Anaconda or Asp Explorer for Exploration

[FuX]

Hello again,

Today I want to know some opinions on which of these ships is better suited for exploration.

I currently have AspX with an exploration build (but without any modifications from engineers) but I am thinking of going overboard to Anaconda.
To be more specific, I want a ship for long trips and without any improvements from engineers because I don't have time for it.

I am also aware of the cost of equipping the anaconda for such expeditions, but it does not play such a role in my case. I just mean which ship will be more suitable for long trips without improving anything by engineers.

Because I don't know if there is any point in buying Anaconda since I already have AspX.

What are the biggest advantages and disadvantages of an anaconda to Asp beyond the obvious such as a better view in Asp.

Thanks for all the answers

[Yuki]

It shares the Asps caveat of weaker forward thrusters. For awesome strength in every other direction (Typically Imperial, the courier also excells at this).
Thats what lets people think its clunky, while in fact its all but.
Its "hard", more difficult to handle yes, but if you can handle it its way better at keeping its sights at the enemy- and a position in their back at all times.
Not bad for a ship about twice the mass.

And yes, battering ram is fun, FSD mass lock too :D
I personally found its higher "raw numbers" in defense to be misleading though, its not that much more tanky than a Conda given its also a way larger target with its massive "wingspan".

[Syad]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย ⎛ Alucard ⎞ ✟:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Syad:

I did

No actually you didn't explain why Large ships aren't "immersive" for exploration.
When they clearly are according to the game..

Ok i'll explain again. Large ships aren't used for exploration because it's inefficient. Inefficiency, predicting your next "question", is throwing excess resources at the problem. That's why we don't build death stars to distribute mail. It is economically unfeasible and realism breaking from normal people's perspective. You don't understand how large these ships are.

Here is an Anaconda to scale https://i.imgur.com/Pwnmqid.jpg tl;dr it's the size of a modern air-carrier, operated by over five thousand people, not counting support ships and support crew. These highly sophisticated ships cost an arm and a leg to operate and the tools they carry are only, only, used for specific purposes and only when it is absolutely necessity.

The issue with getting a pub buddy "crew", as you amusingly suggested, and use the above hunk of metal to fetch some rocks from some other rocks just because the game allows to, is that it's about as believable as space crocodiles with lasers. We don't have this in our world and there are no indications it ever will be the case. That's fantasy, not science fiction.

But, to be fair it's a problem with many games, the meta often contradicts common sense. Except the Anaconda isn't the meta as you seem to think, it just has a good mass/jump range ratio. ( which is mostly used to boost jump range)

Although the game in general has the problem with oversized ships.

[veryinky]

Diamondback Explorer:
-range: best (41.7)
-temperature control: best
-cost: very low
-equipment: small
-manoeuvrability: good
-appearance: space industrial helicopter

Anaconda:
-range: excellent (41)
-temperature control: mediocre
-cost: most expensive
-equipment: largest
-manoeuvrability: bad
-appearance: space boat

Krait Phantom:
-range: above average (38)
-temperature control:
-cost: expensive
-equipment: medium
-manoeuvrability: good
-appearance: star wars fighter

Asp Explorer:
-range: above average (38)
-temperature control: average
-cost: low
-equipment: medium
-appearance: space polygon with massive cockpit.

Hauler:
-range: above average (36)
-temperature control: bad
-cost: cheapest
-equipment: small
-manoeuvrability: good
-appearance: ford transit

Orca:
-range: above average (36)
-temperature control: below average
-cost: medium
-equipment: above average
-manoeuvrability: average
-appearance: space whale

Personally I recommend the Diamondback Explorer due to it's range, price, manoeuvrability and temperature control (useful in some of the more exotic locations). I've used it to explore for months.

The Anaconda is the ship to use if you have money to burn, but I find it's lack of manoeuvrability annoying. Orca is rarely mentioned as exploration ships but it's very good.

[Yuki]

Are you two still at your personal vendetta?
Call a mod and he will slap the both of you.

Back to topic:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย veryinky:

Diamondback Explorer:
-range: best (41.7)
-temperature control: best
-cost: very low
-equipment: small
-manoeuvrability: good
-appearance: space industrial helicopter

While the Daimondback has a lot of useful stats- jumprange, record heat capacity, nice cockpit, high maneuverability- it falls seriously short on modules.
Not only cant it fit a proper sized FSD boost, more importantly it also cant fit a properly sized fuelscoop.
Measured by "scooping per jump" it spends about 3-4 times as long as the "benchmark" Asp would (~5-6 seconds compared to 17-20).
And that becomes a serious difference "out there" while the price difference isnt that much at all.

[Heretic]

My current big ship is the Asp Explorer, but I haven't flown it since before the DLC (Horizons only). It has a good cockpit for VR and a decent jump range.

[FuX]

I thought about why it is so easy to get to the most expensive ships and I think that maybe the creators of the game do not want the purchase of the ship to be hard but its appropriate equipment to specific role.
It is enough to look at the price of a class A power plant of Conda, it is higher than the price of the ship itself.
And that's just one module out of many.

[generalnibbler]

i guess no one thought about using a fleet carrier as an exploration ship it does have the biggest jump range of them all

[Alucard †]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย generalnibbler:

i guess no one thought about using a fleet carrier as an exploration ship it does have the biggest jump range of them all

It's more of a "movable base" than a ship in a sense so that kinds of limits its usage to being just that. But well there are quite few carriers out there in the deep black far away from the bubble.

[Erei]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย generalnibbler:

i guess no one thought about using a fleet carrier as an exploration ship it does have the biggest jump range of them all

Well, the FC can't land on planets, and can't scan anything. You still need a ship for that.

Also, while the FC does have the best range for the FSD, it also comes with a 20m total time for each jump, and you need to manually input each of them (no automated jump like for ships).
Eventually, that mean a ship is faster if you just scoop and jump. A conda/ phantom can reach into the 70-80 range, without sacrificing anything (for explo). That's 7 jump max to do what a carrier can do, and that won't take 20m.

Finally, FC use precious fuel to jump (tritium), and can't scoop. So you have to carry your fuel with you or risk being stranded and have to find someplace to mine tritium.



I use FC as a mobile exploration place, but that's the choice of lazyness. I just have to log 2-3times to ask for the jump, and then come back to explore later on. Instead of spending a stupid long time doing nothing but jump on the ship.

[FuX]

Finally I had time to fly a little on my Anacodna and maybe what I say will seem strange to most people, but for some reason I like how slow and sluggish this ship moves (I have already switched engines to class A).
There is no such tragedy as I expected from what I read here, but it is actually not the king of maneuverability.

It's just that the slowness of this ship, in my opinion, gives it such majesty and the feeling of flying a really huge ship (which it is).
I really did not fly anything as funny (not to be confused with effectively) as Conda.

Call me crazy, but I love to pilot this ship exactly because of its slowness, maybe in exploration it will be a problem in the long run, I do not know yet, but during the transport missions it was extremely pleasant for me to fly this thing.

Anacodna has something magical for me about how this ship is piloted and I will agree with anyone who says it is slow and sluggish, but what should it be like? it is over a hundred meters long weighing 400 tons vessel, logcial that it will not fly like the FDL.
And don't call me a funboy because I understand perfectly well why someone can not like very much how this ship flyes, Im just saying that despite the opinions of others, I decided to see for myself how it will fly with me and I don't regret it. That's why I think that basing on the opinions of others is valuable (and thank you for each of them) , but it is also worth trying for yourself if a ship is for you.

[Walrus-Sama]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย FuX:

Finally I had time to fly a little on my Anacodna and maybe what I say will seem strange to most people, but for some reason I like how slow and sluggish this ship moves (I have already switched engines to class A).
There is no such tragedy as I expected from what I read here, but it is actually not the king of maneuverability.

It's just that the slowness of this ship, in my opinion, gives it such majesty and the feeling of flying a really huge ship (which it is).
I really did not fly anything as funny (not to be confused with effectively) as Conda.

Call me crazy, but I love to pilot this ship exactly because of its slowness, maybe in exploration it will be a problem in the long run, I do not know yet, but during the transport missions it was extremely pleasant for me to fly this thing.

Anacodna has something magical for me about how this ship is piloted and I will agree with anyone who says it is slow and sluggish, but what should it be like? it is over a hundred meters long weighing 400 tons vessel, logcial that it will not fly like the FDL.
And don't call me a funboy because I understand perfectly well why someone can not like very much how this ship flyes, Im just saying that despite the opinions of others, I decided to see for myself how it will fly with me and I don't regret it. That's why I think that basing on the opinions of others is valuable (and thank you for each of them) , but it is also worth trying for yourself if a ship is for you.

Compared to small and medium ships, it is slow and sluggish. But compared to other large ships, it's actually quite good. People who say the Anaconda has poor agility have never piloted a Type-9, Type-10 or Cutter.

Personally, of all the large ships, I find the Anaconda the most pleasant to fly. Though that may have something to do with the fact the Anaconda is the ship I've used the most.

[Yuki]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย FuX:

That's why I think that basing on the opinions of others is valuable (and thank you for each of them) , but it is also worth trying for yourself if a ship is for you.

Thats why i suggested to just give it a try ;)
And indeed it feels like a cruiser. Exploration cruiser!
However ... Majestic?
Wait until you fly the 2400 ton Cutter :D
(Conda is around 1200 thereby, 400 is more the range of Asp and Phantom)

[Heimdall313]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Walrus-Sama:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย FuX:

Finally I had time to fly a little on my Anacodna and maybe what I say will seem strange to most people, but for some reason I like how slow and sluggish this ship moves (I have already switched engines to class A).
There is no such tragedy as I expected from what I read here, but it is actually not the king of maneuverability.

It's just that the slowness of this ship, in my opinion, gives it such majesty and the feeling of flying a really huge ship (which it is).
I really did not fly anything as funny (not to be confused with effectively) as Conda.

Call me crazy, but I love to pilot this ship exactly because of its slowness, maybe in exploration it will be a problem in the long run, I do not know yet, but during the transport missions it was extremely pleasant for me to fly this thing.

Anacodna has something magical for me about how this ship is piloted and I will agree with anyone who says it is slow and sluggish, but what should it be like? it is over a hundred meters long weighing 400 tons vessel, logcial that it will not fly like the FDL.
And don't call me a funboy because I understand perfectly well why someone can not like very much how this ship flyes, Im just saying that despite the opinions of others, I decided to see for myself how it will fly with me and I don't regret it. That's why I think that basing on the opinions of others is valuable (and thank you for each of them) , but it is also worth trying for yourself if a ship is for you.

Compared to small and medium ships, it is slow and sluggish. But compared to other large ships, it's actually quite good. People who say the Anaconda has poor agility have never piloted a Type-9, Type-10 or Cutter.

Personally, of all the large ships, I find the Anaconda the most pleasant to fly. Though that may have something to do with the fact the Anaconda is the ship I've used the most.

I've piloted a Type 10 more than any other Large ship and yeah Anaconda handles pretty ehhh.
Cutter is the worst though, the sliding. The insufferable sliding. Type 10 stops on a football field.

[Yuki]

It also doesnt really leave that field :P

Anyways, i didnt take a Cutter despite my plans.
Its the Phantom again and...honestly? On paper its the size of the Asp, however...

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2750000394

Doesnt look the part imho :D
(And no that balcony is sadly inaccessible. Yes of course i tried)
Certainly big enough, with enough space inside as well.

[Alucard †]

Krait looks like a ship that belongs in Star Wars universe ^^