I say nerf the Anaconda. It makes owning multiple ships pointless. The Anaconda is atleast top 2 best combat ship. It is the best exploration ship, the best trader, the best passenger hauler, the best pirating ship, top 2 mining ship. Multilevel ships should be jack-of-all-trades and master of none. Instead we get master of all trades. At least make the Beluga the best passenger ship and maybe release a large dedicated exploration vessel aswell as a mining vessel.
Serious proposals on how to reconcile the Anaconda WITHOUT DIRECTLY NERFING IT. (+Jump range)
- Thread starter GraXXoR
- Start date
LOL.
Yes... I do have some Anacondas... but... "Best trader" is not true at all. Not sure it is "best combat ship" either... Even the T9 is a much better tradeship now with 720t cargo capacity... Anaconda comes in with 448. The Cutter, which has superior boost speed compared to a trading anaconda, takes the same load as the T9; 720. The Cutter is, by far, the best trading ship in this game... I would argue that the T9 is the second best trade ship, give it some engineering... the Anaconda... will not use it for trading... nopes..
Nope, seems deliberate to me. All the important slots went up a class, some bug, nerf the Asp I say...
Just slap that distro down to class 7. Or make the hull upgrades (mil/reactive/mirrored) much heavier.
And OP, don't insult me when I directly discussed the solution you mentioned in the OP.
And OP, don't insult me when I directly discussed the solution you mentioned in the OP.
Last edited:
The anaconda should be heavier and that's that, I can't see how it can have any structural integrity at its present mass. Perhaps it should be a glass cannon of a ship!
Christ, this thread still rumbling on?
If ppl in Open were getting jumped and killed by super OP Annie's then I could see why people would be up in arms about them.
Anaconda has a fat behind both in and out of SC, and a horrible view out the cockpit so it's far from the best "Explorer" ship out there in my opinion (unless you consider exploring to be all about the destination and not the journey).
Before 3.0 a full combat build could expect a jump range in the mid-twenties, hardly mind-blowing or unrealistic.
Anyhoo, nearly forgot why I bothered jumping on here. Frontier obviously have data on what ships all Cmdrs are flying and are basing decision to not nerf Annies (or buff Vettes etc) at least in part on this information. Want a change? Might I suggest a petition as many players as possible to use only that one ship in order to get their attention (which would never happen because despite "claims" about it's OPness(?), many, MANY Cmdrs actually prefer other ships
If ppl in Open were getting jumped and killed by super OP Annie's then I could see why people would be up in arms about them.
Anaconda has a fat behind both in and out of SC, and a horrible view out the cockpit so it's far from the best "Explorer" ship out there in my opinion (unless you consider exploring to be all about the destination and not the journey).
Before 3.0 a full combat build could expect a jump range in the mid-twenties, hardly mind-blowing or unrealistic.
Anyhoo, nearly forgot why I bothered jumping on here. Frontier obviously have data on what ships all Cmdrs are flying and are basing decision to not nerf Annies (or buff Vettes etc) at least in part on this information. Want a change? Might I suggest a petition as many players as possible to use only that one ship in order to get their attention (which would never happen because despite "claims" about it's OPness(?), many, MANY Cmdrs actually prefer other ships
Last edited:
As I said earlier, it's bar none THE BEST in exploration. It is a top tier for trading though if you want, it's also a good combat ship thanks to great hardpoints and placements despite it has a turn-rate issue. Fact is it's way too strong for a ship meant to do everything well but not master any (aka multipurpose or jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none concept). Instead it outright dominates to the point Frontier is hesitant to just slap a nerf of some kind on it out of fear of the backlash that will come, which means more people pick up the Anaconda over other ships a large amount of the time (just look how many will do Distant Worlds 2 even despite you only need around 33ly jump range to reach their biggest jump destination, or the amount of Thargoid solo'ers using a Conda), which means more people Frontier is afraid to off, which means even more people pick up a Conda... which just repeats the loop.
Fact is Frontier messed up with the Conda and are so afraid of ing people off they are not nerfing it (or heavily buffing other ships to dominate over it in specialized roles) and the situation keeps getting worse and worse.
Total nonsense. As many people as I see on here saying things like "a combat Anaconda does about the same light year jump range as a Corvette", as if that somehow makes the ship not broken. I guess not enough people actually own the Corvette to know that it gets about 22 light years completely empty with no build on it. That's after engineering. A combat built Corvette often doesn't even break 10 light years so how is it balanced at that the Anaconda can do 22 light years full up on hull reinforcements, prismatic, SCBs and an upgraded hull?
How is that balance compared to another warship that has nothing in it? If the *** ship is so old, why does it have so many advantages over modern ships? People can lie to themselves all they want, but the Anaconda has superior DPS, for no damn reason, a light hull for no damn reason and all of the game breaking modifications it allows, it has comprable speed, the same shielding etc over modern military ships. It has military slots and can equip a fighter hangar.
Did humanity regress in that time? Why the hell did the Federation and Empire even bother making new warships if this old freighter is already better than them anyway? Anaconda actually destroys any kind of lore within Elite Dangerous. Anyone unwilling to acknowledge this is simply dishonest and not the kind of person anyone should take advice from.
Honestly the Anaconda has no business being better than the Corvette or Cutter in really ANY regard. Those are new warships with the backing of entire superpowers.
It is nonsensical to have to fly a non combat ship to a destination and then pay millions of credits to move the proper machine for the job. Why, to appease ****s that fly "multi-role" ships? Somebody was high on some type of gear when they made that ship. This travesty of lore is allowed to exist as is but any attempts to buff other ships that cost more and have every reason to be better somehow equates to breaking the game..sure.
Last edited:
That's complete rubbish! The Cutter is by far the best trader! As for exploration, the AspX/DBX both go head to head with the Anaconda. In relation to combat, well you're smoking some weird stuff.. The Cutter and Vette are both way better.
And yes I have all of them on all of my accounts. You're plain wrong every regard.
You reckon a non-engineered Anaconda has more DPS than a non-engineered vette or cutter? Wanna test ?
Depends on the stock weapon loadout but yes. I don't remember what weapons it comes with stock, but none of the big ships come fully outfitted.
Base armor > Corvette and Cutter. 954, 666, 720.
Shield = Corvette. 7 class vs 7 class
Internal storage roughly = to Corvette and Cutter.
Speed > Corvette. 7 class thruster with massive weight advantage.
Manueverability > Cutter. Better power to weight ratio.
Price < Corvette and Cutter. Both outfitting and purchase.
Hull Mass < Corvette and Cutter. 400t, 900t, 1100t.
Jump Range > Corvette and Cutter. Hull mass + FSD efficiency.
DPS > Corvette and Cutter. 1H,3L,2M, 2S vs 2H,1L, 2M, 2S and 1H, 2L, 4M
Anaconda has better DPS period. Anyone with common sense doesn't have to test. 1 huge hardpoint is not going to out damage two larges much less three. It has over double its own hull mass in armor which should be physically impossible, same PP as the Vette, same power distributor which is larger than the Cutter 's, roughly equal overall storage. It's a broken ship.
Last edited:
It's about the 4th best trader, actually. For short hauls even the corvette is better. Same with passenger missions, mining. This may be news to some people but you don't have to do long haul trade and ferrying. There us money to be made in high volume short turnaround trips.
Best pirate? Get out of here.
The only thing it's best at is jump range. And the only people that complain about it are corvette tankers. You want better jump range take some if the junk off your tank.
Yes, but with the condas jump range I feel like it is more profitable. Although, I don't keep records of my trades.
Nonsense, even a fully combat fitted Anaconda has better jump range than a stock Corvette. Suggest how someone should take weight off of their stock ship? So they can have a ship worse than a stock Anaconda? The ship is broken and no amount of not accepting that will change the facts. You don't have to do long range exploration.. see how stupid that sounds?
Just to drive home the point:
Extremely heavy Anaconda: https://eddp.co/u/6mVh94Pw
Mostly empty Vette: https://eddp.co/u/zvYnAhHi
Last edited:
Yeah... About that... I'd much rather be shieldless in a wing fight with my Dropship then my Anaconda any day of the week. Numbers only paint half the story. The Anaconda might have more hull but due to weaker/softer armor its going to get eaten alive.
The anaconda is a broken ship, thats a fact, and realistically there are only 3 possible fixes:
1) Decrease the Anacondas armour so its magic lightweight mass makes sense (but would need to be severe as it has almost double armour than some heavier ships already!)
2) Increase the Anacondas hull mass (again comparatively to other ships it would need at the very least a 200t increase maybe more)
3) Reduce the hull mass of every other ship in the game by 25%+ so that all ships have a comparative mass that makes sense.
Rather than do any of these alone they could take partial fixes from 2 or all 3, but the magical hull mass Anaconda is the problem.
1) Decrease the Anacondas armour so its magic lightweight mass makes sense (but would need to be severe as it has almost double armour than some heavier ships already!)
2) Increase the Anacondas hull mass (again comparatively to other ships it would need at the very least a 200t increase maybe more)
3) Reduce the hull mass of every other ship in the game by 25%+ so that all ships have a comparative mass that makes sense.
Rather than do any of these alone they could take partial fixes from 2 or all 3, but the magical hull mass Anaconda is the problem.
Last edited:
Its a decent proposal the engineering one, give already purchased Condas a free G5 roll on the lightweight thing while returning the ones in the shipyard to the proper weight.
Put out some decent G5 alternatives and lot of people will probably swap to a hull hardness or whatever G5 instead unless they still want to run an explorer.
The other option is to add it in as a purchasable hull type in outfitting, and just give all current condas that option.
Put out some decent G5 alternatives and lot of people will probably swap to a hull hardness or whatever G5 instead unless they still want to run an explorer.
The other option is to add it in as a purchasable hull type in outfitting, and just give all current condas that option.
I second this.
Anaconda needs option (1) in my opinion. It'll still be one of the best ship in the game : Good trader, Great Space Bus, Best Explorer, Good Combat ship.
(2) is a bad option has it is a beloved ship for it's jump range. We use it as multi-role taxi and as one of the best explorer.
(3) will create more mess than solve things.
Combat : There should be heavy and light weight battle cruiser and as advertised in game Some smaller navies use the Anaconda in the light cruiser and frigate roles , Anaconda is a light cruiser. Therefore it should also be light in hull.
More light and heavy combat ship should come into the game and balanced according to mass/integrity.
Passenger : As soon as Kruger's ship get decent Luxury Passenger Missions, big ship like Annie will fit in their role : used for mass transportation.
Mining / Exploration : For now no ship have specialised slot to make it a specialised miner/explorer. Only Annaconda have lightweight hull. This specificity could be added to a specialized new explorer ship with a large cockpit like Lakon ships.
I'm confused. Is this just a salt thread for people with buyers remorse regarding their corvettes?
If you like the 'vette, fly the 'vette. If you think the conda is better, fly the conda. Plenty of cutters in open too, give that a spin. Neither of those 3 are anywhere near overpowered. From a min max stand-point for pvp and combat in general, the go-to ships have been (for ages now) the FdL and FAS. The Chieftan might be opening up a 3rd option in that category.
For trading, both the updated type 9 and the cutter outperform the Conda.
For exploration, you can strip anything down to the gas tank and take screenshots.
If you like the 'vette, fly the 'vette. If you think the conda is better, fly the conda. Plenty of cutters in open too, give that a spin. Neither of those 3 are anywhere near overpowered. From a min max stand-point for pvp and combat in general, the go-to ships have been (for ages now) the FdL and FAS. The Chieftan might be opening up a 3rd option in that category.
For trading, both the updated type 9 and the cutter outperform the Conda.
For exploration, you can strip anything down to the gas tank and take screenshots.
Last edited:
It's not a salt thread. The Conda is OP because it weighs 400T which is lighter than MEDIUM ships, has a high cargo/passenger carry ability, has one of (if not the best) Hardpoint convergence stats in the game, has excellent combat ability and a high hull armor value.
No other ship has all that in one package and that's what we are talking about. FDev made the Conda too good and never did a balance pass on it like they did the Python. They have admitted it is OP.
The problem now is that the Conda is too embedded in Elite's gameplay with it's stats as it is, and FDev does not want to change them.