Oh, you don't. There's subtext that the average player misses when my haters come to stir up threads against me. That's the point of how their argumentation works.
Oh, you don't. There's subtext that the average player misses when my haters come to stir up threads against me. That's the point of how their argumentation works.
PS. I volunteer to duel you and make videos on all topics we clash our opinions, i'm on pc, i can take reverski 4rails phantom vs your favorite hybrid or hull tank, i can also test your anti seeker tactics with heat sinks, tlb or whatever light defence you like that is not triple ecm or double point defence with good arcs vs my small ship with single small seeker launcher, or even test your favorite ship with shock cannons to prove that they are not competitive against engineered alternatives. If i m wrong i admit i m not only worse poster on this forum but also lackluster pvper at best
Yeah....
That didn't go so well the last time you tried that with me, Ramius007. I'm pretty sure you're still convinced to how you think Seekers work too...when you still don't understand how easy it is to not lose modules to them in a hull tank if you know what you're doing.
And, what's worse is you still don't and didn't want to acknowledge that you were wrong this entire time about JUST seeker missiles alone. You asking other people to do this with you when you don't really have the knowledge yourself, well - I find that a bit funny.
Last edited:
This thread is about you now?
Your prize is being the most accurate poster in the thread.
Quite an achievement. GG!
~4600 hull FAS; module status at 19% hull after getting pummeled by Ashenfox's triple rail + dual frag Krait Mk II with instructions to try for module damage:
Nothing was repaired during the fight except the larger of my two MRPs and I had no TLB weapons in this engagement.
I am not remotely a good assault brick pilot and I'm still experimenting with loadouts, but even against the sort of setup Ramius has proposed, I do not see module damage as being the limiting factor, at least not without a lucky shot through the canopy. A good pilot in a quad penetrator rail phantom should best me, in this setup, quite handily...when the hull integrity on this FAS hits zero.
Anyway, we'll see for sure later. Maybe the phantom can open up a large enough gap and with enough penetrator rails damage MRPs faster than the AFMU can compensate, but I'm skeptical. For more general use, I might even dump the second MRP...most of my ships that can reliably power an AFMU through PP malfunctions only need one.
Nothing was repaired during the fight except the larger of my two MRPs and I had no TLB weapons in this engagement.
I am not remotely a good assault brick pilot and I'm still experimenting with loadouts, but even against the sort of setup Ramius has proposed, I do not see module damage as being the limiting factor, at least not without a lucky shot through the canopy. A good pilot in a quad penetrator rail phantom should best me, in this setup, quite handily...when the hull integrity on this FAS hits zero.
Anyway, we'll see for sure later. Maybe the phantom can open up a large enough gap and with enough penetrator rails damage MRPs faster than the AFMU can compensate, but I'm skeptical. For more general use, I might even dump the second MRP...most of my ships that can reliably power an AFMU through PP malfunctions only need one.
So instead of accepting a current challenge you rehash the results of a previous challenge?
well, it has a good part of the pubescent repertoire
- gooey green hud
- 'smart badass meme' in big, colorful kindergarten letters
- condescending chat talk
- apoplectic music
- 'fierce' pack logo ending fading into black
but i'm missing a bobblehead, christmas lights, some flying mocking headlines and the recurrent meme flash. git gud, scrub.
nice flying, though!
Ziggy \o/Your prize is being the most accurate poster in the thread.
Quite an achievement. GG!
This thread just keeps on giving!
PS. I volunteer to duel you and make videos on all topics we clash our opinions, i'm on pc, i can take reverski 4rails phantom vs your favorite hybrid or hull tank, i can also test your anti seeker tactics with heat sinks, tlb or whatever light defence you like that is not triple ecm or double point defence with good arcs vs my small ship with single small seeker launcher, or even test your favorite ship with shock cannons to prove that they are not competitive against engineered alternatives. If i m wrong i admit i m not only worse poster on this forum but also lackluster pvper at best
He's a vette pilot. No risk of PP getting shot out when you can't be masslocked and just jump out when things get a little too toasty for you.
I cant wait to get on PC co after seeing numerous vids from folk who talk the talk, I know straight up that they can't walk the walk.
Spent a lot more time in in the Viper and FDL than I have in the vette.
I don't think you've even watched many of my vette videos.
AFMU wunderwaffe
Double PD on gunship OP, not so on bottom hardpoints on FAS or in (bugged) central utility on DBS
Now be gone bad ghost
~4600 hull FAS; module status at 19% hull after getting pummeled by Ashenfox's triple rail + dual frag Krait Mk II with instructions to try for module damage:
Nothing was repaired during the fight except the larger of my two MRPs and I had no TLB weapons in this engagement.
I am not remotely a good assault brick pilot and I'm still experimenting with loadouts, but even against the sort of setup Ramius has proposed, I do not see module damage as being the limiting factor, at least not without a lucky shot through the canopy. A good pilot in a quad penetrator rail phantom should best me, in this setup, quite handily...when the hull integrity on this FAS hits zero.
Anyway, we'll see for sure later. Maybe the phantom can open up a large enough gap and with enough penetrator rails damage MRPs faster than the AFMU can compensate, but I'm skeptical. For more general use, I might even dump the second MRP...most of my ships that can reliably power an AFMU through PP malfunctions only need one.
Me likely, but can I ask for the build? I find it kinda amazing how 3 rails didnt do more!
Yeah, If I'm going to play elite dangerous, a thing that is a game, a game being a thing that you do to have fun, I'd rather fly against someone like Hazzmango or Yamato or Rinzler that would absolutely kick my backside then send me a "gg", than have to deal with that nonsense trash-talk in chat. It's nothing to do with being "scared to lose."
If you're an unpleasant jerk who does nothing but run around insulting everyone you meet, people will collectively decide that they'd rather hang around with other people. Funny how that works, isn't it?
AFMU wunderwaffe
AFMUs are great. Every hull focused vessel with more than half a dozen slots should have one...essentially no reason not to.
That's something I've not checked - do MRPs still provide protection while being actively repaired, since they're not powered? If so, does that also apply to guardian MRPs which are powered?
can they be used during combat?
The PDT on the FAS isn't anywhere near as bad as I feared it would be. If you use one of the forward utility mounts it can fire almost directly forward and if there is one thing the FAS is good at, it's rotating, which makes it easy to point.
Yes, and I'm pretty sure yes, but would need to double check on the Guardian MRPs.
Coriolis EDCD Edition
A ship builder, outfitting and comparison tool for Elite Dangerous
s.orbis.zone
Of course.