Activity Stream

Filter
Sort By Time Show
Recent Recent Popular Popular Anytime Anytime Last 7 Days Last 7 Days Last 30 Days Last 30 Days All All Photos Photos Forum Forums
  • SentineI's Avatar
    Today, 6:34 PM · 26 replies and 388 views.
    Here are my top wishes, but I'd actually be happy with just the first one being fulfilled: 1. An option to stop the SRV turret's rotation being independent of SRV's actual rotation (so the turret turns as the SRV turns). (Currently I get confused which direction my SRV is driving in, when I'm in an intense battle with several skimmers. I never had that problem with tanks in Battlefield 1942, and I think this is the main culprit.) 2. Show the mass of a ship next to the ship's type (e.g. Eagle) in the HUD. ED has too many ship types, and I honestly can't remember all the ships that are much bigger/smaller than me. But if I could see it's mass then (a) I'd quickly know if I was probably outmatched, and (b) I'd quickly learn their relative sizes. Yeah, I could just spend ages trying to memorise them on some web page, but I play ED for fun. Bonus points of it changes colour depending on whether it's heavier or lighter than my ship. P.S. It only needs to be the mass of an unladened factory-spec...
  • El_Hefe's Avatar
    Today, 6:34 PM · 1007 replies and 37439 views.
    Your still not understanding man The 18 number came about because its the amount of weapon BP fragments you needed for set of guardian weapons. Lets take plasma charger and gauss cannon on their own for the moment. Gauss cannon require 4 x weapon BP fragment,plasma charger requires x 8. This means you need to repeat the same puzzle 12 times to get the required number of BP fragments for these two weapons. Add in the rest of the needed BP fragments for the other modules and you have a serious amount of repitition. This doesnt even take into account the types of obelisk scan data you need ie Alpha,Beta,Delta,Epsilon and Gamma for the modules as well as the module BP fragments.
  • Phisto Sobanii's Avatar
    Today, 6:34 PM · 43 replies and 527 views.
    Right on. There could be a warning about it. This would also be a helpful way to address that yes, PvPers trash talk and that sometimes includes naughty words. Of course, there is a line, and perhaps that’s a discussion for another thread.
  • Pville_Piper's Avatar
    Today, 6:33 PM · 12 replies and 54 views.
    I don't think that company is in bad shape or else why would the work on beyond for free? Do I think there's been far too many placeholders in the game? Yes. Do I think that far too often the Devs work out "gameplay" goals with no gameplay to get there? Yes. Do I think that shortcuts like tying the HUD colors too many things has compromised the game? Yes. Do I think that selling cockpit additions will save the game? No. (Although I'm still waiting for my hula girl bobble head...)
  • Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
    Today, 6:33 PM · 2680 replies and 102491 views.
    Sure. As you said, you and others do like to play in groups. Last thing you need is a sour puss. Absence :)
  • Mangal Oemie's Avatar
    Today, 6:33 PM · 364 replies and 9897 views.
    1. While I completely agree that the transactional nature can lead to some unnatural game play, it also allows BGS players to have an effect and counter the activity of randoms. This is perhaps a point those in quiet to no-traffic-but-you systems on the fringe might miss, but change this nature, and groups like the Hutton Truckers are going to be completely overwhelmed by random traffic 2. No. I disagree entirely. If someone wants to do more, they could. If people don't have the time, don't do it. Burn out is the responsibility of the player. With hard caps per system, those CMDRs would just work another system as well (not uncommon, anyway, when managing larger factions) 3. Changing from transactional to value/effort based will not change the invisible grind wars between player groups. It will almost certainly make the grind worse, as you would have to counter all activity from all other CMDRs active in the system as well. Moreover, guessing and anticipating random and opposing traffic is the key part...
  • Riverside's Avatar
    Today, 6:32 PM · 2680 replies and 102491 views.
    With diplomacy. Although I'm not sure what particular style Ziggy's is called, possibly sarcasm? Are you now arguing the case for status quo Phisto?
  • SP_Predicador's Avatar
    Today, 6:32 PM · 1137 replies and 68000 views.
    SP_Predicador replied to a thread Star Citizen in Otros Temas
    Te he preguntado yo primero. La comprensión de la respuesta a mi pregunta, creo que es, a su vez, la mejor respuesta a la tuya segunda. Es el alcance. La fusión de elementos en un solo juego, hasta ahora dispersos. Ojalá hubiera más juegos con la ambición del "americano" y del "inglés". Intentos anteriores como galaxies fracasaron y los siguientes giraron casi totalmente hacia el parque temático.
  • Dietger's Avatar
    Today, 6:31 PM · 43 replies and 527 views.
    Dietger replied to a thread The PvP Subforum's Purpose in PvP
    PvP forum is about player versus player combat. Its builds, its tactics, help given to new PvP players. Videos about it, its stories and drama. Complaining about PvP, is a topic for the Modes subforum. Griefing about lost ships, don't belong into it. Cheers
  • Borko's Avatar
    Today, 6:31 PM · 1 replies and 0 views.
    Nothing to add, just rep for the Shofixti in your avatar. Jumping peppers, this is smiley time!
  • mojonaut's Avatar
    Today, 6:31 PM · 4 replies and 0 views.
    Here ya go, music to travel by:
  • Theodrid's Avatar
    Today, 6:31 PM · 43 replies and 527 views.
    Theodrid replied to a thread The PvP Subforum's Purpose in PvP
    I suppose in an ideal world this sub would be for advice, build information and the like but like all forums, Frontier's are far from an 'ideal world'. The kind of things that some are agitating to 'keep off their lawn' in this sub are self inflicted wounds to be honest. If your true desire is to limit this sub to advice and information sharing then steer clear of provocative threads and postings yourself. Let's be honest here, if you are posting using terms like 'carebear', 'forumdad' or 'coward', (and many more besides), you are trying, to a greater or lesser degree, to illicit a response from those you are wishing to keep away from this sub. The same goes for some of the suggestions, if you are suggesting taking areas of the game away from a portion of the playerbase you really shouldn't be surprised when some of those folks ride in here and go 'hold on a bloody minute'. Of course the insults roll both ways, so again, if someone rolls in here calling 'griefer' or 'psycho' then the post should be...
  • Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
    Today, 6:31 PM · 539 replies and 6052 views.
    So true, I forgot all about CQC, easy mistake to make :) Doesn't have to be Elite ... just for every hour actively played in CQC, you're allowed to shoot other CMDRs for an hour, if you have influenced the BGS sufficiently. Enough with these faux PvPers only playing one part of PvP!
  • Phisto Sobanii's Avatar
    Today, 6:30 PM · 2680 replies and 102491 views.
    How do you handle those issues, Ziggy? Just by avoiding?
  • SentineI's Avatar
    Today, 6:29 PM · 4 replies and 0 views.
    The Q2 & Q3 updates are 'content' updates, which I take to mean 'story content', and so will probably just move the Thargoid/Guardians story along. Bug fixes will no doubt be included as well, and probably other small tweaks (e.g. improving the slightly broken new crime system).
  • Morgan Grimes's Avatar
    Today, 6:29 PM · 12 replies and 54 views.
    You cant talk about a business model not working and ignore financial reports, that's just inane. Perhaps you'd like to rephrase your entire post.
  • Siranui's Avatar
    Today, 6:28 PM · 9 replies and 334 views.
    So...in precis: More stuff, junk a bunch of stuff that development time has already been spent on and replace, and you'd like them to hamstring their revenue stream too?
More Activity