[quote]that zsar bomb someone posted about? a single kilogram of antimatter has the same explosive force antimatter is real, not just a made up plot device, and it is coming... i would give it only 50-100 years before we are able to effectively harness it... then we are all in for some fun times[/quote] Maybe, but there are some huge barriers standing in the way. First of all, there are some serious technical issues that must be overcome if antimatter is to be used for anything. T
Ricree
[quote]I downloaded this from sourceforge. and downloaded .net 2.0 from microsoft and have GC2 gold edition with dark avatar and when i unzip the file I can see any instructions on how to install the editor and there is no executable file. So the question I have is what am I doing wrong?[/quote] There are two files that can be downloaded. One is the source code, and the other has an installer. Did you download the source code instead of the installer? [link="http://downloads
Is there a way to quickly zoom out to the level where it's easy to move from one star to another? I saw the quickzoom commands for other distances, but I can't find one that would zoom out far enough to easily see multiple star systems at once.
[quote] Let's do an unscientific poll: Who here would like to see a game setup option of: A) Toggle Pirates off on (easy to understand) B) Slider setting Pirate strength (more flexible but more complicated) C) Keep it as it is. [/quote] Definitely B. I like the pirates as a game mechanic, but right now I find them to be overpowered. While I haven't been playing that long, in al
[quote]I'm sorry, but this entire concept seems horridly involved, massively complicated, and entirely pointless. This would be game-breaking for any of the larger maps - conquest victories would take so long there'd be no reason to attempt one. If I can flip a planet more quickly than I can conquer it, why would I bother building transports? OTOH, spore ships would see a lot more use [/quote] I disagree. With the ideas mentioned in this thread there would be very little extra
I will probably end up getting it anyways, assuming good reviews (which I doubt will be a problem given the comments on these boards). I just hope that this is something that gets addressed in a future patch (or at least expansion) because it is a big deal for me. I know that it's silly to get so preoccupied by what is really a graphical detail in a game that reputedly has excellent gameplay, but it is something that really matters to me. Edit: [quote] Most of the ships in HW
[quote]Yeah, overall the combat movement is one of the few things I'm disappointed about with this game. Most of the ships simply get into range, then sit perfectly still and just fire away at each other until one is dead. The only ships to seem to move around during combat are your fighters and such that are based from your capital ships.[/quote] This may sound kind of dumb, but that's a huge turn off for me. It may be just me, but I loved sitting back every now and
[quote]One might be given more choice, though: pre-invasion orbital bombardment of farms could decrease the defender's troop count;[/quote] You can do that now with spies, although I usually prefer to hit the morale buildings and us information warfare.
[quote] Ugh, what would be the Drengin equivalent of a Chuck E. Cheese? A torture chamber? (not that that isn't entirely unlike Chuck E Cheese )[/quote] I'm pretty sure that Chuck E Cheese [I]is[/I] the Drengin equivalent.
[quote] I'm not a big fan of micromanagement, unless it actually adds some challenge to the game. A system where we had to move ships back to planet orbits for an upgrade, and then back to where you want them on the map, just seems like busywork to me. At least the upgrade isn't instantaneous, and there are some strategic concerns like not letting a ship sit defenseless in enemy territory during the upgrade cycle. [/quote] It wouldn't necessarily be much extra micromanagement. For
[quote]I agree with all, but especially NUMBER 7! But then again, sequels are rarely as good as the real original...It had better to the likes of Godfather II.[/quote] I'm not sure that I agree with that statement when it comes to games. Many game sequels are as good as, if not better than the originals. Off the top of my head, I preferred Galciv2, Baldur's Gate 2, and Halflife 2 over the originals. While sequels can certainly be bad, especially if the publisher or developer decides
If it's decided by a judge, sorry, it ain't a sport. Thus boxing gets the boot ('cept when they win by knockout...then I'll call it a sport). What about something like MMA, though, where there is a judged system, but matches are just as often won by other means that have nothing to do with the judges de
i think that's a given. it really ought to be given explicitly in the definition, since a lot of non physical competitions have taken to using the word sport to describe themselves.
track and field...no defense. athetic competitions are a better definition. So the definition of an athletic competition is basically any competitive physical activity? Also, would you say that there is any physical component in the definition of a sport?
the game FABLE has the best sountrack then I would say HALO I'd agree that Halo has one of the best game soundtracks. I also thought really liked the Halo 2 soundtrack. When they first announced it, I was definitely a little skeptical of some of the artists that were contributing music (especially B
That's one of the better definitions I've seen, although I think that a lot of people would disagree with any definition that didn't include track events as a sport. Overall, though, I pretty much agree with this definition.
For people interested in making games for the Xbox 360, it might also be worthwhile to take a look at XNA . I've never worked with it personally, but it sounds fairly interesting.
I agree with you in general. I think that there is enough of a problem that something aught to be done, but I am not convinced that affirmative action is really the method to go about it. Besides the problems you mentioned, I think that there are a couple others. For one, there is no real good way to evaluate and deal with the question "what if it works?". Any time affirmative action programs are changed, there is a slow, awkward, and dra
Most of these were pretty funny, but somehow I am completely missing the humor in the third one down.
Personally, I think that is is a mistake to look at this decline as some sort of confirmation of one party or another. If you really have to put it into part terms, I'd say that the closest thing we have is a general dissatisfaction with the two part system as a whole, although that conclusion is almost certainly too far reaching. Really, though, I just think that there is a general dissatisfaction with the way things are being handled, and people a
I have a hard time buying that people really don't agree with the eighth amendment (although we all have that guilty little part of our brain that wouldn't mind being able to really make certain criminals pay for what they did). The problem that a lot of people have with this amendment is that some people like to cry cruel and unusual punishment for all sorts of stupid little things. I don't think that most, or even many people would argue that the eighth isn't needed, since let's face
I've kind of wondered that too Mjollnir. This seems like something that would work especially good with digital distribution, since it's a lot easier to target an individual's computer. If I had to guess at an answer, I'd say that it is probably just a matter of not seeing enough benefits for the added complexity of having to debug a the different builds. Still, I don't really know. Hopefully someone on here who's a developer will see and chime in
Like others have said, the answer is "kind of". Good performance isn't usually praised nearly as much as it should be, but it does have implicit benefits in reviews and word of mouth. For one thing, bad performance will almost always show up in reviews. Look at supreme commander. By all accounts, it is a brilliant game, but it has definitely scored lower than it would have if the performance issues. Personally, I really want to get the game, but I
I'm not seeing how parental rights figures into this at all. No one seems to be arguing that the parents had the right to do this to the child, and the couple did get a life sentence, so it seems that there isn't really any issue of parental rights here. It's just a shame that this wasn't caught before the child died.
I can see where you're coming from, KFC, but I personally have a really hard time accepting feeling over reason. The biggest thing, for me, is that I don't know how you can, in general, trust any given feeling to be a representation of truth rather than simply a normal feeling. Like stubbyfinger said, there are people out there that strongly believe a lot of things that I think you and I would both agree are unlikely to be true. How can you be sure that your feelings are true and theirs aren'