Two commanders critically analyze the strengths and weaknesses of large ships in Elite Dangerous, highlighting outdated designs like the Type 7, Type 9, and Type 10, and suggesting practical improvements to enhance their combat and utility roles. They also discuss peripheral elements such as ship-launched fighters, SRVs, and fleet carriers, advocating for skill-based progression and balanced gameplay while expressing concerns over microtransactions and game design choices.
In this extensive discussion, two commanders delve into the state of large ships in Elite Dangerous, analyzing their strengths, weaknesses, and potential improvements. They start with the Type 7, a ship criticized for its awkward classification as a large ship despite its medium-pad size, poor heat management, and limited combat utility. Although it once served as a stepping stone for traders, its large size and inability to land on medium pads make it impractical today. The speakers suggest downgrading it to a medium ship and adding small hardpoints to revive its usefulness.
The conversation then moves to the Imperial Clipper, a ship with decent speed and handling but hindered by poor weapon convergence and shield capacity. While not ideal for combat, it excels in niche roles like mining and scavenging, especially in graveyard sites. Suggestions include adjusting its internals to enhance shield strength and make it a more distinct shield tank, differentiating it from hull-tank ships. The Orca and Beluga passenger liners are also discussed, with the Orca praised for its surprising speed and ramming potential, while the Beluga is noted for its massive size but poor combat stats, with recommendations to increase internals and jump range to improve viability.
The Type 9 and Type 10 ships receive critical attention for their declining relevance. The Type 9, once a staple hauler, is now slow and cumbersome compared to newer ships like the Panther Clipper, and the speakers humorously propose a “cash for clunkers” program to retire it. The Type 10, originally designed for anti-Xeno combat, is considered a meme due to its poor speed and utility, though it has niche uses in automated combat roles. Both ships exemplify the challenges of balancing legacy vessels in a game that continuously evolves.
The iconic Anaconda and Federal Corvette are examined as well. The Anaconda is lauded for its historic significance, damage model, and versatility, especially in exploration and PvE combat with specialized builds like the railgun sniper setup. However, it suffers from poor maneuverability and speed. The Corvette, while visually impressive and boasting powerful armaments, is criticized for its sluggish speed, which limits its effectiveness in PvP and combat scenarios. The speakers suggest modest speed buffs for the Corvette and potential adjustments to the Imperial Cutter to balance its speed and combat role.
Finally, the discussion touches on peripheral topics such as ship-launched fighters (SLFs), surface reconnaissance vehicles (SRVs), and fleet carriers. SLFs are deemed fun but largely ineffective due to poor design choices and lag issues. SRVs like the Scarab and Scorpion have awkward handling and limited combat use, especially in AX content. Fleet carriers receive praise as mobile homes that enhance player experience, though some bugs and economic concerns remain. Throughout, the speakers express frustration with microtransactions, pay-to-win mechanics, and game design decisions, emphasizing skill-based progression and advocating for thoughtful ship balancing to enrich Elite Dangerous’s gameplay.