Let me buy the Cobra MK IV please.

Only ship I'll mine in.
Engineering makes it shine - it's a lot "nicer" once fully "tweaked" as well - if I had to have only one ship it would be the MKIV.
Also, I wouldn't mind terribly if some mechanism was brought in to make it available - but, I'd make it properly onerous to get - maybe something exploration related - a MkIV b explorer varient maybe ?
 
Why not right? Are the early backers going to feel cheated after all this time?
Because it's wrong.
Not an early backer or owner of Mkiv, i too missed the boat.That's life.
Not everyone gets to land on the moon.Being alive during a turning point in history was a privilege, not a right.
I see one in game, well it's hardly the titanic,is it?
 
Last edited:
Never mind these old ships grandad, lets have some new ones by new manufacturers.

The Gankertron by Griefton Lacey:

It’s a small planet and it pays no attention to physics. It laughs at permits and can smash its way into the creche to devour noobs. It’s armed with gravity, pulling any ship near by into it and has 150 medium to huge volcanoes that shoot plasma magma at players that not only kills their ships it devalues their ARX.

Only available to one man squadrons.
 
MKIV suggests an upgrade.
Not really, Mk IV suggests a design revision/evolution - successive designs of given things need not be upgrades in the universal sense of the term.

Take a tank for example, a Mk 2 variant could be slower than a Mk 1 but have better armour. Depending on the use case the Mk1 may be considered better than the Mk2 but that does not mean that in other use cases the Mk2 is not better than the Mk1.

But theres nothing balanced about the ship when its basically crippled
Speed is not the be-all and end-all, I have ALOT of flight hours in both the Mk III and the Mk IV, the latter is far from being crippled but it does require you to fly it a bit differently.
 
Never mind these old ships grandad, lets have some new ones by new manufacturers.

The Gankertron by Griefton Lacey:

It’s a small planet and it pays no attention to physics. It laughs at permits and can smash its way into the creche to devour noobs. It’s armed with gravity, pulling any ship near by into it and has 150 medium to huge volcanoes that shoot plasma magma at players that not only kills their ships it devalues their ARX.

Only available to one man squadrons.
You found raxxxllaaaaaaaa!!!!!!
 
Bigger number doesn't mean better, just newer... Eg land rover series 2 vs series 3.
The cobra 4 needs to remain exclusive to remind fd how not to do things. (and also its fun watching people getting eggy about it)
 
The cobra 4 needs to remain exclusive to remind fd how not to do things. (and also its fun watching people getting eggy about it)
I do not think the Cobra Mk 4 is an example of how not to do things - the FSS/DSS changes on the other hand.
 
Not really, Mk IV suggests a design revision/evolution - successive designs of given things need not be upgrades in the universal sense of the term.

Take a tank for example, a Mk 2 variant could be slower than a Mk 1 but have better armour. Depending on the use case the Mk1 may be considered better than the Mk2 but that does not mean that in other use cases the Mk2 is not better than the Mk1.


Speed is not the be-all and end-all, I have ALOT of flight hours in both the Mk III and the Mk IV, the latter is far from being crippled but it does require you to fly it a bit differently.
When the MKIV only gets about 1000 points more hull than the mkiii the loss of speed isnt worth the added hull or the extra small hardpoint. For being a full 200 m/s slower after engineering.
The easier you can evade the longer you last.
The cobra mkiii can get 3.1k hull which with engineering is already maxing resistances and the 1k extra of enginerring on the Mk4 wont add that much extra redistance. Being slow, especially in a small ship, kills.
 
I see no justification whatsoever in Frontier simply declaring that these items that others paid money for are now going to be available for FREE to any player
I suggest you read the EULA then, I believe FD reserve the right to waive any fees.
 
Last edited:
When the MKIV only gets about 1000 points more hull than the mkiii the loss of speed isnt worth the added hull or the extra small hardpoint. For being a full 200 m/s slower after engineering.
The easier you can evade the longer you last.
The cobra mkiii can get 3.1k hull which with engineering is already maxing resistances and the 1k extra of enginerring on the Mk4 wont add that much extra redistance. Being slow, especially in a small ship, kills.
Not everything is about combat though - the Mk IV also has increased optional internal slots which in a multi-role context can matter more than combat ability. That being said, I believe the Mk IV is not worse at combat in general, just requires different tactics to what you would use for the Mk 3.

Speed in combat only really becomes an important factor when you are either intercepting or running away.
 
They may well have some weaselly little legal clause in their terms and conditions...
To be fair to FD - wording along those lines is pretty standard.

The only people that really would have legitimate cause to object to FD's business practices in regards to ED are LEP owners IF AND ONLY IF at the end of the development of ED there has been insufficient premium content to justify the relative price difference of the LEP at time of sale.
 

Lestat

Banned
Well LP owners and people who paid when Horizon first Xbox and PC They deserve the Cobra MKIV. How much did we pay for the game? Well, One of my accounts cost $300, but I wanted more starter ships and to help in Design Decision Forums. So if you are complaining because you spent $20 for both ED and Horizon, you should not get the Cobra MKIV
 
That's your interpretation. However, as someone who has spent a good bit of cash on 'Game Extras', I'm afraid I don't share your point of view.
I hate to burst your seemingly entitlement bubble but I have also spent a significant amount of cash on 'Game Extras' for ED.

Ultimately, AFAIK we do not know the rate at which Arx will be attainable, how much they will cost if bought with real world cash, nor how the current prices would translate to Arx credits.

If someone played 24/7/52, how much Arx would that earn them and how much 'Game Extras' would that afford them? Unless the values in question are unreasonably high then there is no real cause for complaint.

At the moment, micro-transactions are seemingly under a lot of scrutiny but that is mostly from a gambling aspect which does not apply in this case. That being said, the situation with Arx is far from being without precedent nor necessarily unreasonable.
 
Last edited:
There's no entitlement 'bubble'. Just expectation that money I spend is actually being spent on something worthwhile. Discovering that others will soon be able to gain certain things I've bought with cash for free - simply by playing the game - is not right in my books!
Having spent a lot of money on the cosmetics myself I see your complaint as being tantamount to a sense of entitlement. If you honestly feel you are being hard done by then take it up with Customer Support, perhaps they will give you some Arx credit for free if they feel your complaint has true merit. Though if they do, I hope they proactively recompense everyone else in a similar situation.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom