Jump to content

Danakar Endeel

Imperium Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Feedback


Everything posted by Danakar Endeel

  1. I'm not a lawyer either but it does appear to be as you say: "Put up or shut up" Apparently there are actual procedures that serve to protect a defendant when they are being sued by a foreign plaintiff in a US California Court by demanding a bond from the foreign party if it can be reasonably shown that the defendants have a chance at being declared the prevailing party and then there is the concern that this foreign plaintiff may not (be able to) adhere to a ruling where they have to pay the defendant's legal costs. As Crytek's big-ticket items have already been thrown out during the pleading stage with their remaining complaints being more of the minor "filler" variety while their own financial state is questionable at best CIG's legal team has shown that there is a reasonable chance of CIG being declared the prevailing party and wants to make sure their client won't get stiffed on the bill should CryTek refuse to pay for CIG's legal costs. The way I see it, if the Judge rules that the Motion for Bond is warranted and makes it an Order then CryTek has to make $2.2M available to a holding account (most likely set up and held by the Court). But if CryTek refuses to comply (or is unable to comply due to their financial state) the Judge may throw their entire case out and declare CIG to be the prevailing party right then and there.
  2. Managed to get a copy of the Order now. As suspected the Judge has accepted the Proposed Order and signed off on it. ORDER RE JOINT STIPULATION TO CONTINUE HEARING ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR BOND PURSUANT TO CAL. CIV. PROC. CODE § 1030 [58]
  3. Looks like CryTek is finally realizing that they are on the losing end and are now aware of the risks involved with CIG's motion for the Judge to order a $2.2M bond from CryTek as they suddenly appear open to more realistic settlement talks now that CIG has a good chance at being deemed the prevailing party. CryTek has already agreed to put their demands for Discovery on hold with this Motion for Bond now looming over them. As such I expect that CryTek is finally coming to the table in earnest and will be forced to agree to a reasonable (and likely much smaller) settlement or risk losing $2.2M if they persist in continuing this farce. Lior Leser already made a guess that it will likely be settled for $100k-$150k and then it's over. Ofcourse this might still be the final nail in the coffin for CryTek as a company once their expensive lawyers present their bill to them as each party would have to pay for their own legal fees. But that was the risk CryTek was willing to take when filing this joke of a lawsuit so them potentially going bankrupt over it is entirely their own fault. Ofcourse such a settlement would also cost CIG around $200k-$250k in settlement and legal fees but that's a drop in the bucket for CIG and I would be more than happy to buy another concept ship just to mitigate CIG's losses while CryTek will finally go away. Main Document Attachment 1 The Judge has already given her Order on the 8th of April regarding this matter but I wasn't able to get a copy of that document yet (as I don't want to pay for it). I assume she merely accepted the Proposed Order (Attachment 1) to postpone the hearing.
  4. Danakar Endeel


    Agreed. I have to wonder if Chris actually thought this one through or maybe he forgot about the feature the Starfarer/Gemini was marketed and sold with? The way I read this is that the Starfarer/Gemini can now no longer harvest Quantum Fuel and instead of Starfarer/Gemini crews braving the dangers of diving into gas giants to try and harvest exotic gas for refining Quantum Fuel they basically now either have to use a pickaxe or have to go out in an Orion to mine rocks for raw Quantum Matter in bulk, then put those containers of raw Quantum Matter in their Rent-a-Hangar at a location where there's a high demand for Quantum Fuel, then load the containers into their Starfarer/Gemini from within that hangar to refine the raw Quantum Matter into Quantum Fuel while sitting afk in their hangar the whole time, and then once it's done refining they sell the Quantum Fuel directly at a shop terminal while their ship never leaves the hangar. No more adventures of diving into gas giants hunting for pockets of rare exotic gas to refine into Quantum Fuel; you just sit in your hangar and use the Starfarer/Gemini as a static crafting station like in some generic MMO. Effectively this could result in never seeing any player-owned Starfarer/Gemini flying around as players would just use them as stationary refineries safely locked away inside a player's personal hangar because harvesting hydrogen for regular fuel is pretty much pointless when nearly every ship (except small fighters) can replenish their regular fuel themselves over time with their own hydrogen scoops. Harvesting and refining Quantum Fuel was the main draw for the Starfarer/Gemini in my opinion and now after years of selling the ships as "designed to collect and refine Quantum fuel" Chris appears to be taking that feature away for no real reason. Makes me also wonder if those external 'dry cargo' pods CIG talked about on several occassions will now meet the same fate. Personally I think that Chris should place some greater importance on actually delivering the ships with the features they were originally sold with instead of constantly changing things every time he sees something in a movie and goes "Hey that's cool, I want that in my game now" (in this case Coaxium in the movie "Solo") and do a complete 180 from what we were told we'd get years after selling us a ship for hundreds of dollars while basically telling us someone at CIG will fabricate some lame excuse later to justify why our Starfarer/Gemini suddenly lost the ability to harvest Quantum Fuel even though they were explicitly marketed and sold with that feature for years. https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15262-Massive-Hauling-The-MISC-Starfarer "Designed to COLLECT and refine quantum fuel in flight" As such I hope this was just an honest mistake and Starfarer/Gemini captains can still have adventures by diving into dangerous gas giants to harvest Quantum Matter gas instead of having to float out of the cargohold with a pickaxe to go bang on a rock for several hours as that would be pretty daft and unfun in my opinion. ⛏️😒 Anyways, that's my take on the matter.
  5. There hasn't been much happening for a while apart from some minor stuff that wasn't really worth mentioning but yesterday CIG has filed a motion with the Judge for CryTek to provide money for a bond in the amount of $2,193,298.45 to secure the award of attorneys’ fees and costs that Defendants will be entitled to receive as the prevailing party in this action. This sounds like CIG wants to make sure that CryTek will be forced to transfer funds into a holding account now so that CIG can lay claim to those funds later for their legal fees should they be deemed the prevailing party in the lawsuit (which is very likely now). Especially since CryTek was proven to have many financial issues in the past already and CIG doesn't want to be stuck holding the bill if CryTek has no intention to pay up should they lose (which is very likely as well). CryTek has already refused to agree to this bond voluntarily hence why CIG is now filing a motion through the court for an Order by the Judge. From what I understand this bond would make sure that CIG's legal team gets paid as per California Civil Code § 1717(a) should CIG be deemed the prevailing party instead of continuing with what's going on with CryTek attempting to play a game of high-stakes bluff poker without ever putting (or having) any money in the pot themselves. This bond money would prevent CryTek (a foreign company) from simply jumping ship, flat-out refuse to pay, or filing for bankruptcy or something after losing in court just so they can stiff CIG on the estimated $2 Million+ in legal fees that CryTek is now forcing upon CIG for their defense while the 3 Yerli brothers could then simply run away back to Turkey with all the money they already funneled away from their dying company. They already performed a stunt where 1 brother stepped down as CEO and then the other 2 brothers became the new CEOs (with the former CEO naturally getting a lucrative severance package in the process). To me this entire lawsuit was done out of spite and I suspect that the Yerli brothers have no intention of paying CIG's legal costs after CryTek loses in court and ordered by the Judge to pay CIG's legal fees. Also, the Director of Product Development at Faceware chimed in (Attachment 15) basically stating that CryTek are lying as Faceware was never provided with any CryEngine sourcecode as CryTek was claiming. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6256484/crytek-gmbh-v-cloud-imperium-games-corp/?order_by=desc Main Document Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 15 Attachment 16 Attachment 51
  6. The Reliant variants are currently for sale again. If you pay with cash you can get them as Warbond at the old/original price while the Store Credit versions now use the increased price (+$10). Both versions come with 6 months insurance. https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/16979-Alpha-35-New-Features-And-Ships MISC RELIANT SERIES Adapt in Alpha 3.5 Newly-flyable in Alpha 3.5, the Reliant series from MISC features advanced Xi'an-inspired tech and design. With broad wings, omni-directional thrusters, a fully-articulated two-seat cockpit with horizontal and vertical flight modes, as well as a spacious interior cabin space suitable for a variety of functions, the Reliant can acclimate to a multitude of purposes and situations. MAXIMUM ADAPTABILITY DISCOVERY, COMBAT, COMMUNICATION, AND BEYOND. THE MISC DIFFERENCE MISC RELIANT MAKO 3.5 FLYABLE - WARBOND- Standalone Ship $85.00 USD MISC RELIANT MAKO 3.5 FLYABLE- Standalone Ship $95.00 USD MISC RELIANT SEN 3.5 - WARBOND- Standalone Ship $75.00 USD MISC RELIANT SEN 3.5- Standalone Ship $85.00 USD MISC RELIANT TANA 3.5 - WARBOND- Standalone Ship $65.00 USD MISC RELIANT TANA 3.5- Standalone Ship $75.00 USD
  7. Reliant variant prices just changed on the Ship Upgrades page Reliant Tana - $75.00 Reliant Sen - $85.00 Reliant Mako - $95.00 Personally I think those prices are way too high for what they offer in return. In my opinion the Tana was already pushing it at $65 compared to more viable and cheaper alternatives. Then again the 'tier 2 starter' Kore going from $50 to $65 back in 2016 was already bonkers imo; especially with the cheaper yet more viable Avenger Titan and 300i.
  8. Heh, I'm betting that the primary function of the Corsair is 'exploring' the cargoholds of other ships and those "state-of-the-art sensor suites" are probably tuned to scan the contents of cargo containers similar to the contraband scanners used by UEE Customs agents. So yeah, I don't think this is a real exploration ship at all (not like the Aquila or Carrack) but more of a raider that's meant to find and disable other cargoships so they can 'explore' their cargoholds for rare artifacts (aka anything of value).
  9. Ah well, it was fun while it lasted but in my opinion it's good for CIG to invalidate those old $0 CCUs as some people abused it a lot by gaming the system with thousands of $0 CCUs stocked up and giving themselves several hundreds of dollars in extra discounts. I'm also to blame for 'gaming the system' a little bit but only used them a few times myself as I recall. Once with a $0 Redeemer-to-BMM CCUs so I could give myself a $100 discount on a Hammerhead and that's the single time I gave myself such a big discount. The other times I used them was for minor stuff like using a $0 Kore-to-Tana CCU after the Kore had gone up from $50 to $65 and I was allowed to get a Tana CCU for $0, and then once to turn a $350 Carrack in one of my UEE Explorer Packs to a $350 Reclaimer while I turned another $350 Carrack from another UEE Explorer Pack into a $350 Hull-D. So I'm personally not too miffed about it but some people over on Spectrum appear to be going completely batshit crazy over it. Time for people to get the lead out and use 'em or lose 'em. We all knew it was going to happen at some point since the initial announcement back in May 2017 so I have no clue why some people go full retard over it all of a sudden.
  10. Warbond price: $195 Store Credit price: $215 https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/16995-Drake-Corsair-Sail-The-Stars
  11. The Carrack is the top-tier of exploration ships while the Corsair is more of a competitor to the Constellation. In terms of price and size it sits inbetween the Freelancer DUR and the Constellation Andromeda.
  12. Maybe, not sure if those are actually S4 guns or not on the Corsair but I'm suspecting they are. The last we know about the Carrack was that it was supposed to have 4 turrets with 2xS4 guns each but that was from the ship stats years ago so no clue if that changed or not. CIG might have upgraded some turrets to 2xS5 (the top turret would be the most likely candidate for that) but we'll have to wait and see. The latest Carrack images do make it appear that the Carrack has much better overall coverage from all angles though while the Corsair has a lot of forward firepower at its disposal but the rest of the ship appears to have issues with proper coverage and lacks firepower (guns on those side turrets and the rear appear to be S2 or S3). So... Carrack with 8xS4 on turrets with good coverage versus Corsair with 4xS4 forward facing guns, some missiles (8xS2?), and an assortment of S2-S3 guns in locations that offer only limited coverage Personally I'd rather have a ship that can bring 2 S4 guns to bear on any location compared to a ship that is only protected by 2xS2 or 2xS3 on the flanks and rear. I'm also suspecting that the Carrack will have larger shield generators and thicker armor as the Corsair will likely have only medium sized shield generators and cardboard for armor.
  13. Some images from AtV showing some of the interior. Seems everything inside the ship is on the same floor. Vehicle/Cargo area shown on the top left with the Component Access shown in the middle. Crew area with kitchen stuffs and individual rooms for each crewmember. It appears the Corsair is going to be a 3-man ship. One of the seats in the cockpit actually moves down to sit under the other seat. So apparently one person looks out through the top cockpit while the other sees out the bottom windows when in flight.
  14. Can't take credit for that one I'm afraid as I merely confiscated the image from Omega@Supreme when he made his post. I just wanted to share it so we could all see how he got to the 48m length estimate. So all credit for that one goes to Omega@Supreme.
  15. Looks like it will be approximately 48m in length. At least according to some rough estimates made by Omega@Supreme over on Spectrum based on the concept art Ursa = 8m in length Corsair = 6 Ursas long
  16. Nothing as of yet. We'll probably get more info on the specs tomorrow once the full sale starts. My guess is a 4-man crew with 4 S4 guns on the front. Probably S2-S3 on the manned turrets as those looks siginifcantly smaller than the ones on the front and it looks like it has 4 missile hardpoints on the starboard wing while the port side wings have 1 small gun each (probably S2).
  17. Hmmm, reminds me a little bit like the BT-7 from SWToR due to the positioning of the wings. Warbond price of $195 doesn't appear too bad either and is a lot 'cheaper' than the Aquila but the Corsair probably won't come stock with a $50 rover; just room to put one in. So that's probably where the price difference went. Although most Drake enthusiasts will want to fill it up with Dragonflies anyway. Now I already have a Carrack so I don't need this one but it's nice to see another multicrew exploration ship to add some more variation.
  18. Well, still going to wait for the Q&A but I got me a little $10 Tracker-to-SRV CCU just to have the option available.
  19. Yep, as such I think this ship will become more of an 'orgmates only' ship. Like an Imperium member asking on Discord "Hey guys, I hit an asteroid in Caliban while farming Vanduul and now my engines have fallen off; can someone help me?". That said, the SRV is growing on me a bit. Most notably because (unlike the Vulcan) it is a 1-man career ship in the same vein as the Prospector/Vulture so maybe I'll get one just to have one. If it can also be used for other purposes like carrying prefab modules and stuff there might be some additional use for it once Imperium gets to building their own moon-base and stuff.
  20. Official sale page is up with more information. Store credit price is $150 https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/16971-The-ARGO-SRV Some noteworthy tidbits of info: SPACIOUS CABIN More than enough space for you and a small number of passengers. CARGO HOLD 10 SCU capacity assures your stuff is just as comfortable as you and your passengers. So not only can it tow vehicles, but it can also carry 4 passengers and has a cargohold with 10SCU of cargo. It also has a Quantum Drive and a Jump Drive according to the brochure.
  21. Looks cool but atm it doesn't feel all that enticing to me. For the same price I'd rather buy a Vulture or Prospector as I'm more interested in heading out to salvage/mine in peace whenever I decide instead of being at the beck and call of someone else (and for that reason I own both a Vulture and a Prospector). Not really envisioning the job of being a Roadside Assistance Guy (RAG) where I have to wait for idiots to do idiot stuff just to tell me to tow their idiot ship (only for them to shoot me in the head and steal my tow-truck and use it to tow away their ship while leaving me dead in space). Also wondering if we'll ever see that third Argo variant with the medical pod as I was more interested in that one.
  22. CIG's answer to CryTek's SAC. Basically just CIG further clarifying their previous position as to why CryTek has no case. https://www.docdroid.net/WPfo6Rw/crytek-gmbh-v-cloud-imperium-games-corp-et-al-cacdce-17-08937-00530.pdf It was interesting to read that after CIG had announced the SQ42 split CryTek contacted them about it by phone and claimed it would be a breach of the GLA but after CIG clarified it CryTek's counsel concluded it was not a breach and retracted their complaint (only to pretend it's now a breach again for their lawsuit). It's also good to see CIG's legal counsel bringing up CryTek's failure to register their CryEngine3 at the copyright office and how CryTek is now effectively trying to claim copyright infringement for unregistered works (which is why they can't claim statutory damages).
  23. Yeah, I'm hoping that CIG will still have that spot marked for the fourth turret and didn't change it out for an elevator or something. Otherwise it will be a massive blind spot.
  • Create New...