Puzzle solving gameplay confirmed!
Oh wait... nvm... there's no solution.
Meanwhile these accomplishments happened during SC's past 7 year development period in alpha:It's an oldie but a goodie...
Hang on a second - the most expensive and most advanced AI on the planet takes a sopping wet cloth smeared in deity-knows what germs, and shoves it up his....
Fidelity!
What heresy is this?
(...) why ask them in the first place?
Oh, but it is, they advanced form ignorance to censorship Besides, I don't see the challenge in that post, it just says what moderators did, without any description or judgement. I believe they triggered on the word 'censorship', as one can't publicly call the censorship a censorship, this action is a subject to censorship.Still, this is nothing new. I remember previous polls where they outright ignored the most upvoted questions or requests.
In Elite: Dangerous you indeed can do all that. But in Elite you do that without respect. You don't offer friendship. You don't even think to call Roberts Godfather. Instead, you come into Eilte: Dangerous on some day six years ago, and you play a released game."With signature and stealth instead of getting hung up on various stats, you need to..."
...get hung up detection range and stats like IR, EM (he even says they're stats in the video!) and radar type (which you don't know).
Also nice to see they duplicated Elite's system. Your signature depends on ship type and components - like in Elite. And you can suppress your signature in-flight by using counter-measures and managing your modules - just like in Elite.
Wonderful. Now let's just hope it won't be broken like everything else.
Upgrade to the stealth and signature mechanics in 3.10
I believe that's a purely rhetorical question, yes? After all, we had actualDo we have any actual footage of this rather then theory waffling?
Actual footage of what ? Some numbers on the HUD/radar of ships ?Do we have any actual footage of this rather then theory waffling?
Oh, but it is, they advanced form ignorance to censorship Besides, I don't see the challenge in that post, it just says what moderators did, without any description or judgement. I believe they triggered on the word 'censorship', as one can't publicly call the censorship a censorship, this action is a subject to censorship.
Holy Roberts, that was a lot of censorships, maybe I need to lay out a pipeline for that...
Well, there's rules and ppl gotta deal with them. Just don't argue about moderation - it's not so hard.Oh, but it is, they advanced form ignorance to censorship Besides, I don't see the challenge in that post, it just says what moderators did, without any description or judgement. I believe they triggered on the word 'censorship', as one can't publicly call the censorship a censorship, this action is a subject to censorship.
...
But what if I feel my country has an overly binge-focused drinking culture, and prefer to try and foster an environment where myself and a few friends can slowly enjoy one or two drinks and each other's company over an afternoon?FD's forums have the same rule. You cannot, in any shape or form, discuss moderation.
Sure, but as I see it, dude wan't discussing moderation, he just wrote that something was moderated. That's hardly qualifies as discussion, no?Well, there's rules and ppl gotta deal with them. Just don't argue about moderation - it's not so hard.