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

[NMS]

I HAVE A SOLUTION!

In the beginning there was only the Anaconda, and life was good.
Then came the corvette and cutter, and the conda was "op".
Get rid of the corvette and the cutter.
Problem solved and without nerfing the conda.

+1

And Bring the Panther Clipper (OP of course!)

And don´t touch the conda....

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Hey, let's not have people think I can be constructive here bud...I've spent a lot of time fostering a reputation as a sarky dunghead, pls don't greef my forum reputation

My apologies. I have altered my post to reflect your request.

 

[Stupid_hippy]

Conda is fine.. It's people using extra big text because they think it somehow makes their point more relevant that needs nerfing.

 

[GraXXoR]

Geez, I dunno why people make this so hard.

All that needs to happen is the following simple 3-step plan:-

1) Nerf the Annie's integrity down to around, say, 250 with the standard hull.
2) Adjust the weight of the Reinforced alloy hull to, say, 200t and the integrity to +1,000.
3) Adjust the weight of the mil/mirrored/reactive hull to 400t and the integrity to +1,500.

That way, the Annie remains the uber-explorer for those who want to use it as such and nobody currently exploring in one gets stranded.
Fit a Reinforced Alloy hull and you get a big ship which is still fairly light but has good armour.
Fit a mil hull and you're back at the current level of integrity but with a sensible weight.

There's no need to over-think it.

I can see where you're coming from....

But I just can't see Sandro apologising to all the Annie owners, though. 945 to 250 is a monster nerf, so I can't see it happening... There will be salt aplenty and pitchforks in droves.

The only thing that doesn't affect current ships' stats is taking the current stats on arbitrary hull weight and hardness and making them "Engineered."
The Vulture, DBX, DBS, FAS and FDL have a high density composite hulls G3~5 as standard..
The Anaconda could have a G5 lightweight composite hull as standard etc.
That way it could prevent outlier ships from becoming even more "outlierish."

Let's stay on topic please.

Thank you T.J... I feel like I'm running around, rounding up free range chickens with nothing but a short stick for company.

 

[GraXXoR]

Noted, thanks. I wonder how many people pushed through the Corvette rank grind without looking too closely at the stats? I would have to hold my hand up there; I just expected it to be the best from the descriptions. I really like my Corvette, but I'm going to be building an anti-Xeno Anaconda once I have saved up some cash and materials for engineering. The Corvette is great for anti-Xeno, but the Anaconda's combination of hardpoints and armour mean it is still the meta. The best AX weapons are now the new class 2 Guardians toys, so the Corvette's twin huge hardpoints don't give it any advantage.

Yes, when I got the corvette I was seriously underwhelmed and two of my wing mates actually rage quit... (to their credit, they never left a message on the forum, nor did they every return) LOL.. They were utterly disappointed at the disparity between grind and reward...
They couldn't get over a corvette having a single class 1 weapon on each side instead of a bank of 4 down each side... Or having an extra set of mediums...

Grr... Now I'm off topic... LOL...

"Admiral, a huge Thargoid fleet is on course for the Sol system. Shall I scramble the Corvettes?"
"Negative Commander - we've got some 400 year old freighters to handle them."

Perhaps next time the question should be phrased better and we might get a more positive response, e.g. "How do you plan to address the imbalance between the Anaconda and the Corvette?".

Yes... But many anaconda owners already think that anaconda is far worse than the corvette and nothing needs changing. They say it is already flawed..

When I ask them in what way, they say, "Well, this of course."

Spoiler

 

[GraXXoR]

I HAVE A SOLUTION!

In the beginning there was only the Anaconda, and life was good.
Then came the corvette and cutter, and the conda was "op".
Get rid of the corvette and the cutter.
Problem solved and without nerfing the conda.

Yep, that'll work.

 

[Jastebro]

Instead of making the Corvette a copy of the Anaconda, why not simply fly the latter ship, if it has traits that are to your liking?
It's not like it's restricted to an exlusive group. You need not even grind anything but credits to get it.

 

[zombieapocalypse]

Remove the Anaconda from the game. No ship, no problem!

 

[Crank Larson]

I do have to ask... After several years of resolutely keeping the Anaconda as is, why would anyone think that FD are suddenly going to change things? The Annie being overpowered is a topic that keeps coming up. Yet in-game, it is very rare that I encounter one, so clearly it isn't actually an issue (or everyone would fly one), and most people probably don't care.

Let's have new ships, and leave the ones we have as they are.

 

[Judz]

Give the FdL and Corvette mahoosive jump ranges. I know, you said don't mention it, but when you tell a kid not to touch....

46 going on 16...sorry.

 

[znôrt]

There is a monster thread brewing called...

it is truly surprising how it took folks 3 years to figure out that the conda has some inconsistencies and make the new forum rage about it just now. go figure, it must be school vacation time somewhere.

but to the point: why does your link which supposedly backs the statement that fdev has acknowledged that the conda is op actually point to an inane blog entry about ... ship skins???

this is unacceptable. i'd expect forum agitators to be a bit more ... uh ... professional!

 

[OHMSS]

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.

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.

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.

Might already have been said GraXXor but how about renaming the Anaconda to the Anaconda Explorer - people want exploration ships. Keep the jump range, while reducing the cargo hauling and combat capabilities. Tweak internal slots to focus on it's new purpose. Combine this with releasing a second SRV for pure exploration and/or a shuttle craft that only the Anaconda with it's size can carry. Give both of these new deployables a solid reason to use them i.e. good game play with benefits.

Would I like this? I'd grumble as my Anaconda is my money maker, but all of a sudden here's an exploration alternative that emphasizes and celebrates the one thing people are complaining about and suddenly it makes sense.

 

[GunnerBill]

Big exploration ships don't really need a great many hardpoints.

Balance the Anaconda's jump range with other similar sized ships but allow various hardpoints and all the associated machinery to be removed decreasing mass and increasing jump range.

The number and size of the hardpoints removed is proportional to the range improvement until with only 2 small HP's remaining you are pretty close to where it is now.

 

[CMDR ANCALAGON]

But when fitted for combat, the Anaconda has roughly the same jump range as the Corvette, around 20ly.

When fitted for combat, there is little to no difference in jump range between the anaconda and other large combat ships or heavy trade ships, which means that the only real impact to reducing the jump range will be to explorers who are running around with no weapns, shields, cargo, 12Mw power, ability to boost or travel at speeds over 160 m/s.

Seriously, add any meaningful cargo amounts, hardpoints, upgraded internals, or anything that has mass, and that jump range begins to plumet.

In fact, the FSD only gives a range in the upper 40'(with no optional internals excep an SRV). The light weight mod on the internal sensor module pushes that up to the mid 50's, and mods to other internals do the rest.

I get that the 400T hull mass on a ship that big doesn't seem to make sense, but changing it will only really hurt those who are not carrying weapons, cargo, or defenses.

Does anyone have an example of a PvP or trade scenario where they 'lost' to a CMDR in an Anaconda because of its jump range?

 

[CMDR ANCALAGON]

Big exploration ships don't really need a great many hardpoints.

Balance the Anaconda's jump range with other similar sized ships but allow various hardpoints and all the associated machinery to be removed decreasing mass and increasing jump range.

The number and size of the hardpoints removed is proportional to the range improvement until with only 2 small HP's remaining you are pretty close to where it is now.

We effectively already have this. Fitted for exploration, I have no hardpoints or defenses, and little to no internals (SRV, SLF, and AFMU). Its an empty ship strapped to an FSD.

Fitted for combat, I have a range of 20ly and every slot is filled with something, mostly HRM (wonder why...) which brings most stats in the range of the vette and cutter.

No changes required.

 

[CMDR Carbo]

Well, FDEV have just shown they are not comfortable with nerfing existing content (some engineered modules) that players invested lots of time in.
Instead they buffed the new engineering system to compensate for grandfathered modules.

Thus, the proper FDEV way to balance the Anaconda would be to buff all the other ships in the game?

 

[StiTch]

But when fitted for combat, the Anaconda has roughly the same jump range as the Corvette, around 20ly.

When fitted for combat, there is little to no difference in jump range between the anaconda and other large combat ships or heavy trade ships, which means that the only real impact to reducing the jump range will be to explorers who are running around with no weapns, shields, cargo, 12Mw power, ability to boost or travel at speeds over 160 m/s.

Seriously, add any meaningful cargo amounts, hardpoints, upgraded internals, or anything that has mass, and that jump range begins to plumet.

In fact, the FSD only gives a range in the upper 40'(with no optional internals excep an SRV). The light weight mod on the internal sensor module pushes that up to the mid 50's, and mods to other internals do the rest.

I get that the 400T hull mass on a ship that big doesn't seem to make sense, but changing it will only really hurt those who are not carrying weapons, cargo, or defenses.

Does anyone have an example of a PvP or trade scenario where they 'lost' to a CMDR in an Anaconda because of its jump range?

Thankyou - the exact point I was making earlier. Low mass/low FSD class allows for high jump range that gets massacred when you add other outfitting.

So drastic is it that I took my iCutter exploring instead of a 'conda because I prefer combat capable explorers, and the combat capable exploroconda I initially laid out basically jumped no further. Conversely I could pack everything I wanted to the iCutter and was barely losing anything, so in the end could use an explorer featuring full combat ship level offense and shield defense.

Hull wasn't obviously up to standard for a combat cutter, but that's the concession I make for wanting to, you know, scan systems as I go

 

[Skip Rockbounder]

All I see here are excuses to keep it is, buffs to every other ship in the game or the introduction of new mechanics to circumvent the issue.

Just phase it out (Rebuy and New buy) with the introduction of a MK2 with the weight raised to 600t... problem solved.

 

[JonathanBurnage]

Well, FDEV have just shown they are not comfortable with nerfing existing content (some engineered modules) that players invested lots of time in.
Instead they buffed the new engineering system to compensate for grandfathered modules.

Thus, the proper FDEV way to balance the Anaconda would be to buff all the other ships in the game?

Exactly.

All I see here are excuses to keep it is, buffs to every other ship in the game or the introduction of new mechanics to circumvent the issue.

Just phase it out (Rebuy and New bye) with the introduction of a MK2 with the weight raised to 600t... problem solved.

Never going to happen.

 

[GraXXoR]

Page 8 has been extremely constructive... Rep all around... I fear I might hit my 24hr limit, soon.

For me it has an easy answer: remove hardpoints on the Anaconda. Multipurpose, right?

IMO, ALL OF THE huge ships (except perhaps the T10) are undergunned... Just look at how pathetic class 1 and 2 guns look on those stupid tiny plinths that pop out... I understand the merits of class 1 turrets/gimbals: fast tracking. But srsly, the big ships should have a battery of them in unison, like a group of four (which must mount the same weapon type) ... Much like in the game Dreadnaught.

It really shouldn't be possible to single handedly take out a corvette with a medium fighter.

The game is being ruined by people who feel they have some right to dictate how other players play.

Gold mines are nerfed because people complain that they don't use them no one else should.

Good missions are ruined by the same people.

Here's a simple answer those wanting to nerf the Anaconda.

If you don't like it, Don't use it. Sorted. Close Thread.

That is why I EXPLICITLY stated in the OP: NO ANNIE NERFS... I don't think it is actually OP, PvPers never use them, which is a top sign that they're not OP... They use FDLs, FASs and Corvettes... Cutters and FGSs to a lesser extent.... it's just that its hull weight and jump range are well out place. An outlier...

Well maybe, but now we're contravening the no-nerfing-Anaconda rule...

Buffing other ships seems the way to go. This has precedent (Engineers 3.0 vs 2.4 and the resolution of grandfathering issues) and would avoid the saltpocalypse; as Sandro has said, it's too late now and people will get very upset if a nerf bat gets taken to their favourite ship.

One simple tweak to the Corvette would be to swap its C1 and C2 hardpoints around.

The proposed solution means that no ship changes out of the garage... However ships have the potential to have their hulls customised to make them heavier and harder or lighter and ... er... squishier.... via engineering or only at the stations that have a dockyard, for example. The Annie will come out "maxed" from the dock with G5 lightweight advanced composites.

I think there is in general this expectation the 'vette should be a "point and destroy ship": on account of being one of the big 3, and being "the combat one", players are expecting to get in it, press the fire button while roughly looking at an enemy, and hear the words "ship destroyed".

That would be explicitly out of place, and people know it would be. Can you imagine the forum wildfire if any n00b could jump in a 'vette and murder every CMDR in sight by clicking because they were given a point n' win weapon?

The 'vette has a number of advantages that are outside of raw firepower, and again people know that because it's not exactly a seldom used machine. It handles far better, it has a very strong shield/SCB layout despite the fact Fed ships are typically hull tanks or hybrid tanks at best, it has modules placed to be much harder to cripple by targeting subsystems, it has very potent hardpoint placement if you can handle the one C3 weapon, it can use a C7 fighter without sacrificing much (where either of the other big 3 is utterly crippled using one)...

The 'vette is nowhere near as poor as people will have you believe. There is a discrepancy, but it's not because the 'vette is urine poor - it's because the 'conda has the modules that should be reserved for a combat dedicated equivalent. C8 is the highest class we have in the entire game; why does a multirole ship have it on distributor?

We can dance around this if we want, but we'd ultimately trying to build a house on sand, justified likely by the usual cries that "any attempts to balance the game is because you hate me and you hate fun and you don't want me to have fun!!1!"

That is interesting that a 500 year old freighter can back a higher powered distributor than an Imperial navy flagship... Yes. it is maddeningly unbalanced in that respect. But there is no way in HELL that the Annie would be given a distrogeld.

The corvette requires a hundred odd hours of no shortcut grinding. (or it did...) it's to all intents and purposes endgame content... The anaconda takes 10-20 hours... In skilful hands, the corvette should be a beast. But preferably only come into its own in multi crew.... Same with the cutter. That should have been a beast, too and benefit from multicrew... Unfortunately, we all know what happened to multicrew.

Also, C7 SLF? That is a wasted effort.... 30 fighter printing capacity with only one launchable at any time? It's basically a C6 with less than double the capacity. If you could equip three different fighters instead of two it might have been worthwhile... It's just 20T of paperweight on top of the C6.

But not maxing out the combat power of the corvette does not negate that you can still mount the same number of AX weapons on it as in the anaconda. I really hope this whole discussion (or the event that triggered it) is not that because of the new guardian weapons, the corvette can't have better weapons in its huge hardpoints.

The whole point of the discussion is about the jump range discrepancy (read the title), so I still think removing a couple of hardpoints (thus leaving the corvette more combat oriented) is a way to go and does not nerf the current conda jump range.

Not really on topic, I'm afraid... A chat for a different thread. Sandro has explicitly said... No nerfs to the Annie or buffs to the Corvette planned.

Without heaving read all the answers in this thread: I really like the suggestions of the OP. instead of nerfing ships because they are op, I rather like to see buff to other ships. And all of the suggestions of the original post are very good ideas to workaround this topic.

Sandro's argument that the Corvette is very popular and doesn't need a buff is short sighted (in my honset opinion - sorry Sandro). FD tries to create a realistic universe. But no realistic ship manufacturer would design their ship in such a limiting way. An explorer without two class 1 slots and space for all the necessities for exploring is stupid. A dedicated (luxury) bounty hunter that could be outrunned by any other ship in terms of high waking away makes no sense at all. The list goes on ...

o7

The FDL is more short-range, heavy fighter than bounty hunter though it says bounty hunter in its description...

I don't have much knowledge on ship builds, since I can only build one type of ship, but Sir Sarky Dunghead Stitch gets a lot of kudos for making me understand the subject matter quite a bit better then when I started reading the thread.

*hat's off*

Stitch is always such a font of sensibleness (is that a real word?) I wonder how he does it, sometimes.

I'll say it.

Nerf the damn Anaconda already. No amount of buffing other ships will change the fact that a multipurpose ship (aka jack-of-all- trades- master - of - none) is the number one exploration vessel, one of the best traders, one of the best Thargoid solo'ers thanks to it's freakish hull, one of the best all around combat ships despite some turning issues,... it's too broken unless you bring it in line with the others. It also is like the only ship i think to show combat damage (maybe cobra does too, can't remember).

It's disgusting how much it dominates to the point that everyone keeps taking it over other ships for a lot of roles.

Nerf it

le sigh de la sigh... Just when page 8 was promising to be a doozy...