rather heated and unfocussed discussion about the game's state...
Among the "gems" on that thread: anaconda is bug****d, FDEV's integrity as a game developer is dirt, the game is s**t, the readers of this forum lack integrity and are dishonourable...
the list goes on, just as Ziggy Stardust predicted on page one.

In this thread I want proposed solutions ONLY on HOW TO RECONCILE the ANACONDA without any direct nerfs...
It has already been stated that FDEV know that the Annie is OP and that it's too late to nerf it without a spit storm.....
So please, DO NOT discuss the rights and wrongs of current game balance in this thread.
ONLY Solutions to improve balance of other types of ships without unbalancing the game unduly...

Note, please DO NOT include ship specific improvements like:

The Corvette needs an bigger FSD.
The FDL needs to jump further.
The T7 needs to land on a medium pad.
And definitely no
The Anaconda needs a nerf.

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー

Here are some proposed solutions:

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.

A later post suggests that the "ORIGINAL" weight of the Anaconda was 600T, engineered fully down to 400T without compromising its strength. Thus other ships should be able to remove 33% from their own weight.

NW3 also adds a few salient changes, some of which have made it into the game.

• 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.
• 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.

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー

Another solution for ship balance would be to offer optional modules that augment specific core functions. One being a Hyperspace Jump Augmenter... It's size could be any class up to the class of the FSD with diminishing returns. Thus the most powerful module would be a grade A module of a class equal to that of the FSD, adding some nominal boost to the optimal mass (33%?) or increasing the maximum fuel allowed per jump.

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー

Another solution has been supplied by Mengy... It requires no extra game mechanics and achieves pretty much the same as the above Engineer method, but without any effort on part of the players to bring their ships up to Anaconda spec (i.e. engineer their hull to G5).

Frontier will never nerf the Anaconda now, it’s far too popular and is the most flown ship in the game. Probably due to it’s brokenness no doubt. So with that option off the table there is only one other way left to address the imbalance: boost the rest of the fleet up to meet it.

If I were Frontier right now, here is how I would fix the ship design imbalance:

Adjust the hull mass numbers of the fleet downwards to be more in line with the Anaconda’s design, resulting in slight buffs for every other ship. Also where applicable boost some armor values for a few combat ships too.

I’ve played with the math of mass vs jump range and it wouldn’t require huge reductions, in most cases rather minor ones actually. Frontier has actually been doing this gradually, they reduced the DBX hull a while ago (not enough though), they reduced the Beluga hull (again not enough), and just this week they reduced the T7 hull too. They need to go farther to make up for the gross imbalance of the Anaconda.

For example, if the Asp Explorer’s hull was lowered from 280T to 250T (just a 30T reduction, or 11%) it would today jump almost exactly like the Anaconda, no other change needed at all. Similarly if the DBX hull was lowered from 260T to 245T (15T or 6%) it too would jump as far as the Anaconda does. Now drop both exploration ships an extra 5T and suddenly the ships with the word “Explorer” in them have the best jump ranges in the game, not much more than the Anaconda currently but a bit more. And all it took was a small reduction in hull mass, that’s it.

Likewise you could drop the hull mass of the rest of the fleet too, boosting the jump ranges of combat ships and traders alike. They would never jump as far as the Anaconda but they could be much more comparable. The three passenger ships should all jump closer to the Anaconda, still less than it but not by as much as they do now. If I were doing it I’d make the Dolphin jump a bit more than the Orca with the Beluga being a bit behind the Orca. These mass reductions would result in the following rebalancing of the fleet:

• The two Explorer ships now jump a tad farther than the Anaconda.
• Combat ships all jump more, which is sorely needed.
• Trading ships can jump much more when empty and slightly more when loaded.
• Passenger ships jump a bit behind the Anaconda but not a lot (Dolphin best, Orca next, then Beluga).
• The Anaconda stays right where it’s at, still an OP multirole but much less so when compared to the rest of the fleet.

That’s how I’d address it. Just lower hull mass and boost some combat ship armor values and leave everything else alone, then reassess after that.

 

[damon8r351]

As distasteful as the subject of nerfing an overpowered ship is, and as "forbidden" as the topic apparently is (only one person on this planet presumes to think he can tell me what to do, my father, and I don't listen to him either), both the Anaconda and Python need to given a nerfing they so richly deserve. That would balance out the inequalities in ship types. It's distasteful, but needs to be done.

 

[SAB380]

I don't even think it needs to be engineered.
I've always fantasised about this on the Fer de Lance.
Hypercars have ultra light shells of carbon fibre and aluminium.
Its not a big stretch of the imagination that in the Elite future there is a top class hull available (lets say more expensive than mirrored) that is ultra-light but retains the same strength as (say) reinforced alloy.
This wouldn't be standard on ships because it is ultra expensive to produce, so only those that have the means and/or want to put in the effort could create their 'hyper-ships'.

 

[nosleepdemon]

As distasteful as the subject of nerfing an overpowered ship is, and as "forbidden" as the topic apparently is (only one person on this planet presumes to think he can tell me what to do, my father, and I don't listen to him either), both the Anaconda and Python need to given a nerfing they so richly deserve. That would balance out the inequalities in ship types. It's distasteful, but needs to be done.

No, it doesn't. A ship's jump range more or less has no impact on other players, it's merely a convenience. You could argue that it helps with PP perhaps, but nobody cares about PP anyway.

I propose nerfing you instead. Let's nerf every busy body and know it all who has taken it upon themselves to decide what is and isn't for the good of the players. As they clearly seem so unable to curb their own "bad habits" in games, they wish to impose blanket rules over everyone else as well as themselves as it's the only way they will behave. I know, it's distasteful.

But it needs to be done.

Also #25LYCorvette2018

 

[damon8r351]

No, it doesn't. A ship's jump range more or less has no impact on other players, it's merely a convenience. You could argue that it helps with PP perhaps, but nobody cares about PP anyway.

I propose nerfing you instead. Let's nerf every busy body and know it all who has taken it upon themselves to decide what is and isn't for the good of the players. As they clearly seem so unable to curb their own "bad habits" in games, they wish to impose blanket rules over everyone else as well as themselves as it's the only way they will behave. I know, it's distasteful.

But it needs to be done.

Also #25LYCorvette2018

No need for the hostility. An opinion was asked on ships in Elite, I gave it, unpopular as it is. I am in fact not a ship in Elite, so belittling my opinion with an immature personal attack such as above is not constructive, offensive, and off-topic.

 

[MarcusKross]

Here is my serious proposal,

Anaconda is op and everybody knows it. That is why condabois are so fiercely defending against nerfs.

I am a balancetard. Either pull the other big ships in line with the conda or make the condas hull mass something that makes sense.

 

[ErichZann]

Here is my serious proposal,

Anaconda is op and everybody knows it. That is why condabois are so fiercely defending against nerfs.

I am a balancetard. Either pull the other big ships in line with the conda or make the condas hull mass something that makes sense.

so why don't you complain about the fdls combat capabilities (6 utility slots and crazy base shield anyone?) and the cutters speed and/or shields? both of those are much more broken and have a much higher impact on the game. Why do you focus on the Conda when you claim to want to balance the game?

BTW, look at the cutters jump range with a normal around outfitting, not bad either. the anacondas is only really high fitted for exploration, that's it. as soon as you put stuff on it the difference is not monumental, neither is it fast due to the weight...

 

[kofeyh]

I am a balancetard. Either pull the other big ships in line with the conda..

Essentially Frontier has only one choice; bring other ships up to be similar to Anaconda, as this has become the standard by which the game pivots.

It's the same fundamental problem they had with engineering; a massive distortion that was only solvable by a generalised increase to drown the extreme. When you look at recent changes, this has already started happening. Frontier could stand to learn some degree of moderation, and recognise their response in unnecessarily crushing stats for other ships added, has only served to increase the divide.

No-one wants cookie cutter ships; but we are so far from that at this juncture, it's just not a reasonable thing to be concerned about. I have no love for power-creep; but I just don't fundimentally believe the developer has much choice.

 

[CMDR ANCALAGON]

Sure, my exploration Anaconda gets 64ly (pre 3.0), but that is with class 3 shield and smallest power plant and distributer possible, and no hardpoints or cargo, and with light weight mod on internal scanners. My combat Anaconda only gets 21ly range, and that's with the same FSD.

The whole premise is that combat ships shouldn't have a huge jump range, and when fitted for combat, the Anaconda does not have a jump range that significantly differs from other combat capable ships.

Anaconda does not need a nerf for this reason. Besides, I though everyone hated the "oil tanker" handling and speed anyway?

When I get back to the bubble next month, I'm going to buy two more. Gold ones.

 

[Mugur]

I never used mine as an exploration vessel, nor a warship, mostly trading, but leave the Anaconda alone. I don't want any nerf on any ship. I am pro buffing any ship you like. Therefore, if a lightweight mod for Lightweight Alloy will appear, make it with diminished returns depending of the current hull size (greater weights can be modded further) and perhaps everybody will be happy?

And don't complain afterwards that the Cutter will be the only big ship flown in the game.

 

[kofeyh]

so why don't you complain about the fdls combat capabilities (6 utility slots and crazy base shield anyone?)

Because this is changing the topic, and shifting the goal posts to serve a purpose. Try the topic.

 

[kofeyh]

The whole premise is that combat ships shouldn't have a huge jump range, and when fitted for combat, the Anaconda does not have a jump range that significantly differs from other combat capable ships.

Actually it's more Anaconda has an FSD ratio nothing else enjoys. It's also a military ship. They aren't going to nerf it. But this isn't solved by going "well everyone hates the handling so why does it matter". Either ships having relevant stats, and being consistent matters, or it doesn't. Pick one. Frankly, frontier hasn't a lot of options. As silly as it is, bringing everything more inline with Anaconda's ratios for hull mass, fsd class, armour and so on, is about the only thing they can do.

Given Type-10 and Chieftain both have relatively sane FSD potential, suggests even the developer now understands this. People are clutching to a very old consideration for Jump range. The game isn't 1.3 still; folks need to think about how this will impact everything to come, rather than clinging hopelessly to the past. The game has moved on; people need to, too.

 

[damon8r351]

Edit: Never mind, as was pointed out, it's off topic.

 

[Sylveria]

All ships need a good looking over. Plain and simple.

Python and Anaconda both need knocked off their thrones.

It's going to happen sooner or later... whether by direct nerf of them both, or buff of other ships.

 

[Van R Flyheight]

I'm not really sure the Anaconda can be fixed without either buffing other ships or a direct nerf. Obviously not gonna ask for a nerf and I've seen how asking for a buff goes so not going there. I think if we were to introduce new game mechanics like the one suggested in the OP but not open it to the Anaconda then it's just another argument waiting to happen. If we did open it to the Anaconda then it'll only become more OP.

The only way is forward you could say and perhaps one day we'll have bigger ships, Frigate class ships. At this point the problems of the Anaconda will fade away or depending on where bigger ships can land, the Anaconda will be the new Python.

 

[crushdepth]

Well you could take a hard point or two off it, so that it has less potential as a warship and becomes more of an armed trader (as was the original Anaconda back in the days of yore). Or convert its military slot into some kind of FSD booster. I would like to point out that since 1984 the anaconda has been *the* ship for long haul, even if we couldn't actually play it at the time. Legendary jump range is the defining characteristic of the anaconda, always has been.

As for all the faff about "not consistent with magical game formulas", forget it. Lots of things in the game have arbitrary fudge-factor values eg. "hull hardness" values, but nobody complains. Insisting that one specific case must be fixed is ridiculous. It's fine as is. No problem and no solution required.

But if you absolutely must have an in-game rationale for its superior jump range, how about this: The anaconda has a superior, more efficient FSD design. Or maybe it's made of superior, light weight materials. Same principle as hull hardness, which is an existing fudge factor that varies between ships, and affects resistance to weapon damage. That's not a small fudge, it's a giant glucose overload, but since it's the tankers that benefit hey no problem.

 

[MarcusKross]

so why don't you complain about the fdls combat capabilities (6 utility slots and crazy base shield anyone?) and the cutters speed and/or shields? both of those are much more broken and have a much higher impact on the game. Why do you focus on the Conda when you claim to want to balance the game?

BTW, look at the cutters jump range with a normal around outfitting, not bad either. the anacondas is only really high fitted for exploration, that's it. as soon as you put stuff on it the difference is not monumental, neither is it fast due to the weight...

I focus on the conda 'cos the thread is about the conda. Fdl has short legs and low hull hp due to low amount of optimal internals and while the cutter has many things going for it is a an absolute cow when it comes to steering and good luck using fixed weapons with it against somebody who knows what he is doing. Both of those ships have apparent downsides to them meanwhile the conda enjoys nearly as good steering and speed as the vette, has the best hardpoint convergence of all large ships, has all the benefits the large ships have to offer as in mcrew seats and fighters and on top of that has the best jump range in the game if you set it up correctly.

So we have a multirole ship at our hands which can do anything and everything and most of the times better than its specialized counterparts in the supposed same weight class.

If that is not OP i dont know what is.

 

[stumblingdrunk]

I really dont think the conda should get a nerf, people are out there now and part of their enjoyment comes from the jump range and how fast they can travel.

One thing I dont get is why those same people dont want other ships (like the vette) to have a slight increase in jump range (to about 25ly combat fit). We have people flying condas to stations and then paying to drag their vettes there as it is so tedious, is that the elite universe people really want? From my own point of view I love a good combat CG and with my current range I can fly there in one play session, then I usually get to play it for one or two more play sessions and then its another play session just to fly back. That isnt balancing combat ships, that is just making players spend half of their playtime travelling while another ship gets there on day one and can enjoy it immediately.

I genuinely cannot understand why anyone would be against a minor increase for the slower ships

 

[kofeyh]

The only way is forward you could say and perhaps one day we'll have bigger ships, Frigate class ships. At this point the problems of the Anaconda will fade away or depending on where bigger ships can land, the Anaconda will be the new Python.

Frontier will never** add another ship as broken as Anaconda. Best we can do, is try and have everything else at least in the same ballpark. I find it remarkable, that people endlessly complain newbies make a beeline for Anaconda, but don't seem to think it's broken? Clearly not. I mean, hundreds (thousands?) of players all charging headlong for the exact same ship just has to be a coincidence, right? Sure.

There are a few ways Frontier can do this; but if they aren't going to nudge Anaconda, and this is pretty evidently the case, then everything else needs to be consistent with that decision. Otherwise everything ever added will never reach the same potential.

There is an outlier and just leaving it that way, isn't constructive. But nudging the entirety of the rest of the fleet, to better align with that, as much as it's power creep, is probably the way to go. It provides more options, reduces the undue influence and settles the game into a bit more of a contextually better experience.

Ultimately, they did that with engineering. I think they probably just need to revise all the ships, to have them contextually relevant to the outlier; because then it ceases to be one.

--

** except that one time they gave type-7 a class 6 everything and broke the entire everything. And even that still couldn't compete with Anaconda for range (it got close, though!). lol

 

[GJ51]

All ships need a good looking over. Plain and simple.

Python and Anaconda both need knocked off their thrones.

It's going to happen sooner or later... whether by direct nerf of them both, or buff of other ships.

Python already had it's nerf back in the day...

It only seems OP because of a lack of medium sized competition. Gutamaya and Saud Kruger need to enter the space and compete. The FDL was actually a bit of an apology for what FD did to the Python. Think it's OP now, you should have seen it when it was introduced - pure awesome.

The Anaconda is the Anaconda. I can't recall any changes or adjustments since the very beginning, but at my age that could be my own fault rather than FD's

Pretty sure it's the same as it ever was and it seems a bit unlikely to change now.

The biggest mortal sin of all time has been when Engineering knocked the speed crown off the Cobra III

I was shocked there wasn't more of a backlash on that one.

FD has the ship usage stats and from posts I've seen there seem to be plenty of CMDRS that despise the Conda - try it once or twice and sell it and claim they'll never fly one again.

I think players tend to think of "balance" in terms of the ships' attributes, whereas it's probably likely that FD looks at the usage distribution numbers.

All hail Anaconda