Leaderboard

I was all in for Sagan's Planetary Society back in the day. Great group but we kept losing battles. The front goal was to lobby for a self contained moon base to act as a focus for advancement that was not in a gravity well. The louder voices made the focus an unsustainable orbital vehicle. Then the push to get rid of massive rocketry and move towards reusable shuttles. The argument against shuttles was they would only support close orbit missions, and in effect it would abandon deep space projects. Not only did the shuttle push win, the shallow thinkers at NASA also pretty much destroyed any plans, mock ups, or prints of the massive rockets. This was to force the thinking on shuttle only. Don't know what they called that at NASA, but it is called burning your bridges in the non scientific world. And the quest for space gradually dwindled and died. Harder to get interest up when you are replacing an orbital base crew for the 30th time. All the huge space projects were easy to push away and forget also, since we did not have vehicles to launch them, even if we decided to do one. If I sound bitter it is because I am. I grew up knowing I was going to have a job in space. The race to the moon only served to intensify the dreams. But we took the moon trophy and retired. Hoping for dreams from politicians is apparently a lost cause. New hope now though. There are a few billionaires with a space urge. They may get us where the government failed to go. No one is electing them to office, so they will be in for the long haul and not fade away on us. Too late for me, but some of you younger folks can revive the dream of a space based job in the next few decades. - DRUM out

See you at CitCon 2018!

Hello Again @Imperium Members We’re returning after a short hiatus to bring you a new version of Game Day, one where we are going to include other games aside from Star Citizen! We wanted to improve the experience of Game Day overall and felt that with Star Citizen in its current state just doesn’t warrant the amount of effort that we had once been able to put into it. IE. Custom Scenarios, Hype Trailers, Streaming, Competitions. Eventually that will change again and we can get back to the game that we are so anxiously awaiting. Until that time we would like to keep Game Day’s focus as a team building event that gives us a regular time each month that we can set aside to play games as an org. You’ll notice at the top of this post there is a poll with several games as options. If you plan on taking part in this Game Day, please vote for your favorite choice from this list, and those that play in the chosen game will be added into a raffle! The poll will close on this Friday, the 27th. You’ll still be free to join in with anyone else that would be playing Star Citizen, so don’t worry if you don’t have any of the games in the list. If you would like to suggest game to play together as an org on future Game Day’s please leave us suggestions in this thread and we will add them to the poll for the next event. We’ll also be shortening the duration of Game Day for this month. Instead of 1600 UTC through 0400 UTC, we’ll be starting at 1800 UTC and run to 0400 UTC. Joining Game Day For those of you that want to make a return visit, or show up for the first time, you only need to enter the Landing Channel on Teamspeak (ts.starcitizenbase.com), and one of our Hosts will direct you to the action! Raffles As for most other Game Day’s, we will be providing raffles for participants that play games in Star Citizen. However, this month we will be only conducting a participation raffle, so if you join any Star Citizen games created by other Imperium members, you’ll be entered into the raffle! As mentioned above, we will also be conducting a participation raffle for the winning game from the poll. Said game will have several TS channels created for players to meet up and play together, and doing so will enter you into this second raffle as well! Since we are hosting two games at once, be sure to check in with an officer or specialist that your name was added to the raffle of the game you played in! (As much as we may pretend otherwise, our Game Day hosts are still human, and you wouldn’t want to miss out on your chance to win free stuff) The prizes for both raffles will be $10 Star Citizen gift cards, and the winners of the raffles will be PM’d in the following week to confirm their prizes. New to Star Citizen? Read this post for information on the game and our Game Days:

Hercules C2 (Civilian spec) Hercules M2 (Mil spec) Hercules A2 (Gunship) Internal One piece of spec he gave us was it length (nearly) 100m x width 70m. I suspect a high price 400-500 for base :-/.

I agreed 100%

I don't think the M2 or A2 have any credible threats from the surface. I think the Hercules will shrug off all 4 missiles from a Cyclone-AA, if they even hit the ship, because the M2 and A2 will probably have excellent countermeasures. I think the Herc will also tank shots from the Nova's main gun -- assuming it can elevate high enough to hit the Herc in the air. I agree that the Hercules is more vulnerable from above and an Eclipse can almost certainly take it out with 2 or 3 torpedoes -- the Herc won't even see it coming. However, that isn't a problem that the Hercules should fix. The Herc should have some vulnerabilities for balance. It should require escort fighters for air superiority and gunships to hunt and kill Cyclone-AAs. CIG needs to produce more AA weapon systems, including handheld, mobile, and fixed emplacements, because there are over 40 flyable ships now and there's currently only ONE vehicle with AA weapons. With the releases of the Pioneer, land grants, the Cyclone, Nova Tank, and Hercules, it seems like CIG is really pushing surface combat now. If that is the direction the Alpha is going for the foreseeable future, CIG needs to create weapons that can counter the overwhelming air and space threats. CIG said that there will be defensive emplacements for outposts, such as AA Batteries, which might protect them against the A2's MOABs. I think outposts will need powerful shield gens to stand a chance. And fighters will be the best defense. I agree about the devaluation of "old money". Ship prices seem to keep going up because of war-bond pricing. I don't believe the war-bond prices are discounts. They're the regular price and CIG charges 10-20% more to use Store Credit. That inflates ship prices and devalues older ships. If backers choose to melt an old ship, they will probably need to spend extra cash to cover the difference. The price fixing scheme is intended to entice war-bond purchases to generate new money. I've said this many times now: CIG needs to focus on attracting new backers to Star Citizen, instead of milking existing backers for more money. The Origin 100 series was an ideal ship to get new backers on board. It did seem to cause a surge in recruits. CIG needs more Starter Ships like the 100i. I think that every Ship Manufacturer should have a Starter Ship. That means Aegis, Anvil, and Drake, possibly Crusader, Esperia, and Kruger, and perhaps even Aopoa and Banu. I also think that for all new Starters, CIG should not put them on Concept Sale. They should withhold them until they're flyable. If a new backer buys a new Starter Package to get into the Star Citizen Alpha, they should be able to fly it immediately -- not a loaner substitute ship. That's confusing and disappointing to newbies who don't understand that it takes months to develop a new ship. This would only be the case for new Starters. The more expensive ships can continue have Concept Sales and take a year or more to be ready to fly. Perhaps as a compromise CIG can release concept art for new Starter, but NOT put them on sale. Have a Concept Reveal event and do the Q&A, but wait until they're flyable to put them on sale. Also, prioritize the Starters in the ship development pipeline to get them flyable ASAP. I believe that's the right way to attract new money and backers into Star Citizen. Whereas premium ships, like the Hercules, scare away new backers because it makes Star Citizen appear to be P2W.

I just completed the campaign and I want MORE! More content, more battlemechs, more of that epic soundtrack...😁

Sadly, the race to deep space was only a worthwhile endeavor because the Soviet Union was still trying to get to the moon themselves. Had the USSR not collapsed we likely would have commercial flights to the moon same as we have cross-country railways. The dream wasn't just to live on the moon, it was to live the American way of life on the moon. Stagnaton resulted from a lack of competition. Musk's SpaceX program is beginning to get the ball rolling though now that rich fucks are climbing over one another to try and see who can make commercial space flight a viable business. I hope I live to hear about the first schlub to get fired from his job IN SPACE, because then I will know we as a species will have made it.

What irks me about CIG's concept ship sales is that, ever since Warbonding prices were introduced in 2016, it seems like ships have only gotten more expensive. How do we know if Warbond prices are discounted or if they're the normal price, and the Store Credit prices are deliberately higher? The evidence of this has existed almost from the beginning. The first warbond sale was October 2016 for the RSI Polaris Corvette for $600, or $750 store credit. During the 2016 Holiday Sale, CIG released the "special edition" variants: the Hornet Wildfire, Sabre Comet, Gladius Valiant, and Avenger Titan Renegade, which were all more expensive than the standard models. The Avenger Titan is $50, the Titan Renegade is $75 and was $65 warbond. WHY? The new ship skin and different weapons weren't worth $15, nevermind $25. The Hornet Wildfire was the worst culprit at $165 warbond and $175 store credit. Those prices were comparable to the Super Hornet, but the Wildfire was just an F7C Hornet with a ball turret, a different ship skin, and different weapons. Those aren't worth $55-65. CIG increased the prices for new variant models of existing ships, which was a dead giveaway that warbond prices are bullshit! They aren't discount prices. It's the normal price that requires backers to pledge money. The store credit prices are higher to make the warbond prices more appealing and to discourage backers from buying the ships with store credit. CIG has recently made this price-fixing scheme even more diabolical by only giving warbond ships LTI, whereas concept ships bought with store credits only get 6-month insurance. And with the Hercules VIP Early Access Sale, the M2 Warbond includes a free Tumbril Cyclone (worth $55) and the A2 Warbond includes a free Nova Tank (worth $105). I understand that CIG needs new money coming in to fund Star Citizen's development, and if backers could buy new concept sale ships with store credit then CIG would earn less money for each sale. I know that because I exploited that ability to buy every concept sale ship. I still bought several warbond ships that I definitely wanted to own, but most concept ships I bought with store credits so I could melt them and bank them as Buybacks, just in case I wanted them later. CIG's new concept sale scheme counters that. If warbond prices were truly discounted, I wouldn't have a problem with CIG's new concept sale scheme. But there's compelling evidence that CIG is price fixing ships to trick backers into spending cash on warbonds, which isn't right. I'm genuinely shocked and appalled at how expensive the Hercules M2 and A2 models are. Even the warbond prices are too high. Even when you account for the value of the free Cyclone or Nova Tank, they're priced too high. The M2 is $480 store credit, $400 warbond, and $345 without the Cyclone. $345 for a military transport ship. That's only $5 less than an Orion mining ship, Carrack exploration ship, and Hull D cargo hauler. The A2 is $700 store credit, $600 warbond, and $495 without the Nova Tank. That's $100 more expensive than I expected CIG to price the store credit A2, which is extremely disappointing. CIG has to realize that a $700 or $600 warbond is far beyond what the vast majority of Star Citizen backers will pay for any ship, nevermind a niche ship like the Hercules A2. I think that if CIG was only selling the A2 for this concept ship sale, it would be a bust. If the Hercule concept ship sale is a success it'll be because backers buy the C2 or M2 models, not the A2. I don't understand why anyone would buy the C2 because there are a lot better cargo haulers that cost less than $300. Only the M2 seems worth buying because it's a military transport that is designed to deploy combat vehicles planetside while under fire. I suspect that CIG is pulling the same trick as the did with the 100i and 125a. Like the 100i, the C2 model only exists to get backers thinking about buying the Hercules. Then they realize that M2 (125a) is better and "only" costs $100 more. It skips the internal debate whether to buy a Hercules at all and jumps to choosing between a $300 or $400 ship. Diabolical.

Makes me think of this:

Looks pretty cool but I'm sticking to my Hammerhead.

In our last Blood Moon unit meeting we discussed the new focus of RSI on Planetary Game Play (with all the vehicles) vs Space (or even interstellar) game-play. My take on it is that I think it will be easier for CIG to focus on content to go along with a procedurally generated planet rather than creating new systems / cities / space stations / etc.... It doesn't mean that Interstellar game-play won't be coming but I just think planetary (on the ground or atmosphere) will happen first......... especially with Tumbril and now the Hercules ships. I am also glad that CIG followed through with the Star-Lifter since it was promised awhile back with the Genesis (though back then it was going to be a variant of the Star-Liner). I am really happy with this ship and it is my favorite concept that CIG has produced since the Pioneer and Hammerhead

Greetings, citizens! The wave of the 3.0-hype has ended, no one doesn't making hundreds of timelapses anymore. So, that means whitch I can finally make my own timelapse! One of my latest videos was an experiment - I tried to use focus and to achieve a Tilt-shift effect. With varied success. Since then, CIG has released patch 3.1, which has made some visual improvements of lighting and the planet generation system, as shown in my last video, and, most importantly for me - the camera sway was almost removed, which can simplify the creation of timelapse video. And since I have long wanted to make my own timelapse video, now is the better time for that. Therefore, I present you my new video! Almost 300 gigabytes of records, 31 scenes, two weeks of recording and editing, 2 hours of render. I tried to do it qualitatively and difficult - that it not to be a trash and didn't look boring. Maybe it's the Best God Damn Star Citizen Timelapse Video Ever, or maybe it's the usual middle level - it is you who must decide! Bonus: this video is made in 4K and with 60 fps - so turn on yours 4K TVs and enjoy it! P.S. If you want to support me, you can do it here: Citizen Spotlight Spectrum Reddit

Whoever voted for Fortnite, i will find you, and i will ban you.

I hope when CIG finally releases the Hercules Q&A they explain WHY the M2 has less cargo capacity than the C2. Why would the M2 have less physical space in its cargo hold just because it has stronger armour? Did the designers add armour plating to the interior of the cargo bay for some reason?! It doesn't make any sense! (TBF it doesn't make sense why the Starfarer Gemini has less cargo capacity than the Starfarer either, for the same reason!) The trade-off seems very game-y. Basically, if you want extra protection and firepower, you have to sacrifice cargo capacity. Apparently, it's not sufficient that the M2 costs more than C2, which is perfectly understandable because extra armour, guns, and other components should cost more money. No, the M2 has to lose some cargo capacity. It just does, because it's a game. It's understandable that the A2 Hercules loses 40% of the C2's cargo capacity, as well as its aft cargo ramp because its aft bay is replaced by bomb bays. That makes sense. Whereas the M2 is just dumb. I sorta understand why players would rather buy a C2 for the extra cargo capacity and simply try to avoid combat when deploying Tonks to a planet's surface. CIG's design choices are baffling, especially from a sales perspective. If they left the M2's cargo capacity the same as the C2, and gave it extra armour and guns for a higher price, I think it would've sold a lot better. Players only interested in hauling cargo would've still bought the C2, but any players interested in supporting planetary assaults and hauling cargo would've bought the M2 instead. But since the M2 carries less than the C2, those players are deciding to buy the C2 and taking the risk they'll come under and fire and get shot down.

It's sad really. The show isn't being cancelled for lack of viewership but rather for lack of traditional TV viewership. This also clearly shows that traditional TV is dying. People just want to watch any time, anywhere and not have to wait for the next episode. Fact is viewership of traditional channels will continue to drop and with that, traditional TV shows will get worst because channels simply won't have enough money to invest. If this show was supported by Netflix or similar, it would turn out to be a lot more successful. It would be great if it was possible to watch the entire season in a row. And it would be great if it was available in 4K HDR. I hope they can save the show on time without loosing any of the people that was involved in this production. There is still hope. One last note. A good show is good forever. In the traditional TV model, they mostly only care about strong ratings in the first few days of release because they get a big chunk of their profits from ads. In streaming services, they care more about the long lasting popularity of a show because they know people subscribe to services that have strong show catalogs.

I think the main idea is that NPC gunners will most likely be inferior and a liability compared to a human crew. Sure, they may be able to fill in gaps, but NPCs are really going to struggle when it comes to a few situations: Ceasing fire if a target moves out of "effective range" while technically still being in range to conserve power / ballistic ammo. Switching between say an incoming bomber (medium threat), a retreating fighter (low threat), or an incoming torpedo (immediate threat) on-the-fly when all three present themselves as viable targets. Exiting the turrets to help with damage control or boarding as needed. Calling out targets / incoming threats to the pilot, as well as keeping the other gunners informed. Ability to focus target specific sections of an enemy ship, for example an engine, enemy gun turret, or bridge / cockpit. The way I see it, a stock Hammerhead with a human crew will likely always drastically outperform even a top-kitted Hammerhead with the best (most expensive) AI crew available. While this might be fine for simple moderate-risk escort missions, I would not trust NPCs in a PvP setting.

It doesn't matter how much you have

Changing the main characters would destroy the show, I don't see that happening at all. The Expanse needs to be picked up and continued as if there was no change other than what channel its on. There's a limited window of opportunity before it goes the way of Firefly, hopefully they don't miss it.

The SQ42 demo last year showed the Gladius sneaking through canyons to avoid detection from defense turrets protecting the base.

I don't understand why anyone would buy the C2 as a cargo hauler. The C2 carries 624 SCU and costs $360 or $300 war-bond. Ok, the C2 carries more than a Caterpillar (576 SCU) but the Cat only cost $225, originally (I'm glad I bought it ), and now it's up to $295. Anyone who missed out on the $225 Caterpillar has to drop $300 on the C2 war-bond to make it worthwhile. At $360, the extra 48 SCU of cargo isn't worth an extra $60. I'll keep my Cat, thanks. We also know the C2 will increase in price later, like when it's flyable. It'll probably be over $400 with Store Credit and the war-bond price will probably increase too. If you're only interested in hauling cargo, a Hull C or D are much better buys. The only unique thing the C2 does is carry 2 Nova Tanks and deploy them to a planet's surface. I don't think a Starfarer can deploy a Nova because the tank is too tall to fit through its cargo bay door. The Cat can't carry a Tonk either. I think the only other ship that could carry a Nova Tank is the Idris Frigate using its aft boarding ramp. That's the only reason to own a C2: to transport and deploy Nova Tanks. But it's probably not a good idea to deploy Nova Tanks at a hot LZ -- that's what the M2 is for. The C2 is basically for transporting tanks around during peace-time. It's not a cost-effective cargo hauler. The Hercules looks awesome, but you don't buy a big rig for its style. The M2 is the only Hercules model that makes sense to buy IMO because it fulfills a distinct role: rapidly deploying tanks into combat zones. The M2 can do that because it has extra armour and shields, and ventral gun turrets to lay down cover-fire. I think the M2 is over-priced at $480/$400 wb, but much like the Esperia Prowler, it fulfills a specialty role that no other ship can do, and CIG expects us to pay extra for that privilege. Of course, I agree that the A2 is indefensibly OVER-PRICED. I already own a Hammerhead w/ LTI that I purchased with store credit. I'm not going to melt it and pay $50 more for an A2 without LTI, which can carry one tank and most of its guns can only fire down. Sure, the A2 can blast the bejeezus out of planet-side bases and outposts with its MOABs and carpet bombs, but that's not worth $700! Maybe $500. The A2 is apparently the only bomber that can drop MOABs, so it's a specialty role ship. But it's not worth the price of 3 Retaliator heavy bombers. 2 Tali's, maybe, but not 3. I genuinely hope that CIG listens to the outrage over the A2 Hercules' $700 price and reduces it by at least $100 by this Friday. I know that there's virtually no chance of CIG doing that because I don't recall them ever caving to community pressure and reducing a ship's price before. They've modified ships -- like adding a bunch of extra guns to the over-priced $250 Redeemer -- but they've never reduced prices. The only scenario that I'd even entertain buying an A2 is if it were $200 cheaper. But that would mean reducing the prices of the M2 and possibly the C2. I just don't see CIG caving to pressure and doing the right thing. It's disappointing, and I think I might be done giving CIG any more of my money. I have other priorities now. I'll just play with the store credit I have and use it to buy new concept ships, without LTI.

From my perspective buy or dont buy thats your option ajd CIG will live or die based on their merrits. As for the ship at had id pay 360 for the C2 and even 480 for the M2 if its equipped with the advertized armour, weapons and milspec components. But the A2 no no no....way too expensive, ill stay with my hammerhead which has far more going for it IMO. AJ Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk

This?

Which is exactly why CIG has done things the way they have. They never intended the buyback system to be used in this manner, and time has shown that most people don't bother buying back melted ships or packages unless they intend to try to resell them. When I was at CIG LA I asked them about their issues with buybacks and this was one thing they said they never intended, but were taking measures to try to stop. CIG isn't there to be some kind of weird e-currency platform, they're making and selling ships to fund the game. The longer that they take to release the game, the more people offload ships or packages in order to either get moneyback (buyer's remorse), or use their pledge account as some kind of bank account to either make profits or get money back for other purposes. Each transaction of this kind doesn't actually give CIG much in the way of pledge funding, so CIG is taking strides to keep the money coming to THEM and not going to people playing the e-commerce game. If anything, the grey market is to blame for this, and while CIG could be seen as complicit in the creation of the grey market, they have chosen to stay on the side of customers and NOT go after people for selling/reselling assets, even though it would be well within their rights to do so. That said, I do find this new ship to be WAY overpriced, but it could also be a way for CIG to make sure there aren't a ton of the particular ship type in-universe before game launch. I was tempted to make a play for one of these, but then realized I could buy a new video card or a VR headset for that price, and have thus cooled my jets a bit.

The A2 is a game changer. Sell Pioneer and say good bye to now-hopeless ground defense game. Buy A2 and play the now more-promising ground attack game. Cool ships.

There always games like warthunder, world of shits (ships) and team fortress 2. All which are free to play. Quick Pixel run before he catches you!

Received a reply back from CIG today - looks like the problem is at their side with their mailer configuration - probably something in it is flagging the auto-blocking of emails from ISP's.... Still can't login but they have identified the problem and are looking into it now. Thanks for all the advice. Edited: Can recover account fine now, and have managed to login....

cool.. a poll... I don't have any of those games

As it says, I have an original Kickstarter Chronicles of Elyria Ursaphant Rider package that I'd like to get rid of, as life has thrown some stuff at me in the last months that has let me know I won't be able to devote ANY time to the game when it comes out. (I had a dry run in LiF:MMO and I really can't put in the time required to make CoE worth it) As such, I'd like to get rid of this account. Unfortunately it is tied to my email, but I will help the buyer change the email and also provide a written and signed/scanned paper stating I relinquish all rights to the account if so desired. Price: $200 OBO The account also has an Alias Name Change available, so the account can be renamed to suit the buyer. The hand-off would be handled as follows: Upon payment, buyer (must be Paypal verified) would give me new email and new alias that they want on the account. I will connect to whichever voice-based chat that the buyer requests, and confirm all details before handing off the account to the buyer, as well as provide confirmation screenshots of each step if requested. The buyer would then be able to log in and change their password as they so desire. The account has 2000 influence and 3 Sparks of Life attributed. These are the following rewards from the package: Account Rewards Access to Alpha Two, Beta One, Beta Two, Exposition, and Stress Tests 400 Exposition Points to spend in the Exposition Store to customize your package 3 Sparks of Life 3 Souls to choose from Forum Border and Badge reflecting your backing level Exclusive Wallpaper An exclusive backer wallpaper Newsletter Access to our Newsletter Soundtrack CoE Soundtrack (download) Digital Artbook Art Book (PDF) Digital Strategy Guide Strategy guide (PDF) Digital Town Guide Town guide (PDF) Adventurer's Flair Adventurer's title and cloak Founder's Flair Founder's title and cloak Merchant's Flair Merchant's title and cloak Founder's Chat Channel Access to In-game Founder's chat channel Text Emote In-game text based emote (exclusive to Kickstarter backers) Salute In-game salute (exclusive to Kickstarter backers) Dance In-game dance (exclusive to Kickstarter backers) Character Rewards Adventurer's Pack A backpack A collection of trail rations Random treasure maps in your home region Founder's Pack A detailed map of your home county Merchant's Pack A set of merchant scales A detailed map of your home duchy A map of a historical, possibly unexplored location Pack Mule A pack mule to ride and haul your gear Pet Choose 1 of 5 in-game pets to call your own Horse & Saddlebags A Horse and saddlebags Purebred Horse A purebread horse for breeding or travelling Surname Choose your own custom surname (can include your whole family) Custom Coat of Arms Heraldry - Create a custom Coat of Arms for your surname and kingdom Decorative Plaque A decorative plaque with your family's coat of arms Wagon A Wagon Ursaphant An Ursaphant mount Homesteader Artwork A decorative artwork for your home to commemorate your role as a homesteader Expanded Colors Gain access to expanded colors for your Custom Coat of Arms Expanded Sigils Gain access to expanded sigils for your Custom Coat of Arms

Now is the time to give the Developers Ideas for what you would like to see in the game. As a new Star Citizen Game Idea for the PU = I suggest allowing players to "rent space" on a space station / planet side to set up a "retail" operation like you would see in the TV Series Babylon 5 or Deep Space 9. This could also be a "room addition" as part of the Hangar expansions. The shops can either be player run or set up to run by a hired NPC (like a factory but smaller). The hired NPC would be a Money Sink as would the Rent so the player would have to weight the cost of running the business vs profit and constant re-supply of goods. The Player, other Players, and NPC should be able to sell items to the Retail Shop to re-supply the store (the Player would to trade runs to bring back items in Demand to the Retail Shop). This idea was carried over from a thread about Trade. ++++ I added a POLL to the RSI forums for this = Please cast your Vote in that Poll as well

Heading to Rome next Sunday for a whole week with my Wife. Does any Imperium member lives there and could advise restaurants/pastries/ice creams/supplies places? we like typical places where locals go, we don't especially want fancy places. We are looking for the feeling" this is real Rome".

Personally I am running 32, but that is work related. If you would feel better to have more ram sure go for it. But I wouldn't expect to see much difference on SC or any other game. Now it depends if you are running DDR3 or 4, if it is 3 and you intend to keep the mobo/cpu for longer sure buy the extra ram now that is cheaper as the 4 is bloody expensive.

In case some people don't Reddit.

Want to buy 3 ships in total. Banu Merchantman Polaris I prefer to buy them with LTI, Please pm me your offers, Thanks!

Those are the same old pics from concept. The weapons are attached.

BoredGamer is talking thru his ass tbh.

GPP program cancelled: https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2018/05/04/gpp https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlJpO107lTw&t=3

Yes, for the most part, assume "Positive intent"

@Shifty The sabre is also a dogfighter, so it's necessary there. If you're going to spend 80% of your time on target staring at instruments, slightly lower cockpit visibility isn't an issue. It's similar to how a tank pilot has fairly limited visibility and needs to rely on sensors and other instruments to navigate. It won't be quite that extreme in the Eclipse, but some of that ideology will carry over. The cockpit will have enough visibility to allow for maneuvering without sensors, but for the precision you need on a bombing run you'll need to use them. If visibility is good enough for you to see where you're going if you need to scramble for an exit, that's enough.

Heh, when I saw the cockpit section (when viewed from the front) it immediately made me think of this

I like the look of it! Depending on price, I might pick one up as a dedicated cargo runner. If not affordable at this time, I'd definitely pick one up in the PU. The cargo doors also look pretty big, bet you could fit some smaller ships in there too!

I still don't think I'm past the "yo, those planets are orbiting one another" phase yet with Star Citizen. Phenomenal footage. Excellent composition.

Hi all, just asked to join today. Most people just call me taken. I am 32, from the UK. I am interested in all parts of military and industry. And have spent way to much on this game, like most of you. So i have ships for a lot of jobs I want to do. I look forward to working with you in game. If that shooting people in the face or selling stuff that way over priced and making us rich. Hope to see you all in game.

No pricing yet, but damn this is cool!

Retaliator: Strategic bomber, long range, large payload, largest torpedoes. aka anti capital ship Harbinger: Medium bomber, long range, smaller payload, heavier armor/better survivability, improved maneuverability/reduced hitbox. anti sub-capital(carracks, 890s, banu mm), though not necessarily solo. Could still mess up a cap ship in numbers, but lacking the massive anti-cap torpedo limits their alpha strike. Gladiator: Fighter-bomber, short range, smaller payload(relative to tali), less armor/survivability, much improved maneuverability, same target spectrum as the harbinger, but less tanky Harbinger and Gladiator will likely be pitted against the same sorts of targets, but their approach will be different. The gladiator will need to rely on ambush, boom/zoom(harbinger too, but the gladiator will need to really zoom to survive), and tactical advantage or significant fighter support. Due to its survivability and range, the Harbinger should have more flexibility in what targets it attacks, where the attack takes place, and how it prosecutes the attack, but I wouldn't say it is the superior bomber of the two, just a different approach.