Glen van RossWell, as you know, in Project Seraph he oversaw the abduction of the vulnerable, and their physical/mental modification to interface with a Thargoid scout ship. That's pretty evil in my books. If we did the same thing to cure cancer, it might be for a valiant cause... But the methods matter. They speak to who we are.

Glen van Ross I agree with the Aegis criticisms, but that may be because I'm already indoctrinated with too many "Law of Armed Conflict" briefings...

Glen van RossI guess they are just anxious to get the war over with and move on to the next thing.

• I see the Empire going all-in with the solution and making the difficult decision to proceed for the benefit humankind (and the Empire) as a whole and to prevent a longer, more deadly war.. Maybe Smurfette would oppose the decision, but Patreus would probably be gung-ho.
• For the Feds, Winters could want to find a better solution, but Hudson could be for it, causing even more political strife.and dysfunction.
• As for independents, it would depend on which solution was more beneficial or more in line with their ideals.

P O W E R L I N E

Thinder

P O W E R L I N E




I dont necessarily agree, especially in pve. If you have good range control and long range weapons you can have just as high time on target and its viable for pvp as well. The cutter just isnt as much fun to fly in my opinion.

At equal weaponry, less time on target due to lack of pointability is not working for you, that's a fact.

Best example is my Beam Laser [Fixed] fit; both 3C and 1E (just realized I need to finish to engineer one of the 1e), maximum range, fall off at the same max range.

I always start by taking down the target shield, so when the other weapons start to fire, the damage is immediately higher, I saw no evidence of a Cutter able to take down my shield this way ever, even with equivalent weapons, time on target due to pointability and superior shielding works for me.

First of all, if you fly correctly in pve, any ship can have the same time on target, the slightly higher pitch and yaw of a corvette wont make it better for that, it just might mean most people prefer it. I will admit the hardpoints and c8 distributor allow for more flexibility in builds. Plus if you fly the cutter in flight assist on its pretty annoying so i understand why people dont wanna use it.

HaraldsenWho would truly care if some scientist sacrificed a bunch of people if it saved mankind in the end? It’s mostly those who aren’t successful who will be judged. Everything else is a numbers game, some died so many can live.

Kasumi Goto ... specifically referring to post-Proteus Salvation(or should we call him Nemesis now... nah, that's going to give too much credit to him, even compared to the other nickname). Might not be a 'good guy' in the textbook example - who ever is? - but I don't really believe the theory of turning on humanity. Unless it's not really the 'human' Salvation/Caleb Wycherley but just a crazed AI that inherited his memories and personality. Which would be so much worse.

Vasil VasilescuI think there was a missed opportunity not having more (I mean ANY) division about the proposed solution and how that would have affected the war.

Glen van Ross Assuming some form of Wycherly comes back, he is probably not going to be a mindlessly hostile killbot.

Vasil VasilescuKillbots are easily defeated using the Zap Brannigan tactic.

Glen van Ross
The debate over ends versus means is part of why the Nuremburg principles exist, and the implications of command responsibility get inculcated into the officer corps. The method by which you accomplish the mission matters, and done the "wrong" way it can land you in the dock, in the headlines, and as a negative illustration at war colleges around the world. There's always exceptions, of course, and today we could name several notable conflicts where the killing is indiscriminate and cruelty seems to be the point. But in most pluralistic democracies, that's not how we train military professionals to think about the task of killing others.

Haraldsen
If humanity as a whole were facing defeat, and considering that the Thargoids have flattened entire systems, the countermeasures and the necessary research would probably be even more desperate and less restricted - if it is not outright heading into the territory of last resort solutions. I am merely thinking about things from within the game universe.

Jana RazekiSpire sites when you sit at a distance of around 10-11 kilometers to them have some really creepy ambient music going. The kind that sends chills through your body and makes you think ‘Should I really be here?’.

I can’t say whether I recommend the experience.

(And sorry for confusing people about the accounts but it’s not always easy to keep track when you’re logged in with one on your phone and on the laptop/PC with the other.)

Thinder

P O W E R L I N E

Thinder



At equal weaponry, less time on target due to lack of pointability is not working for you, that's a fact.

Best example is my Beam Laser [Fixed] fit; both 3C and 1E (just realized I need to finish to engineer one of the 1e), maximum range, fall off at the same max range.

I always start by taking down the target shield, so when the other weapons start to fire, the damage is immediately higher, I saw no evidence of a Cutter able to take down my shield this way ever, even with equivalent weapons, time on target due to pointability and superior shielding works for me.

First of all, if you fly correctly in pve, any ship can have the same time on target, the slightly higher pitch and yaw of a corvette wont make it better for that, it just might mean most people prefer it. I will admit the hardpoints and c8 distributor allow for more flexibility in builds. Plus if you fly the cutter in flight assist on its pretty annoying so i understand why people dont wanna use it.

Ignoring the laws of physics does nothing for you in combat, flying "correctly" with a less maneuverable ship neither and that's a fact.

Most people doesn't prefer the Corvette, most good PVE players would rather go for the FDL, as for flying without Flight Assist, it doesn't increase pitch, roll and yaw rates, it just allows you to keep your nose pointed to your target out of your velocity vector, which results in exactly what I was saying: Time on target equals faster kill. IF you are skilled enough to stop the rotations you might be able to gain on your time on target.

And there is catch to this flying; it works best at short range, from long to mid-range it is not very useful and before you can come anywhere close to a well fitted Corvette, chances are you'll have no shields, as a matter of fact I practice mid-range engagements vs ships like the Viper or the Imperial Courier in normal flight mode using all 4 axis, Throttle, FWD or BWD, booster and thruster and Fixed Lasers, I never really feel the need for turning Flight Assist Off.

The corvette has more than a maneuverability advantage over the Cutter, even with a Grade 7 instead of 8 Shield Generator it can reinforce this with higher grades Shield Cell Banks, as a result you got 114.0/s instead of 111.0/s Shield Reinforcement with their respective 2 top SCB.

The Corvette weaponry is also more powerful, 2 X Grade 4 plus one Grade 3 which is a 3C Beam Laser [Fixed] Long range XXXXX Thermal Vent on mine, the Secondary weapons (lover Grades) makes little difference, my two 1E Beam Laser [Fixed] Long range XXXXX Thermal Vent like the Grade 3 have a 6000m Fall Off start like the Grade 3.

And last but not least, the 8E Power Distributor on the Corvette is suited to weapons and shield needs, vs the 7E Power Distributor of the Cutter, meaning Power recharge time is inferior, recharge rate is superior for an A grade: 4.800 vs 4.000 for the Cutter.

Visibly, the Corvette is designed for combat with modules that are supported by power supply, more shield recharge capabilities and heavier weaponry.

ps, the reason why the Cutter handles like a pig is because it is 200 t heavier than the Corvette stock.