Discovery 4.87: Conquest - Update 7

[aerelm]

Unforgiven, a friendly request - You already voiced your concern in a somewhat civil manner with your first post, then amended your argument with the second post, which actually made me consider giving scanners another look, but you've been completely ruining it with each and every post you've made in this thread arguing since, reading through which has made me less and less inclined on going through scanners again. So, if you want to see scanners reviewed properly, do yourself and those who share your opinion a favor and drop the argument. You already said all you had to say with your first couple of posts in this thread, so please leave your stick by the door and let the dead horse rest in peace and quiet, and we'll see what we can do about scanners in the next update.

Going on and on in an endless, pointless and mannerless argument about scanners with fellow players while you had already summed up all the constructive criticism you had on the subject in your first two posts does no one no good, so it'd be best if you don't degrade the few good points you made with the continuous argument any more than you've already done. Thank you.

[Swallow]

why the heck cant you guys adapt.

It happens because of constant playing, which turns into the routine, which is similar to the real life, and thus is being taken too serious and deeply personal, which in its case leads to mental issues, the ones we can see standing after numerous and constant complains.

It is not OK to get seriously or continuously disappointed just because of the gaming stuff.
Take a break more often, don't let the disease take over you.

---

FL MOD(EL)MAKING: TOOLS, RESOURCES, TUTORIALS AND MY SHIPS (OLD)

I am on discord: Roal-Yr#5994, I don't log on forum more than a few times a year.

I am not making ships for FL anymore, I am making my own space game instead:
https://github.com/roalyr/GDTLancer
https://roal-yr.itch.io/gdtlancer
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5HQB...cdH45LZgjj

[SnakeLancerHaven]

I love how people go all like "WAHT!? CODENAMES FOR INTERCEPTORS!? THEY RUINED IT THEYR UINED THE GAME!" or "WHAT? THEY REPLACED FIREFLY!? WOAH THEY RUINED IT THE GAME SUCKS NO"


Single complaints, even if just 1 single ship would've been changed, the whole game is ruined, srsly? 8|

---

R.I.P Tabris...
Youtube - Twitch - My old Account

[Binski]

Unforgiven, a friendly request - You already voiced your concern in a somewhat civil manner with your first post, then amended your argument with the second post, which actually made me consider giving scanners another look, but you've been completely ruining it with each and every post you've made in this thread arguing since, reading through which has made me less and less inclined on going through scanners again. So, if you want to see scanners reviewed properly, do yourself and those who share your opinion a favor and drop the argument. You already said all you had to say with your first couple of posts in this thread, so please leave your stick by the door and let the dead horse rest in peace and quiet, and we'll see what we can do about scanners in the next update.

Going on and on in an endless, pointless and mannerless argument about scanners with fellow players while you had already summed up all the constructive criticism you had on the subject in your first two posts does no one no good, so it'd be best if you don't degrade the few good points you made with the continuous argument any more than you've already done. Thank you.

You're right, but people asked, and I let myself get a little baited. This is the first I've seen an admin speak on the subject in days though. Despite what some say, I've shed no tears over this. Please disregard my irritation in favor of considering my arguments, that's all I care about. You know how I feel, and will hear no more from me on the subject.

And without getting too antagonized again, @ scumbag, I don't think I'm better than everyone else here (if my scanner was better, all it cost was credits to compete), but i believe my 'libertarian' attitude when it comes to equipment and gameplay, is indeed a better one to have than the opposite. It seems you feel the opposite, and we all know how we all feel about this now, so lets just leave it at that. En lieu of this, I might hang around a while, and wait it out in the shadows to see what happens

---

The Further Exploits of Captain Antares (August 2015) │ (alt) JonasHudson
*Argo | Special Operative ID (Approved Request)* | Argo Compilation Video
################ *Proposed OF Challenge System* ################
############### The Book of Piracy (Piracy Tutorial) ###############
############### Binski Alamo (Youtube Channel) ###############

[Wous]

But..
It's gone..
The last place in the 'verse where you could take a firefly into the sky..

Apart from that, I really enjoy the dynamic qualities of Discovery.
Kept Freelancer interesting for over a decade, which is quite a feat.

[GrnRaptor]

Complete list of bug fixes and changes included in update 7:

Code:

- Added codename weapons for Light Figthers and Bombers.

So, about this. This isn't quite correct now is it? You didn't "add" LF/Bomber codenames, you took existing ones and made them LF/Bomber codenames. This has broken things for several people, myself included. For example, I logged my UC Sunbeam (VHF) armed with SILVER FIRE/HAMMERFALL guns, because those match our faction Class 8s in speed/refire and have the convenient look of our colors, only to find that my HAMMERFALLS weren't present on my equipped weapons list. It took me a moment to check my loadout to find that my guns were now useless because they are Class 6 guns. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has been so rudely surprised by this. If you wanted to "add" guns for these vessels you should have added guns, not repurposed existing ones that people were already using.

Secondly, why were these added in the first place? You've given Light Fighters and Bombers these weapons, and ignored the Heavy Fighters, which are now the only snub class to not have these special weapons available. People now have less of a reason to choose Heavy Fighters if they want any kind of power available to them. Adding codenames for the LF/Bomber classes was bad enough, but to not add them for those and not the HF class is even worse.

To be clear, I'm not arguing that you add HF codenames now; I'm arguing that you remove the LF/Bomber ones back to where they were previously. VHFs had codenames because they had the power to supply such demanding technology. Now that you've given that to everything except the HF class, how do you justify that? LFs have no cores comparitively speaking, and bombers are bombers, not dogfighters. Return codenames to the VHFs who have the capacity to wield them and leave the LFs their maneuverability and the bombers their anti-cap striking role.

---

[Nerva]

No fighter codenames were harmed when making bomber codenames. Some Phantom weapons were recycled for that.
They seem quite bad actually, except ASURAS.

[7AlphaOne1]

Just a small fact, the bomber codes are SNACs, becoming anti-cap codenames. LF codes, well, since LFs dont have a heavy core, they cant support those weps. HFs dont have the slots, save Missile slots and Gladiator/Hyena, so that just about settles it.

[Nerva]

Just a small fact, the bomber codes are SNACs, becoming anti-cap codenames.

No, they are not. Only one of them is.

[YoungLion]

I guess I'm the only one... but I'm having no luck loading the update. I've even tried the manual method, but the installation just stalls out. Has anyone had this issue... and -if so- how did you resolve it?

Thanks!