Will you ditch the Python for the Chieftain

Lucifera Danzig

Lucifera Danzig
Mrat said:
With everyone ignoring how the Conda made the T10 obsolete, yet somehow not the T9?

It's almost as if people were making straw man arguments to make it seem like the had a point.....
Click to expand...

I think part of it is that they don't notice how the ship strengths and weaknesses can be seen to have some real-world influence. Most people I talk to think that no sensible engineer would make the Hauler, for example, until I remind them it may very well have been the descendants of the people who thought the AMC Gremlin was a good idea. :D
 

Mrat13

M
Lucifera Danzig said:
I think part of it is that they don't notice how the ship strengths and weaknesses can be seen to have some real-world influence. Most people I talk to think that no sensible engineer would make the Hauler, for example, until I remind them it may very well have been the descendants of the people who thought the AMC Gremlin was a good idea. :D
Click to expand...

The Hauler, much like the Adder, was designed to be a cheap ship, like korean hatchbacks are cheap cars.

They aren't meant to be good, but be cheap enough for anyone to afford them, and drive around the universe without emptying their back account. They have a purpose.

As I said, the T10 is just a worse Conda. Only people who buy them are hipsters. That is not a purpose, that is a fashion statement.
 

Lucifera Danzig

Lucifera Danzig
Mrat said:
The Hauler, much like the Adder, was designed to be a cheap ship, like korean hatchbacks are cheap cars.

They aren't meant to be good, but be cheap enough for anyone to afford them, and drive around the universe without emptying their back account. They have a purpose.

As I said, the T10 is just a worse Conda. Only people who buy them are hipsters. That is not a purpose, that is a fashion statement.
Click to expand...

People who buy them, like those who by any ship, may very well buy it simply because they like it. There's others buying it because it can haul significantly more cargo than the Anaconda while having better jump range than the T-9. Every ship will have strengths and weaknesses, and part of the game is to leverage the strengths while working with the weaknesses. If every ship in the game was perfectly designed for the intended function, all the ships in the game would blur together and there'd be no point at all in having more than three or four ships.

Saying the T-10 is "a worse Anaconda" makes no more sense than saying the Anaconda is "a worse Cutter", or the Gunship being "a worse Corvette." The T-10 carries more cargo, the Anaconda trades cargo capacity for jump range and potential in combat.
 

kofeyh

kofeyh
Lucifera Danzig said:
Saying the T-10 is "a worse Anaconda" makes no more sense than saying the Anaconda is "a worse Cutter"..
Click to expand...

.. am all for balance and ships having some limits; but there's not a single person who has ever said an Anaconda is "a worse cutter". Who are the people even saying this? How is this argument even relevant? What player base are we talking about here? There's a bit of disconnection from reality.

At the end of the day, if a ship has a role (particularly if it's role specific) then it should actually achieve that to some measurable degree. The endless changes Frontier has had to make to get ships designed to do a role, actually doing that role to at least some competency? It's been a lot. Just a whole lot.

Frontier get a lot right, but their approach to compromises are so inconsistent, it actually fundamentally causes issues down the line. Creating endless rework. People ask for endless more ships, because the existing ones are struggling in many ways to meet their stated goals.

And people are so fundamentally aware of this, at this point, that the only option they have left, is to ask for another one. We have 32 ships. We'll have 33 soon. How many more will it take before it's understood that more working as intended, should be the goal, over ship count alone.
 
Last edited:

Lucifera Danzig

Lucifera Danzig
kofeyh said:
.. am all for balance and ships having some limits; but there's not a single person who has ever said an Anaconda is "a worse cutter". Who are the people even saying this? What player base are we talking about here? There's a bit of disconnection from reality here.

At the end of the day, if a ship has a role (particularly if it's role specific) then it should actually achieve that to some measurable degree. The endless changes Frontier has had to make to get ships designed to do a role, actually doing that role? It's been a lot. Just a whole lot.

Frontier get a lot right, but their approach to compromises are so inconsistent, it actually fundamentally causes issues down the line. Creating endless rework.
Click to expand...

In the case of the Type 10, given the country FDev is based on I'm actually thinking it's more of a nod to a bit of history that most have forgotten. The Type 10 is a refitted type 9...this is not the first time a civilian ship was hastily refitted for war operations, despite not being exactly optimized for the task.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Olympic#Naval_service

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMHS_Britannic#First_service
 

Ian Skippy

Ian Skippy
kofeyh said:
.. am all for balance and ships having some limits; but there's not a single person who has ever said an Anaconda is "a worse cutter". Who are the people even saying this? How is this argument even relevant? What player base are we talking about here? There's a bit of disconnection from reality.

At the end of the day, if a ship has a role (particularly if it's role specific) then it should actually achieve that to some measurable degree. The endless changes Frontier has had to make to get ships designed to do a role, actually doing that role to at least some competency? It's been a lot. Just a whole lot.

Frontier get a lot right, but their approach to compromises are so inconsistent, it actually fundamentally causes issues down the line. Creating endless rework.
Click to expand...

The bit you quoted was an analogy, not a claim it is often said. That it isnt often said is exactly what makes the analogy work...
 

kofeyh

kofeyh
sleutelbos said:
The bit you quoted was an analogy, not a claim it is often said.
Click to expand...

How can you give an example of something no-one even says, as simultaneously being something that's been said, as a supporting argument? I'm all for ships not being ridiculous clown shoes. But inventing an example that literally doesn't exist, and then using that as some sort of an analogy to support an argument, is pretty out there. It's borderline strawman.

Anyway. I hope chieftain is a wonderfully compromised mess so folks can continue to expand on how this is great for the game.
 
Last edited:

Bortas

Bortas
Lucifera Danzig said:
People who buy them, like those who by any ship, may very well buy it simply because they like it.
Click to expand...

Isn't that exactly the definition of a hipster ship? They don't buy it because it's good, but simply because they like it for sentimental reasons...

I admit I bought one, too, because I like the industrial look and feel. I even god-rolled a C6 PD to mitigate its limitations a bit, but no matter what I try... it remains a bad ship. Whenever I need something good, I still take out my Corvette or Cutter, because they are better in every regard. Look and feel is nice to have, but it's not enough :(
 
Last edited:

Lucifera Danzig

Lucifera Danzig
Bortas said:
Isn't that exactly the definition of a hipster ship? They don't buy it because it's good, but simply because they like it for sentimental reasons...

I admit I bought one, too, because I like the industrial look and feel. I even god-rolled a C6 PD to mitigate its limitations a bit, but no matter what I try... it remains a bad ship. Look and feel is nice to have, but it's not enough :(
Click to expand...

If buying something because you like it makes you a hipster, that would make almost everyone on Earth a hipster, so it probably isn't the definition you're looking for. :D
 

Bortas

Bortas
Lucifera Danzig said:
If buying something because you like it makes you a hipster, that would make almost everyone on Earth a hipster, so it probably isn't the definition you're looking for. :D
Click to expand...

Nope, the question is... WHY do you like it? Do you like it, because it is good or do you like it because... you like it. And yes, I would call everyone who deliberately buys technically worse stuff because it looks better, a hipster or at least a sentimentalist ;)
 

Lucifera Danzig

Lucifera Danzig
Bortas said:
Nope, the question is... WHY do you like it? Do you like it, because it is good or do you like it because... you like it. And yes, I would call everyone who deliberately buys technically worse stuff because it looks better, a hipster or at least a sentimentalist ;)
Click to expand...

Either that or really easily swayed by clever marketing.
 

lokvette

lokvette
Ditch my python?

Nope never going to happen, if the chieftain fits into a role I like doing and its good at it and its fun to fly then I might buy one.

My python, is still my main go to ship whislt in the bubble.
 

Ian Skippy

Ian Skippy
kofeyh said:
How can you give an example of something no-one even says, as simultaneously being something that's been said, as a supporting argument? I'm all for ships not being ridiculous clown shoes. But inventing an example that literally doesn't exist, and then using that as some sort of an analogy to support an argument, is pretty out there. It's borderline strawman.

Anyway. I hope chieftain is a wonderfully compromised mess so folks can continue to expand on how this is great for the game.
Click to expand...

You are confused it seems.

"X is so stupid, its like trying to save money by eating your own head!"

You:"Huh, who eats his own head? That isnt true!"

Anyway, I hope it'll be a fun and agile ship with drawbacks that prevent it from being the next Uber Ship. If I get that, people will complain about those drawbacks. :D
 
Last edited:

kofeyh

kofeyh
I'd just like something that mostly does what it says on the tin. Type-10 is so close to being great (without being broken). It was frustrating to see Frontier introduce a great concept, and then misstep on the distro (regardless of personal opinions, the ship still has to adequately function in it's role).

Anyway - my point was more the ludicrousness of the example given, in context of the discussion; because it was then used as a reason for something.
 
Last edited:

Stealthie

Stealthie
Seems a bit of a premature choice to consider.

I'm guessing the Chieftain is going to be more fightey and less cargoey than the Python.

Besides, what is this "instead" of which you speak?
 

Bortas

Bortas
Stealthie said:
I'm guessing the Chieftain is going to be more fightey and less cargoey than the Python.
Click to expand...

Considering the Chieftain has 2l, 1m, 3s hardpoints compared to 3l, 2m combined with a C7 PD on the Python, I think it will be less fightey and less cargoey ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom