I like the larges where they are the current issue is the shield banks and hrp which prevent true ship balancing
Should the Corvette get a better jump range?
- Thread starter Lord Celestine
- Start date
1. You can buy the house, but you also have to hire a housekeeper or do the hoovering yourself. It's a matter of balance you understand.
2. Sure you can have the fastest car, but there's little bootspace. It's a matter of balance you understand
3 is special. It's claiming that more money doesn't buy better equipment in the game. Which is clearly nonsense.
Who play the game well by having FD remove limitations. Stellar gameplay ol' chap.
"Those of us" *chuckles*
He who just spoke about 'cripple those of us who play the game well' is talking about victimisation. Much irony
Have you noticed you're playing a game and not a realistic sim?
I feel very free to disagree. Thank Zeus I did not have to agree with all that.
Ooohh the Vulture. A very good example. I know your post has a bit of sarcasm, but the Vulture is a fine example of a pure combat ship with numerous balancing drawbacks but with a decent jump range. Nothing crazy about the jump range just decent about 14.8LY and that's why you don't see often vultures as exploring ships but it moves around the bubble with a bit of scooping.
Indeed... I usually swap out some internals for a scoop and an extra tank if I need to move mine. Well, either that or sell it and rebuy at the other end.
Is true! They were just as surprised as we were that the tech tree goes Sail -> FSD -> Steam. So far God has not gotten back to us on the bug report, though. Super unbalanced!
My tongue-in-cheek point is that asking whether the Corvette should have a better jump range is perfectly reasonable, but claiming that its lower jump range is somehow unrealistic is silly. The entire idea of FSDs and hyperspace is unrealistic and silly. The jump range of each ship, while related to its outfitting and drive power, is ultimately an arbitrary call by Frontier. Could Frontier just decide to increase the Corvette’s range, or the range of every ship? Sure. Should they? Maybe—that’s an interesting discussion worth happening, and one that isn’t really happening here, unfortunately. But if we're going to start talking about verisimilitude of warfare, then there's many other things we should address, surely … and let’s not open that can of worms.
I like this question, precisely because it is about something arbitrary. It’s important to recognize that there are many different play styles, and as such, teleological arguments for or against a range increase are largely unsound. Some people are looking for "THE BEST. SHIP. EVARRRR.", and some of those people believe the One True Way to get that best ship is to grind like they've never ground before until they can buy the most expensive ship, which naturally should be the best, right? Except then some of those people discover that it’s not, or that it is, and either way they’ve reached “the top” and “beat the game” and get bored and go home. And there is nothing wrong with that. This is not my play style, but I’m not going to say it’s wrong to play this way, because that’s what others say about the way I play.
Indeed, it continually surprises me how many people take on the challenge of using ships that are demonstrably poor for a chosen purpose. We're having a bit of a race in the current community goal, and while some people are genuinely competing for a fastest time, you also have crazies who just go and try it in Sidewinders. Because why not? Same thing goes for crossing the galaxy in a Sidewinder. Clearly some ships are better suited for certain tasks, and we can have lively debates about the finer points of whether Anacondas or Asps or DBXs rock exploring or fighting or trading more. The fact will remain that some people like sub-optimal ships, for a variety of reasons. This, to me, is balance—not balance in the sense of how different ships fare in PvP, but in the ability for players to experiment and fly different ships and loadouts based both on purpose and preference.
I don’t really care one way or the other. Jump ranges are a limitation that makes the game interesting, and I don’t find making a number of jumps boring—I just put on some music or something. Jump range only really affects me when I’m in a diffuse area of space and find a star that’s a little too far away to reach, grr! But I’m aware that not everyone shares this lackadaisical attitude. I can see how it would be annoying. I’m not sure something being annoying is sufficient reason to change it—we can only make so much about the game easier before we remove the fun provided by the challenge—but having discussions about how annoying a game should be are certainly fun!
I find the t-9 is much easier to turn if you boost-turn with flight assist off.
Well fair enough with the corvette, but what about the Federal Gunship? It's a eagle in supercruise (which is 'supposed' to be a glitch but I hope they keep it in!) and it's apparently the ship with the best upwards thrust which makes it extremely good for landing on planets! yet it would need just one more class 1 internal component to be a viable surface exploration ship, otherwise you'd only be able to really explore with it in supercruise, or you could forgo the AFM unit which is near suicide as far as deep space exploration is concerned.
Yes you can still explore with a corvette and still get 16 ly jumprange if you strip it down, but for the Gunship I see what it could be (making exploring high g planets a possibility) and i'm just saddened that it won't be able to fulfill that role.
Well that's because it's a tank, capable of taking huge punishment. Ships like that get transported to the combat zone, they don't drive themselves there
And there should be a tank exploration vessel! The Thargoids are still out there, and something exists within the vicinity of the Formidine Rift that is supposed to be even worse than the Thargoids! Deep Space exploration is a peaceful endeavor... for now... but when they release these alien civilizations in the game, we're going to see some serious stuff.
And I do think the game balancing is what makes it challenging as well, and I would trade an extra 5 ly jump on the corvette for just one class 1 internal on the gunship in a heartbeat. Those two are my two dream exploration vessels, because exploration would be more challenging that way. For the Corvette I could just D rank it and get 17 ly jump and I suppose that is pretty good. But the Gunship will not be able to make use of it's superior upwards without having to sacrifice the AFM unit. The 4 components that are absolutely necessary for exploration, AFM, Fuel Scoop, Detailed and Advanced scanners, those are the absolute essentials but if you want to land on planets while you explore and cruise around in an SRV then you must have 6 internal compartments one for shields otherwise you WILL damage yourself every time you land, and another for the planetary vehicle hangar.
And again, I hope they keep the Gunship as graceful as the eagle while in supercruise, because that just adds to it's splendor as an elegant exploration ship. Though I also understand that it does make interdicting a gunship pretty hard and would understand if they took it out.
So the corvettes can't follow the Cutter after the Empire loses the battle. The empire has always been keen on running away, that is why their ships are faster and have better FSD's than federation ships.
Last edited:
The Cutter has a bigger FSD for a simple reason. The excess power is syphoned off to the round "basking pool" on the bridge, in order to keep the water at the required temperature.
Having no such requirement, the Corvette does not have this extra frippery.
No. 5char (hear that everyone? It's 5char now!)
My Python has only about a lightyear or two better jump range compared to the Corvette and I don't mind.
My Python has only about a lightyear or two better jump range compared to the Corvette and I don't mind.
Last edited:
I've always found the 'how does anyone expect any military to get their ships where they need to be with this horrible jump range!' to be just amusing as hell and clearly showing that the poster hasn't got a clue.
FDL, fully combat loaded and a 10LY jump range, you are 2 hours at most from the farthest point from you in the bubble. That's it, the lowest jump range ships are no more than 2 hours away from the farthest point in the bubble.
So, HOW does the military get their ships in place with these horrible jump ranges? I don't know, they spend around 2 hours doing it maybe? Which, as it happens, beats the hell out of military response times here on our planet today, 2 hour response to ANYWHERE on the planet, I can't think of any military in the world today that wouldn't kill for that....and you folks whine that 2 hrs to get anywhere in the bubble is stupidly long and makes the military pointless.....
FDL, fully combat loaded and a 10LY jump range, you are 2 hours at most from the farthest point from you in the bubble. That's it, the lowest jump range ships are no more than 2 hours away from the farthest point in the bubble.
So, HOW does the military get their ships in place with these horrible jump ranges? I don't know, they spend around 2 hours doing it maybe? Which, as it happens, beats the hell out of military response times here on our planet today, 2 hour response to ANYWHERE on the planet, I can't think of any military in the world today that wouldn't kill for that....and you folks whine that 2 hrs to get anywhere in the bubble is stupidly long and makes the military pointless.....
Ever hear of an Challenger 2? 550KM range, nearly 60KM/h, Abrams? 440KM rnage, nearly 75KM/h tanks with good range and speed. Your argument holds no water sir.
Nope, the Anaconda is not the best ship. It depends what you do. And why should you quit if you get it? Is getting the ship the only goal you have in the game?
The ASP is a top tier ship for exploration. It is inferior to the Anaconda in jump range, but turns better, which makes handling easier. Plus it retains the ability to dock on outposts, thus reducing minimum bubble flight time at beginning/end of deployments.
The Cutter is a better trader than the Anaconda. And for combat, which for many (like me) is the least interesting profession, the Corvette turns faster, again making things easier.
That's right, and that's the beauty of it. You only need to grind money if you want a prestigious ship. You can "unlock" most of the content without much grind.
Jump range hasn't really got something to do with balance, just how annoying it is to get from A to B. IMO the Corvette should have a jump range of about 15 LY. Not more and the Cutter should also get its jump range buffed.
Also, improve the fuel efficiency of the Vette (dunno about the Cutter) as you have to refuel after just 3 jumps which are not even more than 30 LY at the moment. Of all ships, I think the Vette holds the first place in the worst jump convinience. bad fuel efficiency, jump range and "small" fuel tank.
Also, improve the fuel efficiency of the Vette (dunno about the Cutter) as you have to refuel after just 3 jumps which are not even more than 30 LY at the moment. Of all ships, I think the Vette holds the first place in the worst jump convinience. bad fuel efficiency, jump range and "small" fuel tank.
1. You can buy the house, but you also have to hire a housekeeper or do the hoovering yourself. It's a matter of balance you understand.
2. Sure you can have the fastest car, but there's little bootspace. It's a matter of balance you understand
3 is special. It's claiming that more money doesn't buy better equipment in the game. Which is clearly nonsense.
Who play the game well by having FD remove limitations. Stellar gameplay ol' chap.
"Those of us" *chuckles*
He who just spoke about 'cripple those of us who play the game well' is talking about victimisation. Much irony
Have you noticed you're playing a game and not a realistic sim?
I feel very free to disagree. Thank Zeus I did not have to agree with all that.
Wow, now I know why you have your avatar
1. What? Err, I'm loaded so I can buy as many housekeepers as I want, your point? In fact surely this is in direct opposition to your argument, if I applied it in game I could just buy a fleet of "housekeepers".
2. Small boot in a car? Have you seen a luxury Lexus, Mercedes, BMW, Rolls Royce, etc. They are fast and have more than adequate boot space.
3. Of course it buys better equipment, not my point, it just buys the same equipment as someone who has 1/100th of my wealth, not like in real life.
It is not about "removing limitations" as you put it, IMHO, it is about making the game more realistic, a stated goal of the devs.
As for the comment about me talking about "victimisation", I merely make the point that actions should have proportionate results, perhaps a difficult concept I grant you.
Again, I realise I am playing a game, The devs are the ones who want to make this a realistic sim (I could find lots of quotes but you know I am right, I see you all over the forums.)
Of course, I am glad you disagree, that is what generates progress. Well when the arguments are coherent, anyway
I'm a big fan of David BowieWow, now I know why you have your avatar
Right, this is going to be a trip down memory lane. And I'll explain a little more thoroughly since you clearly need it.
Now what you initially posted:
"Sorry sir, you cannot buy this massive house with your wealth, it is a matter of balance, you understand"
The analogy you were making is that someone who has massive wealth cannot buy a thing. My counterpoint:
"You can buy the house, but you also have to hire a housekeeper or do the hoovering yourself. It's a matter of balance you understand."
was that you can buy the house (Corvette) but it does have drawbacks. The issue being discussed is not the ability to buy a Corvette, but it comes with drawbacks.
I like how you emphasized "fast" there. Saves me the trouble
Now what you initially posted:
"Yes, you can have the fastest car but it is crippled to keep balance, you understand"
I also emphasized a word.
Now what you initially posted:
"I don't care how much money you have, achievement and effort do not equal better equipment, balance you know"
As you noticed you didn't specify any amount, which makes it a false analogy again. How much money you have does impact the quality of your equipment. That's so obvious I feel embarrassed explaining it.
These were your analogies. If you're not happy with them, and I can see why you wouldn't be, create others. Don't try to act as if you're not moving the goalposts on them to "win" the argument. It's transparent.
It's not about removing the limitation of a limited FSD?
Explain to me the science and mechanics of how the FSD works exactly. You can't. Because it's madey-up. Which makes talking about it in terms of realism nonsense.
Actions should have proportionate results, and therefore the FSD range should be increased. Well, now you've put it that way, it makes perfect sense
Which gets us back to the science of how we move about in this galaxy. Which is completely unrealistic from the get go.
I hope I have been coherent enough to your liking.Of course, I am glad you disagree, that is what generates progress. Well when the arguments are coherent, anyway
Now the reason I have the avatar is this: cheers!
This is so true, it baffles me that we can't all agree on this. Jump range serves no tactical purpose in all but the most uncommon cases, yet for some reason it is used to balance different ships towards each other. Basically what the devs are saying is "this ship is fun to use, therefore you will have to waste lots of time if you plan to travel anywhere meaningful in it".
Case in point - I love flying my Cutter, but getting around the bubble in it takes twice as long as in a fully combat/multipurpose Asp. What is the point of this? Except to annoy the **** out of me?
If you're an Explorer, jump range is fundamental. If you're a trader it's also hugely important. If you're a smuggler it's also important - the less systems you have to visit, the better.
Seriously? you are complaining about travel time INSIDE the bubble?
Again: Different ships have different ranges - if you want to travel fast, get one that travels fast.
15 ly isn't that bad for a combat fitted ship.
Plus, if you really have a long way to go, you can shed weight and re-arm near your destination (might take a little bit to find all the pieces again, but they are everywhere).
Basically, it is going to take twice as long to get anywhere as opposed to an exploration fitted ship and about 2/3 longer than a multi-role fit. That ain't bad in my book.
I regularly just swap out one of the SCBs on my FDL for a Fuel Scoop and I'll be just about anywhere in populated space before too long.
EDIT: but, I guess that all comes with perspective. I use travel time as music discovery time, so it always goes by quickly for me. Sometimes, I even for get to jump and just SC into nothingness until I get a break in song and remember I need to hit "J"
Plus, if you really have a long way to go, you can shed weight and re-arm near your destination (might take a little bit to find all the pieces again, but they are everywhere).
Basically, it is going to take twice as long to get anywhere as opposed to an exploration fitted ship and about 2/3 longer than a multi-role fit. That ain't bad in my book.
I regularly just swap out one of the SCBs on my FDL for a Fuel Scoop and I'll be just about anywhere in populated space before too long.
EDIT: but, I guess that all comes with perspective. I use travel time as music discovery time, so it always goes by quickly for me. Sometimes, I even for get to jump and just SC into nothingness until I get a break in song and remember I need to hit "J"
Last edited: