SithLordAJ

[quote who="RiddleKing" reply="17" id="3166616"] A very good idea that sadly clashes with the fact that at level 6 it can capture a planet as soon as it jumps in and that planet automatically starts spreading culture. You are right that the coranata should act as a culture temple -a mobile one. [/quote] I think you missed the part where I said : [quote who="SithLordAJ" reply="15" id="3166539"]This doesn't actually generate culture, it's just

As I mentioned in another post, Coronata should bring culture affects with it. This means if you keep your fleet within range, you get all the culture bonuses regardless of the amount of culture present. stacking the fleet synergizes with the supression aura, and unity mass from the sounds of it (I had no idea there was a fleet component there), along with other obvious synergies like battleballing. This doesn't actually generate culture, it's just the ships act like they are

[quote who="RiddleKing" reply="5" id="3166071"]ps. if your a good advent player then you wont need this ability. [/quote] I think you mean "If you're a good advent player (and acting like it), then you can't use this ability."

What if the DE didn't fire... it just constantly beamed culture to the target?

I noticed. I'm always looking for things to be more complicated, but not for the sake of complications. It's just more interesting. You seem to be good at finding 1 little thing to change that will make things roughly right all around.

Hey, I just read the OP and had an idea. I have not read through the rest of the thread though, sorry. For the Coronata: What if this brought culture with it? AL have good culture, there's great benefits there... the problem as pointed out is that culture bonuses are hard to use offensively. So, rather than making the Coronata generate/spread culture, say that "ships within so-and-so range receive all culture bonuses". can tack that onto confluence or something. As for Uny

AI is not where starbases have issues. That is where they are fairly effective. @ the OP From the get-go, I do not like the idea of mobile dual BRB starbases. Though I am not 100% opposed to these ideas, I think there could be some tweaks to make it more workable. For starters, speed doesn't have to be the only difference between them. An increased weapons range will make the starbases effective over a larger area and therefore equivale

is it green light from the green star?! [e digicons]*_*[/e]

[quote who="Seleuceia" reply="39" id="3164870"] Dang, how do you know that? (Assuming you are being serious which you generally are)...[/quote] google searched him. not going to rip on someone who has higher certifications then me in the subject when i dont know anything about them

I'm not defending that guy's very poor wording. I just know what he was trying to point out. It's pretty impossible for there to be a 'green' star seeing as how that classification doesn't exist. Not that if one were found, it wouldn't be added... but at the moment the only options are blue, blue-white, white, yellow-white, yellow, orange, and red. His students say he's hard to understand as well.

not to mention that corvettes main defense is spending as little time in weapons range as possible. very circumstantial to get any test you do. The flak test probably is closer to reality than the LF test due to flak having 360 degree weapons coverage. However, as Seleuceia pointed out, your fleet sizes might be skewing the results. See if you get the same results with a 5-fold increase in fleet sizes (ie 5 LF against 10 Corvettes; 10 Flak vs 30 Corvettes; 10 Flak vs 35 Corv

like none of that makes sense. But I'm dropping it.

What the article is getting at is that when you see white light, it is a composite of red, green and blue light. So, yes, there are stars that emit green light. In fact, I think you'd be hard pressed to find one that doesn't. Florescent lighting emits green light, though I doubt you'd call it a green light. However, the combined affect of all emitted light makes stars appear blue, white, yellow, or reddish orange (and theres a smooth transition between them). <a

That relies on the the assumption that there is a space-like quality in the multi-verse itself, such that something can exist in one 'place' and something else exists in another 'place'. I find that to be a big assumption, and then there's the assumption that this other universe is similar enough to interact with ours that just happens to be close enough for such an effect? I suppose you can Anthropic all your problems away, but seeing as how the point of multiverse theory

[quote who="axxo2" reply="28" id="3164153"]sith! get serious! its just a color! [/quote] I'm not on a campaign to change the color, but everytime I get a response like this, it actually fuels my desire to have it change. This is only 1 thing of many, and it is trivial to change. There would have to be a string change or two and a variable would get a different color argument passed. Do you have kids? Do you want them being taught about things that don't exist in s

During that last post, I was idly imagining a virus that would cause teleportation. kinda interesting because it could infect a person all over the place at once and then eventually would cause them to disintegrate as the virus starts teleporting cells to other creatures... pretty crazy. Another thing that I realized during the recent discussions: I'm more convinced than ever that accessing another universe is impossible. This came from my contemplations ab

[quote who="Democrab" reply="18" id="3162136"]I tend to not care much because y'know, I'm playing a game which is meant to be fun and not a physics lesson.[/quote] Fine to have that opinion, and as I said, there's a lot in Sins that isn't accurate. It wouldn't really be any fun if it was perfectly accurate. However, I do want to herald a warning: Whenever possible, things should be accurate. There are <span style="text-decoration: underline;

hell, it'd be nice to have a horde of random 'events' that do things like 4x games do. "Giant Sand Worms have attacked one of our colonies" -20 population... "a Solar Flare has damaged some of our ships" 3 random ships lose shields or explode... etc...

meh, that article is light on details. I would guess it's of fairly limited use. Quantum mechanics is very strict about the way information changes hands, so I would think that if some process could copy information exactly or lead to exactly copied information, that process would become a dominate process and you'd see lot's of said copies. I think what they were getting at was how classical physics is recoverable from quantum mechanics because quantum effects 'average out&#3

I think the mindset that people have to get out of with rebellion is that destroying them helps you in some way. Pre-Rebellion, if the opponent had a big fleet and you up and destroyed it with minimal impact to your fleet, you accomplished a lot. You knew you could waltz through their territory to their homeworld and not encounter significant resistance. A titan isn't so clear cut. If you destroy it with anything other than bombers you probably lost a significant amount of

[quote who="Seleuceia" reply="14" id="3161696"]Green stars irk me like none other...Aplos has the right idea with how stars should have been done...[/quote] I have had fights with people on these forums about the meaning of 'Green stars' and their existence. regardless, I agree that it is one of the simplest flaws to fix.

I just thought of a good analogy for quantum teleportation. It might even be feasible to accomplish: Say I wanted to teleport your computer from your house to mine. What I would do is take your hard drive and run something like a scandisk on it, however this scandisk involves irradiating the hard drive with entangled particles. This obviously destroys the information on the hard drive and may render it completely unusable ever again. Now, I take the results of the sc

again. singularities are not synonyms for black holes. A feature of black holes is that they have a singularity. I have heard of micro-black holes and/or mini-black holes. That is a common term but the (spacial) singularity within them has the same size as a stellar mass black hole, a supermassive black hole, and/or the recently discovered medium-sized black holes. but just to drive the point home, the mathematical function y=1/x

nothing about the laws of physics is broken by building ships fast. It's just very difficult to do. Granted, showing a hologram of what you want to build and then some how causing it to materialize bit by bit doesnt make much sense (why wouldn't you just materialize the whole thing at once if you could do that?), but nothing says you can't do it. However, no solar system could be stable with planets 2/3rds the size of a star (even if it were a small star) and close

muahahah. I fixed the forums Apparently my tony stark quote created a glitch in the matrix [e digicons]:grin:[/e] [quote who="Sinperium" reply="216" id="3160990"] Microsingularities are pretty normal usage--even in scientific papers--proper term is quantum singularity if you want to be picky. [/quote] wikipedia says you're wrong. Not that everything there is right, but if it was a term, you can bet there would be