| Author |
Message |
 Topic: VET LEAGUE |
SkyFire
Replies: 15
Views: 11246
|
 Forum: Suggestions Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 11:28 pm Subject: VET LEAGUE |
Haha.. T2.. you interested in joining the fight? 
Right now it's us against pretty much the rest of the alliances.. FG, TOC, TLS pretty much outnumber us. You keeping just one player busy would giv ... |
| Topic: **Newbie training** |
SkyFire
Replies: 13
Views: 12921
|
Forum: Newbie Help Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 12:53 pm Subject: **Newbie training** |
Stop spamming my thrad or i'll evaporate every single one of you.. spammers = swankers = wankers 
MikeCammer: My ingame name is currently "Collector of points". Contact me if you have any qu ... |
| Topic: legendary flier(2) |
SkyFire
Replies: 19
Views: 16597
|
Forum: New Technology Inventions Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 5:21 pm Subject: legendary flier(2) |
Renee: Stop saying 4, because it's only possible with a sporator.
The usual loop rate is 1,5.
And if my interceptors get eaten by a flier+blockades.. then i got outsmarted, didn't i? If i had the fl ... |
| Topic: legendary flier(2) |
SkyFire
Replies: 19
Views: 16597
|
Forum: New Technology Inventions Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:13 pm Subject: legendary flier(2) |
| The most attacks this thing can generate is 4 from what i figured out so far - and that's with a sporator and the best case scenario (i'm including only ingame ships). I would like to stress out that ... |
| Topic: legendary flier(2) |
SkyFire
Replies: 19
Views: 16597
|
Forum: New Technology Inventions Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:34 pm Subject: legendary flier(2) |
| Yep.. my first thought after re-re-re-evaluating the ship was that it should cost more MP. But i don't think we should decrease it's LP. Getting 4 attack runs is impossible, because the ship first los ... |
| Topic: legendary flier(2) |
SkyFire
Replies: 19
Views: 16597
|
Forum: New Technology Inventions Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2007 1:49 pm Subject: legendary flier(2) |
My first invention 
Why (2) ?
Because spacetrace *** the ship description in my first attempt  |
| Topic: Credit Leaderboard |
SkyFire
Replies: 5
Views: 5587
|
Forum: Suggestions Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:56 pm Subject: Credit Leaderboard |
| finaly a good idea! |
| Topic: ToC vs. Nostar |
SkyFire
Replies: 82
Views: 86074
|
Forum: The weekly explorer Posted: Mon Sep 17, 2007 6:38 pm Subject: ToC vs. Nostar |
We will return the favor by not cashing in your flag untill it's at 20%.
On another note.. it took us 24h from finding the flags location to the capture.
You guys should have a huge head start on ... |
| Topic: Spam topic the continue |
SkyFire
Replies: 1842
Views: 648985
|
Forum: Off topic Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2007 6:45 pm Subject: Spam topic the continue |
Hmm.. i dunno what you guys are up to, but i'm just here to set the world record for the widest thread.. so here we go:
_______________________________________________________________________________ ... |
| Topic: ToC vs. Nostar |
SkyFire
Replies: 82
Views: 86074
|
Forum: The weekly explorer Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 6:12 pm Subject: ToC vs. Nostar |
We miscalculated by thinking that we can fing Marlito by scaning
He just keeps hiding  |
| Topic: Zeitgeist - The Movie (MUST SEE) |
SkyFire
Replies: 3
Views: 5564
|
Forum: Off topic Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 10:01 am Subject: Zeitgeist - The Movie (MUST SEE) |
| I've seen it. It's great, but it's more like a compilation of 20 other documentaries The thing with Zeitgeist is that it's very entertaining, very well cut, but it shocks you with so much data, it ... |
| Topic: gravity |
SkyFire
Replies: 6
Views: 10002
|
Forum: All existing Technologies Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2007 10:42 pm Subject: gravity |
What/who is this man_mod thing/dude?
(btw.. please renate this tech into "artificial gravity".. we don't wanna be inventing "gravity" again  ) |
| Topic: sabotage destroyer |
SkyFire
Replies: 3
Views: 4561
|
Forum: New Technology Inventions Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:26 pm Subject: sabotage destroyer |
I love it!
One flaw is the too insignificant LP modification.. i suggest 0/-3.
Another one is.. hmm.. i'd make it eray instead of kazuuula.. not to give mycs even more power.
This would actual ... |
| Topic: ToC vs. Nostar |
SkyFire
Replies: 82
Views: 86074
|
Forum: The weekly explorer Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 8:01 pm Subject: ToC vs. Nostar |
| Sorry, but since the mess with our last recruit, we're currently not recruiting. |
| Topic: ToC vs. Nostar |
SkyFire
Replies: 82
Views: 86074
|
Forum: The weekly explorer Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 7:42 pm Subject: ToC vs. Nostar |
Lmao
Yes help is required.. in the form of Mares coords.. that's all
But in a day or two we should have them anyway |
| Topic: ToC vs. Nostar |
SkyFire
Replies: 82
Views: 86074
|
Forum: The weekly explorer Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2007 11:27 am Subject: ToC vs. Nostar |
...the game is on...
Requesting The_Order_ of _Chaos_ coords from anyone sympathetic to NS or anyone just eager to see a good war
Right now they're holding on by hiding from us. |
| Topic: Spacetrace Quiz Night! |
SkyFire
Replies: 66
Views: 86617
|
Forum: IRC Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 6:38 pm Subject: Spacetrace Quiz Night! |
| Don't scare me like that |
| Topic: Spacetrace Quiz Night! |
SkyFire
Replies: 66
Views: 86617
|
Forum: IRC Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 7:34 pm Subject: Spacetrace Quiz Night! |
They will come once they figure out there's credits to make
I couldn't participate.. i was occupied |
| Topic: flying rocket |
SkyFire
Replies: 3
Views: 4424
|
Forum: New Technology Inventions Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:54 pm Subject: flying rocket |
Hmm.. first of all the syntax is broken:
(battle engine syntax: create,enemy,12,3,missile,flying rockets divide )
This is sth you don't wanna do.. unless you wanna give the 12 missiles to your enem ... |
| Topic: kamikaze constructor |
SkyFire
Replies: 10
Views: 7877
|
Forum: New Technology Inventions Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2007 10:42 pm Subject: kamikaze constructor |
| The cluster cruiser creates the dummies in it's own class while the KC creates ships in the C1. When the KC gets engaged your C1 subbatle is long over.. so they count for the next battle. Nevertheless ... |
| |
