RSI - Polaris - Corvette

[faquarl25]

1 minute ago, Gremlich said:

not likely considering the vector it approached the ship from - if it was the one off to the right - out the back in the back. AND it was ferrying a new guy who was unfamiliar with the idris. Point taken though.

Basically, we know nothing and can just pray to Lord Roberts and hope that our desires will be met.

[Gremlich]

8 minutes ago, faquarl25 said:

Basically, we know nothing and can just pray to Lord Roberts and hope that our desires will be met.

verily

[VoA]

VoAVoA

I thought Chris Roberts (10ftc 77) and Ben's interview with Bat Girl would conclude this debate (and it should have)... this should put a death-nail into it (for those that don't really understand what a Corvette's Role is). -->>> From Wikipedia

The modern corvette appeared during World War II as an easily built patrol and convoy escort vessel..... whose simple design and mercantile construction standards (per Ben - a "disposable"capital ship) lent itself to rapid production in large numbers in small yards unused to naval work....... Their chief duty was to protect convoys throughout the Battle of the Atlantic.... The Flower-class corvette was originally designed for offshore patrol work, and was not ideal as an antisubmarine escort; they were really too short for open ocean work, too lightly armed for antiaircraft defence, and little faster than the merchantmen they escorted, a particular problem given the faster German U-boat designs then emerging. They were very seaworthy and manoeuvrable,....

Modern navies began a trend in the late 20th and early 21st centuries towards smaller, more manoeuvrable surface capability. Corvettes have a displacement between 540 and 3,000 long tons (550 and 3,050 t) and measure 180–420 ft (55–128 m) in length. They are usually armed with medium- and small-caliber guns, surface-to-surface missiles, surface-to-air missiles, and antisubmarine weapons. Many can accommodate a small or medium antisubmarine warfare helicopter. (Snubs in SC)

[Minted]

56 minutes ago, VoA said:

VoAVoA

I thought Chris Roberts (10ftc 77) and Ben's interview with Bat Girl would conclude this debate (and it should have)... this should put a death-nail into it (for those that don't really understand what a Corvette's Role is). -->>> From Wikipedia

The modern corvette appeared during World War II as an easily built patrol and convoy escort vessel..... whose simple design and mercantile construction standards (per Ben - a "disposable"capital ship) lent itself to rapid production in large numbers in small yards unused to naval work....... Their chief duty was to protect convoys throughout the Battle of the Atlantic.... The Flower-class corvette was originally designed for offshore patrol work, and was not ideal as an antisubmarine escort; they were really too short for open ocean work, too lightly armed for antiaircraft defence, and little faster than the merchantmen they escorted, a particular problem given the faster German U-boat designs then emerging. They were very seaworthy and manoeuvrable,....

Modern navies began a trend in the late 20th and early 21st centuries towards smaller, more manoeuvrable surface capability. Corvettes have a displacement between 540 and 3,000 long tons (550 and 3,050 t) and measure 180–420 ft (55–128 m) in length. They are usually armed with medium- and small-caliber guns, surface-to-surface missiles, surface-to-air missiles, and antisubmarine weapons. Many can accommodate a small or medium antisubmarine warfare helicopter. (Snubs in SC)

So that post basically agreed with my initial thoughts of what would be expected for a Corvette....

Small

Fast

Manoeuvrable

Cheap

Easy/quick to build

Versatile

 

No mention of specific anti-air focus and no mention of capital ship escorting. Capital ships basically being better in every aspect when it comes to offensive and defensive capabilities.

Again I see the Corvette as a cheap version of the Idris, capable of similar range of military support albeit on a much smaller scale and with a more limited operational area. Convoys (trade/transport etc) will after all require a broad level of support including Anti fighter, missile/torpedo defence and anti ship.

An Idris would be too big, too expensive and just down right overkill. Enter the Corvette.

 

As for the snub/hangar/fighter debate. I would say that our current snubs would not be appropriate for a military ship but at the same time I don't think a Corvette would necessarily need or warrant a hangar ship with a jump/quantum drive. We would need to see a new military snub created...doesn't have to be from RSI...Aegis? Or a boarding vessel. Afterall it might make sense for a small military ship such as the Corvette to do policing duties. Whether the Argo is fit for this purpose I don't know though.

 

[VoA]

Today was a great day on the RSI Forums as the I-WIN lobbyist get slammed and try to scramble to save face with this below (making excuses that this is what they wanted all along - LOL - and some maybe even editing their old posts...).... 

The issue of what the Polaris' Specs should be like is settled - the specs should mirror or be very similar for the Polaris (Corvette) = Vanduul Void (Corvette)

See this RSI General Transmission -->> Classified Report: Vanduul Bomber Identified

LENGTH 124m
BEAM 90m
HEIGHT 33m
MAX CREW UNKNOWN
POWER PLANT 4 (equivalent)
ENGINE (PRIMARY THRUSTER) 3x TR5 (equivalent)
MANEUVERING THRUSTERS 10x TR3 (equivalent)
SHIELD 5 (equivalent)
FIXED GUNS 3 x Size 6 – Electron Cannon
MISSILES 4 x Size 4 – Triple-Mount Torpedo Cluster
TURRETS 7 x Size 4 – Laser Repeater Turret

 

[Arcanus]

43 minutes ago, VoA said:

Today was a great day on the RSI Forums as the I-WIN lobbyist get slammed and try to scramble to save face with this below (making excuses that this is what they wanted all along - LOL - and some maybe even editing their old posts...).... 

The issue of what the Polaris' Specs should be like is settled - the specs should mirror or be very similar for the Polaris (Corvette) = Vanduul Void (Corvette)

 

Ummmmmmm...

@VoA  The Vanduul "Void" is a bomber, it is absolutely NOT a "corvette" Hell, even the link that you included reveals that, when it refers to the ship as a "bomber"

46 minutes ago, VoA said:

Classified Report: Vanduul Bomber Identified

 

[Riley Egret]

Well, I got told I am one of those lobbist too   ( espeically since you said yourself you're "lobbying" for the corvette you want to have).

I have many reservations about those conclusions, but at this point I'd rather wait and see.

[VoA]

48 minutes ago, Arcanus said:

Ummmmmmm...

@VoA  The Vanduul "Void" is a bomber, it is absolutely NOT a "corvette" Hell, even the link that you included reveals that, when it refers to the ship as a "bomber"

 

Bomber in Star Citizen refers to a ship that has Torpedoes.   Historical Corvettes do have Large Missiles (Large Missiles in Star Citizen = Torpedoes).... So yes the Polaris Corvette could also end up being a "Bomber" as well.   And yes..... the Void Bomber is the Vanduul's version of a Corvette at 124m in length (and is not the same class of ship like a Retalitator Heavy Bomber). --- see image below...

18 minutes ago, Riley Egret said:

Well, I got told I am one of those lobbist too   ( espeically since you said yourself you're "lobbying" for the corvette you want to have).

I have many reservations about those conclusions, but at this point I'd rather wait and see.

^^^ You were not one of the ones Lobbying for a Large STS Turret on the Polaris correct?  That is the big issue......  was that some wanted these Large Turrets so the Corvette would be "designed" to attack other Large Capital ships and that goes directly against the Role of a Corvette historically (as described in the RSI Forums, described by CR10ftc ep.77 and Ben in his last Bat Girl interview)

[Arcanus]

Okay, let's make a few things clear... 

1. CIG does not use the "standard" naval definitions for their ships.  Otherwise, they would never refer to either a Corvette, or a Frigate  (and probably not a Destroyer either) as a "Capital Ship."  
2. Likewise, their ship-design philosophy cannot be lifted wholesale from historical accounts, otherwise we would never have a ship like the Bengal-class Strike Carrier (which is awesome)... that operates as a Fleet Carrier, but still mounts a ventral "long-gun"/heavy weapons turret (combination carriers w/ battleship guns were ruled out a long time ago as being impractical... sacrificing too much of one role for the sake of another). 
3. No one outside (or possibly even inside) of CIG really knows what the future Corvette will be in terms of role or equipment yet.... they may have an idea, but they don't know.  Why? Because CIG itself hasn't decided yet.  Yes, we can make "educated guesses" based upon off-hand comments made in interviews, or even upon naval history, but if reviewing the "ship design" articles in Jump Point should teach anyone anything, it's that sometimes CIG will change the concept of the ship even in mid-design, simply because their own (internal) concept has changed; or because they decided to split the roles for a concept into two different ships; or even just because the art for one particular concept was so damn cool, that they wanted to use it, but it didn't really fit 100% with the original description (and we don't even have an "original description" yet!)... If you don't believe me, take a look at the most recent JP article on the Xi'an Scout... it's awesome, but you can't tell me that it didn't change from the original description, or even the original concept art (where did the 2nd seat go?).

Until we know more from CIG, and especially until CIG releases an "official description" of the RSI Polaris-class Corvette, EVERYTHING on this thread is just theory-crafting and pure guesswork.  Not only that, but even after we have an official description, even after we have concept art, even after it makes it's first debut in the "Baby PU" it can (and probably will) still change... because Star Citizen is a Work In Progress.

So everyone relax, and stop arguing...  Sure, maybe you're right...  then again maybe the other person is right...  then again, maybe neither one of you is right... or you could even both (somehow) be right.  BUT you don't know today, you (probably) won't know tomorrow, and quite frankly all this argument over people making guesses about a specific ship and it's specific equipment, used for a specific role... that hasn't even been concepted yet...  and arguing to the point where they even get upset, or call other people names... is all just a waste of time.

 

[VoA]

2 minutes ago, Arcanus said:

Okay, let's make a few things clear... 

1. CIG does not use the "standard" naval definitions for their ships.  Otherwise, they would never refer to either a Corvette, or a Frigate  (and probably not a Destroyer either) as a "Capital Ship."  
2. Likewise, their ship-design philosophy cannot be lifted wholesale from historical accounts, otherwise we would never have a ship like the Bengal-class Strike Carrier (which is awesome)... that operates as a Fleet Carrier, but still mounts a ventral "long-gun"/heavy weapons turret (combination carriers w/ battleship guns were ruled out a long time ago as being impractical... sacrificing too much of one role for the sake of another). 

Well....... both Ben and CR has described the Polaris in terms of a Historical Corvette - see videos below...

 

 

4 minutes ago, Arcanus said:

Okay, let's make a few things clear... 

1. ...
2. ...
3. No one outside (or possibly even inside) of CIG really knows what the future Corvette will be in terms of role or equipment yet.... they may have an idea, but they don't know.  Why? Because CIG itself hasn't decided yet. ...

 

Ben mentioned that CIG does have a Rough Spec for the Polaris but ya it is still a WIP = but that Spec was giving to a Concept Artist to work from.  Can it change..... sure.... can community input influence it - YES (Ben mentioned specifically that he has seen the specific thread in his interview) = does this guarantee that they will agree with the input from the community - NO......  Has CR reviewed the final Concept = No - it is still a WIP from the concept artist.

10 minutes ago, Arcanus said:

Until we know more from CIG, and especially until CIG releases an "official description" of the RSI Polaris-class Corvette, EVERYTHING on this thread is just theory-crafting and pure guesswork.  Not only that, but even after we have an official description, ....

Actually the below is an Official RSI Description of a Vanduul Void Bomber (Corvette) and as we all know....... the UEE would have its "equivalent" Corvette in the Polaris.   For balance reasons they can't differ that much in Size of weapons Employed on the ship.... but can differ in the Distribution of the weapons.

The issue of what the Polaris' Specs should be like is settled - the specs should mirror or be very similar for the Polaris (Corvette) = Vanduul Void (Corvette)

See this RSI General Transmission -->> Classified Report: Vanduul Bomber Identified

LENGTH 124m
BEAM 90m
HEIGHT 33m
MAX CREW UNKNOWN
POWER PLANT 4 (equivalent)
ENGINE (PRIMARY THRUSTER) 3x TR5 (equivalent)
MANEUVERING THRUSTERS 10x TR3 (equivalent)
SHIELD 5 (equivalent)
FIXED GUNS 3 x Size 6 – Electron Cannon
MISSILES 4 x Size 4 – Triple-Mount Torpedo Cluster
TURRETS 7 x Size 4 – Laser Repeater Turret

 

13 minutes ago, Arcanus said:

So everyone relax, and stop arguing...  Sure, maybe you're right...  then again maybe the other person is right...  

It is really a friendly debate.... and it appears everyone has coalesced behind the Polaris matching the Specs of the Vanduul Void Bomber (Corvette)..... with the exception of a single person I think at this point.   Does this mean that CIG will follow our input..... no..... but we do know they are monitoring the thread per Ben and that's why everyone is throwing in their 2 cents = which is healthy for game development and getting the community involved and active

[Switch]

12 hours ago, VoA said:

It is really a friendly debate.... and it appears everyone has coalesced behind the Polaris matching the Specs of the Vanduul Void Bomber (Corvette)..... with the exception of a single person I think at this point.   Does this mean that CIG will follow our input..... no..... but we do know they are monitoring the thread per Ben and that's why everyone is throwing in their 2 cents = which is healthy for game development and getting the community involved and active

A friendly debate is friendly both when someone agrees and disagrees with you, as well I don't fancy you singling out "a single person" , I keep my opinions to my self on the theory crafting but just know he is not the only person that does not think the Polaris matches the Void Bomber for whatever it matters.

As well all the links and information you've provided above, is due to change is what Arcanus was trying to explain to you we love to discuss the game but when you're discussing something in SUCH great detail with so many facts that depend on X not changing, it can no longer be dependable information as StarCitizen is ever expanding till they release us a game we have nothing solid to "prove someone wrong" about anything. So anyone can be right at the moment and should be encouraging each other to express such interest in theory crafting but not if proving someone wrong is your only goal.  

 

[VoA]

4 hours ago, Switch said:

A friendly debate is friendly both when someone agrees and disagrees with you, as well I don't fancy you singling out "a single person" , I keep my opinions to my self on the theory crafting but just know he is not the only person that does not think the Polaris matches the Void Bomber for whatever it matters.

The debate is there because those that are participating care passionately about the game and want to help CIG develop the best game possible.   There are those that care about realism / immersion / and play balance .... and those that are more interested in getting their favorite ship (or perhaps in this case the one ship they will melt all their other ships for)..... to be the most powerful ship they can possibly lobby for.   In every concept sale most of the people lobby for things that would make the ship to powerful vs other ships that already exist.   Fortunately CIG sees through this... but then when the ship comes out...... those that wanted the OP ship start to QQ (even before they have the context for flying the ship or knowing what a balanced fight should be vs an equivalent enemy ship).

4 hours ago, Switch said:

As well all the links and information you've provided above, is due to change is what Arcanus was trying to explain to you we love to discuss the game but when you're discussing something in SUCH great detail with so many facts that depend on X not changing, it can no longer be dependable information as StarCitizen is ever expanding till they release us a game we have nothing solid to "prove someone wrong" about anything. So anyone can be right at the moment and should be encouraging each other to express such interest in theory crafting but not if proving someone wrong is your only goal.  

Critiquing is the "goal" and only through that will it be helpful to CIG.   Everyone knows it is a WIP and even the information CIG is a WIP (however = per the Wikipedia - the Historical definition of what a Corvette is and its Role will not change).   As mentioned there are often two sides to the debate..... and when one side quotes historical precedence, Sci-Fi genre precedence, provides images, provides CIG interviews, provides an equivalent enemy ship  for play balance vs "I have a Feeling" ... "this is what I would Like"...... then it becomes clear to CIG...    Sure there are games out there that don't care about realism / immersion / precedence / play balance = but we do all know that Chris Roberts is not interested in making that type of game.

[Boildown]

I think I'd rather piss into the wind than try to pre-emptively prevent people from QQing when their imaginations of the ship doesn't match what its descriptions and statistics say it is when CIG finally announces it.  Or puts it into the hangar.  Or makes it flyable.

[CheeseNorris]

I belong to the camp where I believe that the Polaris should be what CIG sets it out to be... but definitely not an iWin kind of ship  OP!

[VoA]

Published on Mar 24, 2016

This episode Ben talks about the Polaris

15:26 Will the Polaris Corvette have heavy guns on it?

16:09 What is the corvette's main mission?

23:39 What is the estimated price of the Polaris?

 

[Booster Terrik]

Can someone buy Ben a new mike or have them subtitle the show because he gives me a headache trying to focus on whatever the hell he is trying to say

[Boildown]

5 hours ago, Booster Terrik said:

Can someone buy Ben a new mike or have them subtitle the show because he gives me a headache trying to focus on whatever the hell he is trying to say

Meh, imo he was perfectly understandable,  These are always quick and dirty interviews and him having to dig out better equipment would probably cause them to be done less frequently.

Anyways, no news on any of the questions posed about the Polaris.  Ben dodged them or gave us information we already knew.  The Polaris is a cheap capital ship to patrol places where a real destroyer or carrier group isn't available, but that was already known.

[Minted]

On ‎25‎/‎03‎/‎2016 at 4:15 AM, Boildown said:

Anyways, no news on any of the questions posed about the Polaris.  Ben dodged them or gave us information we already knew.  The Polaris is a cheap capital ship to patrol places where a real destroyer or carrier group isn't available, but that was already known.

Atleast it doesn't sound like they are restricting it to anti-fighter only which sounds great to me!

[Karmaslap]

If the guns are all suited to be anti-fighter then I'd be pretty disappointing, as a larger gun or two or the option of equipping it as you choose (with the default being anti-fighter) will really give it the edge vs other ships of its size as well as allow them to swarm an Idris (with support) and do some damage to it. Of course, you'd want to counter an Idris with something the same size or larger but right now little ships wouldn't stand much of a chance vs it. 

[Cincinnatus]

On 4/4/2016 at 2:17 PM, Karmaslap said:

If the guns are all suited to be anti-fighter then I'd be pretty disappointing, as a larger gun or two or the option of equipping it as you choose (with the default being anti-fighter) will really give it the edge vs other ships of its size as well as allow them to swarm an Idris (with support) and do some damage to it. Of course, you'd want to counter an Idris with something the same size or larger but right now little ships wouldn't stand much of a chance vs it. 

It could have anti-fighter guns but have torpedo tubes for cap ships. 

[Karmaslap]

@cincinnatus 

It could, but that would limit its effectiveness vs Capitals in larger fights. I'd be happier with that than with nothing, though. This ship will likely be my target to get in-game if I don't purchase it before launch. 

[VoA]

8 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

@cincinnatus 

It could, but that would limit its effectiveness vs Capitals in larger fights. 

Corvettes by definition are suppose to be "limited in its effectiveness vs Capitals in larger fights." = They are specifically designed to go after fighter / bombers not larger capital ships (the only historical precedence for corvettes having any kind of larger weapon is for them to have large missiles - in SC torpedoes - but even this is an exception). - see Wiki Definition below....

> From Wikipedia

The modern corvette appeared during World War II as an easily built patrol and convoy escort vessel..... whose simple design and mercantile construction standards (per Ben - a "disposable"capital ship) lent itself to rapid production in large numbers in small yards unused to naval work....... Their chief duty was to protect convoys throughout the Battle of the Atlantic.... The Flower-class corvette was originally designed for offshore patrol work, and was not ideal as an antisubmarine escort; they were really too short for open ocean work, too lightly armed for antiaircraft defence, and little faster than the merchantmen they escorted, a particular problem given the faster German U-boat designs then emerging. They were very seaworthy and manoeuvrable,....

Modern navies began a trend in the late 20th and early 21st centuries towards smaller, more manoeuvrable surface capability. Corvettes have a displacement between 540 and 3,000 long tons (550 and 3,050 t) and measure 180–420 ft (55–128 m) in length. They are usually armed with medium- and small-caliber guns, surface-to-surface missiles, surface-to-air missiles, and antisubmarine weapons. Many can accommodate a small or medium antisubmarine warfare helicopter. (Snubs in SC)

[Karmaslap]

While that's what we're all expecting out of the corvette and in-line with what Ben has said, I definitely don't think it's too much to hope for to be able to have a larger gun, or enough medium sized weapons to be useful. If it's just brindling with anti-fighter weaponry it won't be very good vs other ships of its class, even. I'm thinking that the polaris + caterpillar will be the foundation of a lot of smaller pirate fleets and that it would enhance gameplay if it could rough up the other ~300$ sized economy ships

[VoA]

Looks likely that we will get the Polaris spec more closely to the Vanduul Void (with no STS turrets) based on these new Idris Frigate Specs below (or LINK)

As I mentioned it is likely we will see the Smallest STS Turret on the Idris Frigate with only ASA turrets on the Corvettes (like the Void) - but that doesn't mean that the ASA turrets can't be used on ships equal to or smaller than the size of the mother ship (they are not AA turrets) --> just not turrets meant to go after larger Capital Ships like STS turrets = since Corvettes are not designed to go after Larger Capital Ships (and no we will not see a Spinal Mount Rail Gun on the Polaris either). Could we see (1x) ASA (2xS5 Guns) turret mixed in with the (4x to 6x) ASA turrets (2xS4 Guns) - sure - but definitely not the  (1x) STS (2xS7 Guns) turret that some were lobbying for (and the stats for the Idris Frigate below prove that point). Remember..... the Polaris will still likely have fixed weapons, gimbal weapons, missiles, PDS turrets, and likely Snubs and possibly Torpedoes.

CIG Ben Lesnick
wcloaf Posted: 8:02PM
Howdy!

These are the stats currently listed in our internal Wiki. I should stress that these are by no means final, and really won't be even when the Idris is flight ready... a whole lot of balancing (and thus stat) work takes place AFTER that stage. (Similarly, these may have changed in the three days since they were last edited in the Wiki, too... much of this can be changed by a technical designer working out something with just a few keystrokes.)

Manufacturer Aegis Dynamics
Variants 2 (M/P)
Cargon Capacity 100 SCU
Cargo Storage Cargo Rooms
Landing Gear Skids
Take Off Method VTOL
Max Crew 37
Role Frigate
Length 237m
Width 134m
Height 50m
Mass 1,600,000kg
Docking Ring Yes
Radar Type 3D

Avionics
12x Name TBC (Medium - Bridge)
8x Name TBC (Medium - ATC Room)

Coolers
4x Name TBC (Capital - Hangar Floor)
8x Name TBC (Medium- Hangar Wall)

Fuel System
2x Name TBC Fuel Intake (FL,FR)
1x Name TBC Fuel Tank

Gravity Generator
1x Name TBC (Capital)

Life Support
1x Name TBC (Capital)

Jump Drive
1x Name TBC (Capital)

Power Plant
2x Name TBC (Capital - Reactor Room)
2x Name TBC (Medium - Bridge)
4x Name TBC (Medium - Hangar)

Radar
1x Name TBC (Capital)

Shield Generator
4x Name TBC (Capital - Shield Gen Room)
2x Name TBC (Medium - Bridge)

Thrusters
8x TR5 (Main)
8x TR3 (Maneuvering)

Turrets
5x Behring M3C ASA Turret (2xS4 Guns)
1x Behring M5C STS Turret (2xS6 Guns)

Weapons
1x Klaus & Werner Zestroyer Rail Gun (S10)

Missiles
1x A&R Plowshare Anti-Ship Missile Launcher (ASML)

.... So the Polaris will likely have specs more closely in balance with a Vanduul Void (bomber / corvette)...

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14774-Classified-Report-Vanduul-Bomber-Identified

LENGTH 124m
BEAM 90m
HEIGHT 33m
MAX CREW UNKNOWN
POWER PLANT 4 (equivalent)
ENGINE (PRIMARY THRUSTER) 3x TR5 (equivalent)
MANEUVERING THRUSTERS 10x TR3 (equivalent)
SHIELD 5 (equivalent)
FIXED GUNS 3 x Size 6 – Electron Cannon
MISSILES 4 x Size 4 – Triple-Mount Torpedo Cluster
TURRETS 7 x Size 4 – Laser Repeater Turret

---------------------

Note however...... the MAX Crew of the Idris is now 37......... which will probably put the Max Crew of the Polaris considerably larger than what was previously anticipated...... and this likely increases the Javelin Max Crew from 25 to something beyond 50....

So what do you guess the Max Crew of the Polaris will be? I am upping my # to 16 Max crew for the Polaris.

[Juntau]

Okay, so the greatest takeaway I find in all of this information is this. " These are the stats currently listed in our internal Wiki. I should stress that these are by no means final, and really won't be even when the Idris is flight ready... a whole lot of balancing (and thus stat) work takes place AFTER that stage. (Similarly, these may have changed in the three days since they were last edited in the Wiki, too... much of this can be changed by a technical designer working out something with just a few keystrokes.) ".

As stated by Ben Lesnik himself, all of this is theory until the ship is built and balanced. All of this information is a teaser to keep your HYPE LEVEL at maxium, which is a good thing.

 While I find the discussion intriguing I think it is prudent to keep in mind that we don't know anything about what this ship will or can become, so don't get your hopes up in one way or another as to what this ship will do for you until more solidified facts have been release.