God damnit, I was waiting for a (rather overdue) cosmetics sale so my saved ARX would go further, not a freaking price hike so they only only go as far as John Howard can throw a cricket ball!
View attachment 390548
Greetings Commanders!
We've got an update for you on the release of the Python Mk II, as well as changes coming to the gamestore:
https://www.elitedangerous.com/news/python-mk-ii-updates-gamestore
This.So by "adjusting" the prices you effectively reduced the value of our ARX to ~ one half... that's not cool.
(and those are price increases of already existing cosmetics, not an introduction of pricier new ones - with that I would be OK)
Doubt it. It's bank holiday weekend. And Tuesday is patch day.would imagine meetings are taking place to discuss this debacle.
Yes of course. Well timed Fdev. Very impressive.Doubt it. It's bank holiday weekend. And Tuesday is patch day.
Actually, the timing is good... There are 3 working days to iron out any minor niggles...Yes of course. Well timed Fdev. Very impressive.
Flimley
I'm not the biggest fan of the kit PJ, but like some of the bits...The MK II looks nice without any cosmetics already.
"Can"? Maybe as a technicality, look at your WPN section. That loadout is not remotely sustainable with that distro (to say nothing of your questionable inclusion of a KWS, which is a power hog - on an already power-strapped ship - and has no practical use case).You can still outfit it for PvE: https://edsy.org/s/vQgL8nW
Though I do agree that the power plant is a bit contrained for the amount of firepower it has. A 7A would fix that, but then again if FDEV did give it a 7A plant or, God forbid, a 7A distro too, this ship would be game breakingly powerful and unbalanced. As it is now, I think it forces folks to be judicious of what they actually put on the ship and doesn't render every other medium ship obsolete for PvP and combat-oriented PvE.
Not everyone will understand me, but having combat slots on a ship characterizes the ship as military."Can"? Maybe as a technicality, look at your WPN section. That loadout is not remotely sustainable with that distro (to say nothing of your questionable inclusion of a KWS, which is a power hog - on an already power-strapped ship - and has no practical use case).
It's not relevant to the topic at hand either but there's absolutely no reason to dedicate two of the one of the few optional slots the thing does have, to MRPs. Protecting modules doesn't matter if the ship can't outlast the modules, and not even a full hull-tank Anaconda needs more than 2 MRPs.
Are you referring to how all ships in the game have weapon hardpoints, or the 'military slots'? If it is the latter, there are a few ships (mostly large pad) that do have those slots but can fulfill well roles that aren't military.Not everyone will understand me, but having combat slots on a ship characterizes the ship as military.
It's the difficulty of translation.Are you referring to how all ships in the game have weapon hardpoints, or the 'military slots'? If it is the latter, there are a few ships (mostly large pad) that do have those slots but can fulfill well roles that aren't military.
I can help a little with the translation aspect... (or structure, more accurately)It's the difficulty of translation.
I wrote, if a ship has military slots, it's designed as a military ship.
That's not inherently true, though.It's the difficulty of translation.
I wrote, if a ship has military slots, it's military ship.
Asking for clarification of intent in a statement is not "over enthusiastic criticism".I can help a little with the translation aspect... (or structure, more accurately)
When discussing some topics, it is convenient to word them as simply as possible, for better understanding...
(and, when your native speech may not include the minor details that some English speakers demand, they may be over enthusiastic in criticising your comments)
Maybe I am better used to understanding non-native English speakers.There were multiple potential meanings