[quote who="joeball123" reply="52" id="3416462"]No. Absolute zero is the temperature at which the kinetic energy of atoms/molecules/subatomic particles/anything else has gone to zero. Having something be at a temperature less than absolute zero would imply that the kinetic energy of the particles involved was negative, which requires either negative mass or imaginary velocity (if you have both negative mass and imaginary velocity, your kinetic energy is real and positive, but your momentum is
Seleuceia
[quote who="Lucky Jack" reply="49" id="3416374"]Let's see, space is at absolute zero (total cessation of atomic motion) so a green star causes atoms in space to go even slower?[/quote] They start going backwards ...
Maybe green stars are cold stars...instead of giving off heat, they give off cold...
[quote who="Phaedyme" reply="35" id="3415835"]Oh, as far as green stars in the game: I like them. They're kinda aesthetically pleasing.[/quote] I personally would prefer teal...
GRG isn't really meant to be used on frigates, it is meant to be used on caps, SBs, and titans...if it is doing more damage than it was otherwise against 2 of those 3 things, I think it is safe to say that is a buff....when trying to kill caps and titans, you will be facing max mitigation for most of the battle anyway, so you don't really benefit from the "mininuke" effect that the original GRG had... It is also a buff against Advent since Advent have shield regeneration (a fa
[quote]"ClearRecordedDamage" - Not yet sure what this does.[/quote] Fairly certain this is related to the inner workings of damage propogation....malice I know "records damage", and IIRC so does the buff in ice fields...my guess is it is related to that?
The gamma burst is even worse....damn thing nearly gave me a seizure....
[quote who="androshalforc" reply="30" id="3415529"]hypothetical experiment take a child and raise it but for this childs first ten years of life you tell it white is blue when the child turns ten ask him/her what color the sun is and they will say blue because they would believe that white is called blue[/quote] It is simply semantics...your experiment is not fundamentally different from a Hispanic child learning that the sun is blanco instead of white...at the end of the day, we
@MottiKhan I am fully aware of how black body radiation works...obviously though you are not... Just because the peak wavelength of a star falls into the green range of the visible spectrum does not mean the star is green...the very diagram you post in fact shows exactly why this is -- in order to have a peak wavelength in the green range, you must inevitably emit lots of red and blue light, which we as humans see together as white light...thus our star is white (with some yel
[quote who="androshalforc" reply="16" id="3415368"]let me ask you a philosophical how do you know that the green your mind tells you is green is the same as the green my mind tells me is green[/quote] What color does the sun look to you? Does it look green?
With telescopes we are easily able to see an immense number of stars, none of which are green...even if there are green stars, it's apparent that they are so rare, statistically we would never expect to see them in a realistic random map generator that technically could spawn them... I might as well say unicorns do not exist, at least not to our knowledge...you might actually have better odds finding a unicorn than finding a green star... You are of course welcome to cling
Ugh...here we go again.... [quote who="MottiKhan" reply="6" id="3415162"]So there are green stars, including our own. Our eyes just deceive us is all.[/quote] [quote who="MottiKhan" reply="8" id="3415190"]Actually, the article says that there are purple as well as green stars. Just because we can't see them doesn't mean they don't exist.[/quote] First, let me pose a philosophical question: what is green ? I mean, it is a color, but how would w
Excellent changes all around! I'm really surprised we don't have more positive feedback on some of these changes.... [quote]AntiMedium to Medium damage increased from 1.33333 to 1.5.[/quote] This is HUGE -- finally we can see viable LRF+flak fleets early game... [quote]Kol Gauss Blast ability updated: The Gauss Blast now bypasses Shields and directly damages the hull of the enemy ship. Antimatter cost reduced from 50/55/60/65 to 45/50/55/60; damage decr
Sins of a solar empire is more like 2.5 D...just saying...
[quote who="Dr Guy" reply="1034" id="3414679"]Actually the sea does not have "rising acidity". It is less base, but still base. [/quote] Actually the graph does not have "increasing position". It is less negative, but still negative.
Press F12 while in IE 11...on the far left side, scroll down and click on the emulation icon (it won't say emulation unless you hover over it)...you can change the "User agent string" to a variety of internet browsers....may or may not solve your problems...
The error only started in Entrenchment...I am 99% sure that if you have aerias with 3 command points but only 2 squadrons, you can get that error occasionally...lots of mods that frigates with 3+ squadrons but only 2 squadron types have flooded error logs with that error...probably applies to hangars too, but I only tested it with frigates....
^^ is true.... however , if you have aeria's flying around with 3 command points but only 2 squadron types to pick from, you will get an error message, something like Squad != 0...it is harmless but it will flood your logs and crop up a lot if you allow error messages to pop up in game....
Ekko...I approve of your methods
Which was forever ago...don't you know how long forever is? Its ever long....times four...
[quote who="GoaFan77" reply="16" id="3413417"]Pretty sure its the former (haven't we had this discussion Zombie before? ). [/quote] Well that's what I thought...as do, I think, nearly everyone...but then the voices tell me other things and well, I get confused... What I do know is this...PMs have been complained about forever, the same solutions have been proposed, and nothing has changed...
Okay, I can't help myself... [quote who="psychoak" reply="978" id="3412335"]Solar radiation is a force.[/quote] Is no one more serious than me going to address this?
[quote who="Ekko_Tek" reply="35" id="3412712"]Shield Regen vs. Missile Barrage - its (SR) radius is pretty small - and bunching your fleet up within it is probably not the best idea in this situation. [/quote] If you micro it right it can buy you precious time to retreat your units, you definitely aren't going to be outlasting MB with it unless you actually kill the marza while shield regen is up...not good for corvettes or illums, only disciples, as they crowd together pretty wel
Radiance is not a good lead...I used to think it was okay but after trying it extensively I've found the prog to be so much more useful...in the end you are only thankful you have a radiance when your enemy has a high level marza...honestly though, malice and colonizing makes it easier to win early fleet battles, and that in turn reduces the likelihood your enemy gets a high level marza....additionally, shield regeneration helps counter orky rushing and in a pinch MB as well...
Well played...I suppose I could have inserted an "in the above examples", but I thought it was implied... Unless you would like me to go into how fluid friction is different from kinetic friction...but we don't need to go there, do we? I sure hope not...I've hit my quota for how much pseudo physics I can spew and I certainly have no interest in talking about real physics...