g4borg

Mercenaries
  • Content count

    2,556
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    76

g4borg last won the day on March 24

g4borg had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,366 Excellent

2 Followers

About g4borg

  • Rank
    Owl

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Vienna, Austria
  • Interests
    Code, Writing, Games, Jamaharon

Contact Methods

  • Jabber
    g4b@jabber.g4b.org

Recent Profile Visitors

13,200 profile views
  1. it's a r14, why would it drop r13 parts ? you only get it in the daily purple with the ranks around it, otherwise, apollo, lion, osprey, ... why did you assume, the tyrant would drop you brokk parts? or do you mean, even the r13s in your lineup stop dropping? afaik, i got the lion in a mixed setup and it contributes... so it might just be reduced drop rate if you use other ships less...
  2. this is a tharga glass cannon being fired upon right
  3. koro is actually being nice here, offering those who farm a bit in open space basicly a first grab opportunity if he finds a blueprint. i think the risk being scammed is bigger for him from experience, if koro says he drops u something in open space, he will do it.
  4. do those r9 ships get into a special queue then? because sometimes it seems r15 come still into other games i do not care about r9 and r10 being "dual", it should just be officially told (as until now it was only r10 doing this), but minimum r11 and r12 should ensure a high rank game, with r15s present. or please simply just remove rank restrictions between r10 and r15, so r12 / whatever can still squad with someone using r15 and you can mix those ships together. atm it feels those restrictions work contrary the other goal, to make high difficulty span across multiple ranks. which imho works great. changing bonuses on the ships are also hard to prepare for, if there is suddenly a medium+t4 inbetween. with the official statement, i would say, this bug report was indeed a bug, but a bug of communication
  5. tool

    i find it great to have multiple tools, cmon this one has more info, frogswarm has their weird rating formula, russian is more russian... it's certainly a good task to test skillsets, and might be useful for some good job
  6. you do realize, that is exactly, why GS does make sense, as it is directly buyable, by anyone, even if he just started, and not a resource which is easily farmable as an old player? I am not defending it, as I stated I find its just very rudimental. But your arguments make no sense together, except the fact, you find it unfair, that most likely without paying money for GS you will not be able to buy anything. And yah that sux. Also, this is no player driven economy, and actually, there is nothing wrong with a player driven economy, as actually, price wars lead to cheap prices for common goods; but player driven economies usually have some kind of fabrication method. This is more a direct trading system for loot. As the loot comes to players slowly, buying up all stocks makes little sense, and would be a huge investment of probably real money. Not saying its an impossible horror future scenario, but I think it is a bit far fetched, especially because it is so simple. I would wait until we see how it does on live. I am also curious, as iridium has said to be a part of trading, so maybe it will be expanded further.
  7. i am okay with the occasional survival, but it is indeed almost every second game and i still prefer tdm over it.
  8. i believe you, but believe me, i am really deep inside this math atm. anyway, I am impartial, as the main topic is still annoying as a fact, imho!
  9. finally, someone to make star conflict great again.
  10. Didn't say never...
  11. oh now i get it. haha. to be honest, you still didnt die I suppose, as that ominous tackler watched you probably blink out of range the next frame... hehe otherwise pretty much summed it up. we do have adequate channels now to participate in its future. can't vote coz last two options i say neither. it doesnt need more development cost, it just needs balancing. redesigning it.. if they start over, it will be back to op. let them tinker.
  12. holy sh*t kosty, you just made me more confused. so how much damage does the thrakt get over charge? wait that means i actually read it correctly get schwifty kthx.
  13. inertial dampening in sc is just drag, otherwise, the calculations must be the same, just capped. So you have to manually create the orbit also, a slingshot manouver does not take you through the middle of the gravity well, otherwise, it would be quite unfortunate. the differences in theory are irrelevant of mass and gravity, as the compared system of a spaceship to a planet or black hole means its basicly just the distance to the mass and the resulting acceleration - which is adequatly represented by virtual point with decreased pull over distance. but yeah, basicly, all you can gain is acceleration until 150m/s, but you can still use it to accelerate away faster than out of your own strength, or theoretically, albeit i gotta try this, to change direction with a cruise build. might be too weak through the cap. I still don't find it as unadequate to use it for nitpicking, as I think probably most people would say "slingshotting" when they encounter this in game by accident. unfortunate, since it does change things. maybe tetroxide makes sense then actually without knowing this, you shouldn't be so sure about the correctness of your whole theory there with only destros getting stuck either, as it would depend on the acceleration of the ships aswell - not just their max speed.
  14. point is, you get up to r13 with r9, and get into games with r6-r9s, if you go r11, where i expect hard (r15) interesting. what is its acceleration? as this information basicly only says nothing in a maximum speed simulation. so you need over 150m/s to escape its influence, but how much acceleration do you need to counter its force? Or is it that? Because then, not many have 150 m/sec² acc. yeah. i think he meant the acceleration here too, of course, in a maximum speed environment, slingshotting will not occur. you can still use it use its acceleration and boost into a perpendicular direction to the force vector of the singularity, which would use the same mechanics, until you reach the pull speed, as a slingshot manouver until you reach the caps, and basicly using it to rapidly change direction. This is just tiptoeing anyway. It's different, but it's still similar to a point in the slingshot, so why not nickname it like that. I like it. coz he is skilled as cena! srsly, take this to the twister club. also it's g4b, monsieur!
  15. it's good cover, like a living emergency barrier i am pretty sure people do this without wanting to signal the enemy. but yeah, bad nasa! bad!
  16. I can fill your thread with rage about players who sit in Long Ranges all day, watching their team disintegrate I suggest you take a look at Claws Twister in Offtopic.
  17. I totally understand how you read it swifter. You mean, 1.4.1b reads reduced damage after charge accumulation, meaning the tharkt actually has reduced damage in charged mode. but both sentences can be read, just as likely to mean, the charge accumulation, which works like gauss, or any other chargable weapon, got its damage effect reduced, which still means, the tharkt has increased damage over charge, but relative to other charged weapons, less so, through those changes. Unassume your expected mechanic, which as far as i saw wasnt in the ui, and read it like that, it leaves you guessing. I do get you, maybe that's the thing, and it is very likely you are right. Especially since you actually never get extra damage anyway, you just stack, so both would mean the same. I was confused by the thought, the Tharkt does not stack its damage on charge, making me totally confused about how charge actually works now, reading it actually has damage increase, misreading this patchnote totally. -- I found kostys and genes explanation to remind myself, now my clarity shifted. unsure if its still accurate. So it just would need clarification, either in the ui, as you say, or somewhere, where the weapon mechanics are described, just to rule out guessing, that it has reduced damage on charge. Guess thats on roadmap. In combination I understand now, that charge basicly stacks damages, and they get some reduction, which would reduce the overall max crits aswell. It should be as number in the description of the weapon, slightly is quite vague. But yeah makes sense. It should basicly be a shotgun uncharged aswell, so they try to keep its high alpha, but its overall point damage and accumulated charge damage seem still way too high imho. I do assume, it still increases its crit chance on charge. Anyway, without your comment, I would not have detected this logic error, so thx. I blame the smooth charge changes for forgetting this. It also happens to me every 2 years.
  18. if it already had damage increase accumulation, the sentence says that got reduced. so it would still have damage accumulation, but not as strong. it does not say, it turned into a damage decrease on charge. if it were a new mechanic, only then, you could read it as "now it decreases damage on charge". point is, its unclear actually, we should wait for cinnamon or someone with code knowledge to actually explain wtf is going on. the charge mechanics are in the tooltip for gauss (capable of accumulating charge). this made me actually always assume, the thrakt does accumulate charge with the same mechanic, so in fact, it has increased damage after charging.
  19. well, that depends, if it does. as if you read it as a patchnote - so what has been changed - then they reduced the damage on charge accumulation, which would mean, charge actually increases damage, but this process has been nerfed. if you read it as "new overall feature" for it, it would indeed mean what you say, but then you would probably word it differently, maybe, well as said, you can read the sentence in two ways as this isnt in the tooltip, like for the thargatok, it really leaves us to the question, which of the two things is really not shown in the ui... increased damage by charge (which has been reduced, but that means it was always there undocumented, or indirectly logical through basic rules of charge mechanics), or a decrease in damage by charge (which was introduced?) :/ in the end both patch notes just read like whoever decided what to patch gave it to someone, who turned them around, and actually, the thargatok would have had gotten a reduced damage increase on time (makes sense as it does it) with an additional 5% overall reduction, and the thrakt should have been nerfed by 15%, which also makes sense. given how similar the weapons are named, I start to think, the nerfs got switcharooed.
  20. this says, the "damage accumulation" was reduced. it doesnt say the mechanic reduces damage.
  21. wut? true. isn't it already worse on paper than assault? okay, with all the em holes and the damage windup, and being on the tharga, and having awesome range is enough to make it a lot better option than assault... nah you cant do the same. the tharkt works also on other gunships, and you can very much compare its effectiveness e.g. on a wolf-m, even if the old ships with their worse strafing abilities make much less use of this gun / make it harder to fight. gauss, assault and ions on a tharga are actually for different reasons worse, but a gauss tharga still shows off its incredible mobility, not however its damage. So nah, it cant do "the same". i do enjoy the tharga with gauss, it feels a lot more balanced. but thats also the problem, in the current meta, thats weak.
  22. hm, in those hot situations, making those decisions might be hard, so yeah, should be fixed before, since otherwise, I can also understand the feeling, that "play yet another" bursts nerves. Still, not condoning it, since you guys made a lot of effort to be actually very accessible as organisers. Which is important, as actually being in a team, there is a weardown, internal struggle, that might even hit teams that are funky cool hipsters. There is always a breaking point, where everybody just wants to go. I would not take it personally, if irrational behaviour comes out from this unfortunate turn of events, but also understandably human from both imagined perspectives. hope you guys can still smoke a peace pipe. so technically, 2-0 + 1 draw means, if it were 3/5, and the team didnt come, the end result would still be 2-2, which doesnt really underline the "we have won" attitude, while 2/3 would have meant, the third match was already a friendly match. Or was there just two? Anyway, next time, it will be even better And it was still very fun.
  23. With R12 you can still take R9 into battle. There is no excuse to sit on the R12 only therefore, as the +-3 rule allows you to take a ship up to 3 ranks under your max ship. I find it great you make thoughts about this tho, as you notice yourself, a one-ship-wonder, as it is sometimes termed, reduces a lot of strength, and even puts the cards on the table, as the enemy knows exactly, which role you will take. If it comes to Capture The Beacon - where every ship has only 1 life - every ship is unlocked, even those which you cannot take. Therefore, if it would be the remote chance, that you have only up to R8's and one R12 (which is pretty unplausible), you can still take those ships to at least have another life in a ctb game - with the role bonuses for underranked ships they also perform a bit better, than in lower ranked games, having significant damage and resist bonuses. If you have R12 only in one faction, just take the max of another faction instead. The missions say "max of one faction". The Tharga, being the only ship in the ellydium faction, counts as the rank you maximally applied already (with the button). So if you only unlock it to R9 actively, it will stay also in your profile as R9, even if you have already unlocked items you could use from higher ranks. IF you ever unlock it to R10 or higher, with apply, ranking it down to R9 will not make it count as max ship of ellydium (afaik), so you can keep it any rank you want while still unlocking higher stuff if you never actively upgrade the ship itself above a certain rank instead. The ranks mentioned are just exemplary, but keeping the tharga r9 is actually the only way, for someone who has already all r15s unlocked, to make those missions in medium, so i mention it here. i find, lrfs should not be in your lineup, until you really got the hang of all the other roles, or you are synergizing it, or maybe keeping it as a survival ship. sitting in an lrf is the best way to keep losing games, and is even worse, than a single ship player. the worst player you can have is an unseasoned one-ship-wonder with a LRF, like a mauler. The reason is not because the LRF sux (mauler is a beast! but yeah, that is r13), but for being a good LRF having experience in the game, both to understand the ships you are facing, and the objectives to play, is key, as it basicly leaves your team hanging, if you are not a major threat to the enemy team, as each LRF standing alone somewhere in the nowhere removes one ship from the main fleet, you hurt your team, and each LRF reduces that fleet even more - as you cannot really engage more than single targets, you simply do not carry your own weight, making LRFs actually the ship, which should be chosen last from all the options the game gives you - even if there are exceptions, given what the enemy takes, or game modes like dread battles, where they have a dedicated objective (shooting dread-to-dread torps). Even if you take other ships, and perform less well overall, simply being there amongst the fleet gives the fleet a better chance of success to achieve victory. So anyone who is still leveling his basic ships, a word of advice: do the LRFs later, and always one at a time. And don't camp in spawn.
  24. I think its a start. I awaited a bit more than GS based trade only, but as said, it's a start. I can totally understand why this has to be tried first like this, and can only say, thank you for evolving outside the box. I hope for other steps like this. It will be interesting to have a Jita chat now. Can't wait to see that in life. Otherwise, linking items to the chat is a generally cool function; definitely one of my favourite functions in eve, so independent of trade, that could be taken to a whole different level yet. Good work. Actually, I have to try that now in unity, this can be useful to have...
  25. I know, and I used cruise extensively, as said, on many ships, but only a dozen ships have "viable" cruise fit "variations". In that particular use, they remind a lot of "Jets", meaning they can use their speed to move more distant to the battlefield, and attack from unusual angles, mostly using ranged weaponry or bomb effects. One of them was to flyby and drop 2 drones, which we call the drone-cruise-tackler, which is a troll fit, because it leaves the tackler vulnerable to another cruise tackler, or even a recon with a plasma gun, and basicly only serves to distract and annoy. It still is perfectly possible to fly such a fit, use it for this purpose, and it was always important to control your energy household and afterburner usage during flight, or plan ahead course corrections, attack and exit vector, and rely on multipurpose modules for close encounters, and concentrate as much of the rest of the build on damage. With the advent of guard slowing bubbles being permanent, cruise is actually even less smart, than it was before, as the main option, so I would definitely not use it on "many" fighters, no matter their role, and in the end, tacklers are still those which have the most individual ships which can benefit from cruise. If you however now say, afterburner uses too much energy after patch, I am questioning, whether your fit was used correctly as a cruise fighter, or basicly was just an uber-mobile fit which circumvented all the downsides of the cruise to make an incredibly agile ship, that cannot be caught. For me, someone using a cruise fit already has to know, he is a missing man in the team, just like a LRF in no mans land, and has to make up by being extremely present on the field, or helping in some way to make pressure on the enemy. A ship that cannot be caught is nice for that guy, but he isn't helping much. Don't be that guy. --- To be honest, you have a point tho pointing at the thargas, as thargas seem exactly what the early cruise wolf-m's were, but much more efficient at it... so if people hate cruise fighters so much, why do they endorse that tharga thing? It does exactly all the things a cruise ship does, and does it even better. I'd rather have the thargas cruise capacities even worse, than that of standard fighters, as they already pay a high price for that speed - The tharga even uses it together with a gun, that allows short windowed encounters to deliver high damage, with the thrakt, and has awesome engine modules compared to standard ships. --- and in this thought, I am amazed, why the thargatok is to be nerfed more than the thrakt. compared, the thargatok seemed actually reasonably balanced, harder to use, and only benefitted from main damages being kinetic and thermal atm., to become so dangerous in terms of damage. if the kinetic dominance would go back to normal, and EM holes were not as present, the thargatok might become extremely weak over time, but lets see. the thargas ability to increase its damage output from various circumstances make any weapon strong on it, but e.g. with a gauss, the same tharga feels a lot weaker, albeit still powerful enough to hold its own.
  26. imho we dont need the tier system. and it happened just aswell, as tier mixing with GS-ship underranking was on and off for years. t3 only worked because everybody played there, so it wasnt too hard getting over r7 simply because you could hide in the crowd, but once most players were in t5, lower tiers became sniper tiers for killfarming and t4 was basicly 3v3-5v5. with r7 and r10 seriously hard ranks to overcome. don't let nostalgy fool you. 10-15 is a nice system, nothing over 10 should be in medium, no matter how many tiers there are below. please dont split up 10-15 either best ranking strategy is anyways getting to full synergy in r9-r10 with everything first, only rank a few passively to r15 for the unlocks. with that r11-r15 is fast enough to rank up. so those ships can form a nice endgame.
  27. i have no problems with cruise fighters in general, and while planned differently, i just accepted it as part of the meta; they still seem to work as they did for me, as in sprinting and jetting. it should maybe add slightly more afterburner speed bonus, but otherwise i find it seems fine. at least my parallax - which has its cruise fit since the day cruise was released - seems to perform very similar to before, even with the reduced max speed. gotta see it in action tho. cruise fighter who can turn / strafe in close combat was imho indeed broken, cruise should stay as a jousting / poking fit. that way its usage requires planning ahead, instead of building abonimations, and reduces its damage through the need to make flybys. the jaguar is fast enough without cruise. imho its wasted as a cruise tackler.
  28. looked at the invuls... it seems it does compared in r12 tharga module to r13 to have 45 recharge vs. 48 sec base, 2 sec vs. 2.2 sec invul, costs 150 vs. 210 energy to use. 810 damage on targeters, host damage at 330 at purple, from tooltips (dont have loyalty to upgrade) still, overall, it's kinda better than CR.
  29. finally, a good suggestion.
  30. Thar'kth'spit cannon nerf is the most important part. They could try experiment with energy cost, or charging slowing your ship down, to keep its alpha. albeit i am not sure if that will really help much. But for the most part, I really dont understand the amount of alien weaponry introduced anyway, as most of them just have crazy names and effects, but kinda feel like unneccessary overall, either replacing other weapons in their usage, or be insignificant or just down right annoying. Less is more. Anyway, i know who to blame, i blame darkredfox for wanting alien ships. gnihihi thats a bit too much. but blink should indeed be an active module, or replace their overdrive. or introduce a new keybinding for a mobility module, and make more of them, for every kind of ship, like the early ideas of cruise engines, maybe adding some other passive engine abilities, like something that ignores artificial gravity sources for a few secs. imho blink should not be possible, if you get inhibited (either tackler or guard activated active module), additionally to ecms. Generally, another nice nerf would be, if it randomly makes them explode on usage due to a malfunction. Seriously, like 1-in-5 chance, you dont blink, just die. Awesome patch. Awesome.
  31. Because it was designed with lots of different ideas in mind, like PvP areas, on-site-missions, loot pickups, hand crafted rooms for variety and exploration, different enemy spawns with their own agendas, but mostly, as a light weight open space emulation, to make the game more "in depth" - and it succeeds in that, as the stations now feel as if they are "somewhere". It's not directly bad, but it is pretty boring and straight forward, and not everything makes sense (karma e.g. only helps you to identify potentially dangerous pilots), has no dedicated gui (even the cargo space panel is pretty "patchworked"). So where you see carefully designed interactions, I just see compromises, a few instanced maps, which can be visited, spawning some stuff. The only problems I directly had with it, was trying to make daily missions only over open space, as it made the mode "unoptional", while the beauty of sandbox games lies actually in the fact, that it stays optional to have emergent gameplay and influence on it. Hiding the Blueprints only in it was also a bit meh, but since both things now are independent of OS, and farmable in pve, I am happy with it as it is, and open to it becoming better. Given it was mostly a gift by the devs to the popular demand of some open space, and the engine itself isn't built for it directly, it is nice to try your ships, get a bit of extra income, but it seriously doesnt even compete with the cheapest available sandbox games, even the epicly failed no mans sky does this part a lot better. On the other hand, we got hot join through it, as that part of the engine required for running instances to be joined and left by players, and some of the extra designed levels for this mode look really awesome. but really, that's it. i wouldnt say no to larger cargo spaces, but i find this is like patchworking an already broken mode, as if it would magicly make it fun. They could just as easily make the drops lucrative again, like it was at the start aswell - but I think, just let them revamp it a bit, maybe it gets more flesh through that.
  32. nope. most players on that level do not need faster synergy. i do not need synergy, at all. i have millions of free synergy at my disposal. and even in strong squads, you lose games, as the MM sometimes makes really unfair teams no matter the squads, and sometimes the teams are even and you just lose. if someone is this strong in the game, chances are high to certain, such practices are unneeded. also, you cannot go faster, as entering new games while you are in another battle is not condoned indefinitely. yes, you do. you need good players to follow, and learn. this is how we learned the game. corps like nasa have very old players from corporations which now do not exist anymore - and an opportunity for newer corps to get competitive enough to beat them. in fact, most usually squads do not carry games anymore, at all. getting to know the older corporations, and the current active corporations is mainly in pvp. just requeue - by now we finally have loot even after losing. get together, as we have missions for squads. there was a time, where squads were not allowed to play pvp for months, and the result was, that games did not get better. Most of the old players even know each other across corporations, and will play just as strong together in all-solo situations. But the games themselves get not fairer through it. Play long enough and you might witness the joy in a game, where a team you hate for making hard games loses. Finally, atm. we have a tharga infestation, so games are usually decided by tharga amount or counter strategies. I feel your pain, but do not blame the players - even if they give you a lot of losses, they also show you how the different roles can be played, fitted, and how teams can become really strong. It definitely is not helpful for them to disconnect, nor does it everybody on purpose. Also, if you ever were in a battle, where lots of weaker players suddenly found themselves and fight back - you will see those games forge you to steel. It's pvp. If you want it easy, go coop. But staying in pvp is like going to the gym, a few weeks of masochism, and you will see how you improve. Especially, if you have a hard time. Go on soldier! tournament: yes. but thats once a week, and yes, most competitive players are online around that time - you will find that pvp after tournaments is very vivid, full of squads, and very very close and intense games. you should ask for more corps to squad up instead! conquest: no. while it gives a bit of fun for organized play, its a separate group mode, that isn't enjoyed by everybody. It's also not high level play most of the time, nor even fair games - depending on the worth of the sector. leagues: hm. problem is, those small games are boring and full of cheese. but it already does reduce the players from pvp. the game would need more population for it to work, it might become more important in the future. It was introduced exactly to fullfill your whish of giving endgame options to players, same as destroyers allow you to play a more slow role in the battle.
  33. most of them you would remember as some mmorpg titles, which were developed in the time wow was released, but failed to be successful as a subscription based title, and reworked into a f2p microtransaction game. while you could argue, LOL was actually designed almost identically to a boxed game, but released as f2p with really small microtransactions for skins, and some progression removal. of course then there are games like starcraft 2, which basicly became f2p as long as you play it competitive, or arcade, while you miss out on campaign modes or playing games on your own. the alternative in shooters was to make very cheap 5-15€ boxed games, with some microtransactions for skins, ensuring not to be seen as f2p, but also not missing out on the microtransactional thing. some of them are really quality bearers (cs), some are horrible, some even have no microtransactions, and are still cheap and still actively developed (insurgency). others like dirty bomb have very simplicistic income systems. a huge factor for the game is whether it needs the publisher to make servers for it, as servers cost money and need you to have income after release day. but contrary to belief, f2p games actually do very well in keeping up their server costs, but often that money is simply not stored up in advance - something you would do automatically if you plan to do a boxed release (usually already planning ahead an expansion a few years later to keep it safe from drowning). It is really usually just the human factor, that makes f2p a really hard business, not the lack of paying customers.
  34. hm, proxy mortar could be called p2w, if it were not just effective because of its surprise damage against spawn rushing thargas. thats the only thing i bought, i would consider an unfair advantage to others - but it isnt a huge one, and it is probably coming as a normal weapon anyway at some point. the free2play games have since forever excused their own ideas by saying "others have done it". Usually not even themselves, but the players. but to be blunt, the most successful f2p games were actually developed as if they were boxed titles, and you might not even count them as f2p in your head. then there is always people justifying f2p grind as if it were necessary, for them to get some money, but in fact its just usually bad gamedesign. while again, most f2p titles make - in short terms - lots more cash than boxed titles. It is usually just, that teams working on boxed titles, usually are better managed, less greedy, more devoted, less interested in appealing to the masses, but to their core player-base. After all, the biggest failures of the free2play market were re-released boxed titles, that didn't sell. It is, how this market was bloated up. And by now, people regard boxed titles often as some token of quality, even if it makes no sense - development costs are often very little different, while the profit actually for boxed titles is always directly decided at release, while f2p evolves usually in a self running cash machine, that just needs "new pop". Obviously, SC is guilty of some of this stuff, but actually, for a f2p title, it has a very good core quality to it. And I hope actually, that the makers of the game just got a bit burned out over the years, but are in fact idealists, who want this to be a very good and successful space-game. In both market types, there are lazy and bad implementations, which are hyped up with promotions, and good well made games. and the occasional good game, that gets made bad by bad marketing.
  35. what does it have to do with players from the same corps? people from the same corps leading a squad already cant face each other in a squad Resulting in actually _less_ balanced games, because if two teams from a strong corp meet, chance is, both are very well equipped, and would cancel each other out. instead, to prevent abuse, they are always teamed up against teams not from their corps. Which can be abused just as easily, but well, leave it to the dumb people to make up rules... (the "expert statisticians" at work here actually probably will still need a few years to realize what the hell a logical bias actually is.) Disconnecting players is for sure annoying, however I have to say, I have never disconnected a pvp on purpose, and still got disconnected a lot by various issues, either isp, strange packet loss, crashes, etc. If it is a structural disconnect, as corps usually have people from similar geographical areas, it usually affects multiple people from the same corps, doesnt mean, they left together. It is much more likely you lost because of the LRFs in your team, than a disconnected player, or the corp tags of specific players, in nearly 90% of the games in medium or hard. this might be nice.
  36. pink tag

    yes! yes! except they die! yes! I totally overuse the proxy mortar condas because it reduced thargas over time in the enemy team, like a flamethrower against cockroaches, sadly, they started to learn and just evolve right in front of my eyes! ahahahaha. really? at least that guy is doing his job. rather that, than a flux phaser fighter standing around on top of a team killed by thargas, because no one took tackler. its his job to annoy you. as i always rely on supporting whatever my team brings, things cant go wrong, can they? nah, i would rather play avorion, if i want to explore sectors with gates. but i dont seem to do that either, i guess, i just want action, and the only thing left after a few bad matches, is to play until you get a few really close ones where the team really fights for the game. but thx!
  37. haha, milf u r totally xenoed tharga mcchicken reminds me only of this definitely the official song of the tharga.
  38. rank 10 either get into medium or high, basicly in both queues, so it was an awesome way to practice. nearly every ship had some use now. when i tried through r4-r6 ships solo, they were nice to play. true, medium was still best played r9. but they are, and they do!
  39. whats with havoc?
  40. The Owl Initiative [OWL] - International We are a community which grew in different games, and are a very old Star Conflict corporation, being more nostalgic and slow growing in nature. Our international members include people from all over the world, but mostly EU and US Timezones We are mainly searching for pilots who bring their own initiative. Some Info and Rules Teamspeak (TS3) address is weltenfall.net Please behave, the server is public; anyone needing a chatroom can use one of the public rooms or request their own. (different sets of people meet in our TS) Teamspeak presence is welcomed, especially in squad-battles, and compulsory for Wings or Tournaments, if we fly any. Please regard the teamspeak like you enter real rooms full of people. Listen in before you speak, say hello, be polite. It's not an audience service, nor an entertainment service for you as visitor, but a social environment, you become part of. Try to speak english if members with different languages are present in the same channel. We usually speak english, even if this is not the case! Note, that our language is not always child-friendly, but we do respect members asking for nice speech. No Racist, Sexist, or any phobic behaviour. Respect other members and their viewpoints. We have a Forum for internal affairs, and Facebook Groups for socializing We value feedback and critics. Please be patient as we try to accomodate all members. In case of any misunderstanding, contact an Officer; the Internet is a complex medium, bad stuff happens, we are training Forgiveness! Requirements for Members At least Rank 10 Ships in multiple factions with full synergy. We do queue for Tournaments, SQ (Sector Conquest, Dreadnought), and sometimes SpecOps, too, but only if there is interest (no schedules). Expected veterancy average (if you want to apply as unknown player): 2k pvp battles, >= 1.1 w/l, 2.5 kill average, 4 assist average. We do however not overemphasize looking on stats. Teamspeak Presence. Especially in a team game. Initiative. You can also come with friends, and play your own squads; Dedication; Real Life comes first. Some notes of warning We rather have you couple times a week for years, than daily for two weeks until you burn out. We have no age restriction, but our age group is rather mature. We like to be relaxed, sit on trees and watch mice. We are Owls. We are friendly to casuals, but reserve the right to remove members who are inactive more than 90 days ingame, if they do not give feedback about their absence. On the other hand, we remove members who seem to expect more than we can offer for their own benefit. We try to keep active and involved members in the corp for at least half a year in case of absence. Once you know you are an owl, you stay an owl. You don't have to be an owl, to be around with us. Don't take it too personally, if someone has an inquiry about your teamspeak behaviour, but do take it seriously. People who show they adapt to the family, will have the family adapt to them. We are also preparing to be present in Star Citizen, and other games. ~*~ You want to become an Owl? Interested in more information? Drop a PM to me or join TeamSpeak. Or simply write into this thread.