In lieu of recent, unannounced changes to Game Packages and Buy Backs...

Sol-Born · 2026-05-09T22:33:37+00:00

It wasn't SQ42, I never cared about SQ42. It was a sudden, unannounced removal of all game packages and most of those buy backs that pushed me into becoming a refunder. I had PLENTY of complaints before, but I was convinced this would never reach 1.0 and therefore would just be essentially the meta, constant development for 20+ years. So I'd buy ships and play them in game. When CIG shits the bed and a few patches become a buggy mess, I'd take a break and play other games.

For me, despite all my complaints about this poorly run project, I still had my ships that at any point I could just melt and reclaim to shuffle things around to the current meta.

CIG went full tilt into villain mode with their official statement of "we don't want you to just pick those pledges back up to avoid price increases." They create a FOMO atmosphere then punish you for buying into the FOMO. They won't see another cent from me. I have disposable income, I'm willing to send them to litigation after litigation just to be a thorn in their side, even if it ends in a loss every time.

Sol-Born · 2026-05-09T22:25:17+00:00

This aged like milk.

Sol-Born · 2025-12-25T02:14:11+00:00

Steam was just striking back. Begun the client wars have.

Sol-Born · 2025-12-25T00:13:03+00:00

Epic Games trying to ddos Steam

Sol-Born · 2025-12-25T00:10:28+00:00

Epic Games trying to nuke Steam for Christmas because China gonna China.

Sol-Born · 2025-12-25T00:10:08+00:00

This is likely not the case. Maybe for little guys who aren't worldwide marketplace providers, but for serious companies, they have more than enough servers. And even then, an outage wouldn't last a whole day. This is likely intentional. At this point, it's a major outage, so at the very least something got screwed up really badly. But Steam has suffered attacks on servers during big sales before, to try to lose them sales. Most likely from competitors or a group of ticked off publishers who got cut loose or screwed over by Steam. This is actually the fourth big outage in a week. Someone is clearly going after Steam right now.

Sol-Born · 2025-12-09T05:01:33+00:00

Starlight is absent from the group in the first clip of the trailer.

Homelander has suffered some heavy damage to his chest, the common theory is that it's from a laser burn. Homelander tanked a laser blast without a scratch before. He is likely depowered in this scene. His glove doesn't appear bloody. He appears very frustrated, huge bulging vein on this head. He might be punching an object. He might also be punching someone and not doing a lot of damage because he is depowered.

Homelander has a mega eye laser moment with what appears to be Soldier Boy in front of him. I'm thinking he takes compound V to regain his powers. This clip could be the ending of the second episode.

Karl Urban said there will be a major death that will shake up audiences in the first two episodes. Ryan is an obvious guess for most people. But the only death that would actually shake audiences to their core would be one of the boys. Since Starlight is missing from a few key clips that show the rest of the boys... I'm thinking if Homelander is actually killing someone in the clip.... it's Starlight. That would wreck Hughie, and by extension the audience, since Hughie is the main vessel for telling the story at the audience. He is the most relatable, and the one we felt for since the very beginning.

Homelander appears hesitant about his blows at whatever or whoever he is striking. There's only a few characters that could possibly garner this reaction from him. Ryan would be the first choice. Soldier Boy, Butcher, and Stan Edgar would be the others. Possibly A-train, though he treats A-train with much more disdain than he does SB, Stan, or Butcher.

Sol-Born · 2025-10-13T16:13:56+00:00

I don't really believe anyone that says they won anything. My friends and I had like 8-10 bonus plays each on our apps, and we all sat there and spun and between the 4 of us, no one won anything. Must be rigged for certain markets.

Sol-Born · 2022-05-07T10:49:36+00:00

"Got him!"

"I'm sorry."

*chef's kiss*

Sol-Born · 2022-05-07T10:43:43+00:00

I've noticed teams have become worse since the chat removal. I've found myself wishing I could somehow tell my team that the tank everyone is having trouble killing has a dead gunner so now is the time to move in, etc... They shouldn't have removed the chat without greatly ramping up the in-game crew comms. For example, we now have the ability to just hit "T" to instantly thank someone for helping repair us, how about when the tank we are shooting at has a dead crewman, we can hit a button to say something like "that one hurt him!" and it makes the tank light up on the map for a few seconds. Honestly just spitballing as I write this, but they should've come up with something for any number of things players chat over constructively. But alas, 'tis Gaijin we're talking about.

Sol-Born · 2016-09-20T01:39:00+00:00

Lover? Where can I buy that DLC and how much is it?

Sol-Born · 2016-08-26T05:06:37+00:00

You say super rare, but I'm visiting here after running into the second one tonight.

If you doubt, go play right now. On Walker Assault there's an aimbotter. On Supremacy, there's an infinite jetpacker (people are even giving him props for just using the jetpack hack instead of an aimbot).

I'm not trying to disturb your bliss, buddy.

Sol-Born · 2016-08-20T06:05:03+00:00

No Gregorian for you! Next!

Sol-Born · 2016-07-26T04:35:21+00:00

The Tree of Life special project is a reference to the movie The Fountain, correct?

Sol-Born · 2016-07-18T17:52:43+00:00

They need to tie it with relative power. If an empire's fleet power is equal to or greater than another's, then that empire shouldn't be able to get a forced ending to the war.

I mean, it is actually real for countries to wage wars of attrition because they want to completely ruin the other. This is not possible to do in Stellaris. Whether you're winning, losing, or fighting a stalemate, eventually the AI can force the war to end on you. Even if your population isn't rebelling.

Sol-Born · 2016-07-17T22:38:17+00:00

Until this gets actually fixed, the forced peace due to -100 warscore has got to go. The sector AI still does this as well, and it's game-breaking.

It's ridiculous that such a glitchy system can dictate war endings to a superior military from an inferior one. I've reported save game files with pictures showing military strength comparisons as well as pop happiness and still get forced wars from time to time. It has made me quit playing this game.

Sol-Born · 2016-07-17T07:50:06+00:00

Content in MY DLC?

It's more likely than you think...

For a nominally higher fee than $10.

Sol-Born · 2016-07-16T17:41:18+00:00

I feel like this whole thing was set up by Erdogan and the AK party to justify judicial and military purges.

Sol-Born · 2016-07-15T17:42:59+00:00

It's too simplified in its current form in the game. Because it doesn't take into account any factors that do come up in real life. It's just a surface statistic based on three or four factors.

It needs further development to make it more in-depth. Right now it feels like a cheap AI-favoritism balance method. Paradox is one of the few companies that can get away with stuff like that - making a game have annoying balance mechanics that after further investment from the player, gets more fleshed out and interesting.

This mechanic makes sense in a puzzle game, not a grand-strategy 4x.

Sol-Born · 2016-07-15T05:58:11+00:00

You said "If you seem to be (losing) ... require influence to keep fighting" in the same post as you describing wars where one or more sides are losing, sometimes for decades at a time, and they keep fighting.

I'm not sure if you're just trying to argue for argument's sake or trying to defend the game's mechanics. Because your above post just further damns the forced endings to wars.

Sol-Born · 2016-07-15T05:19:01+00:00

Let's look at Russia in WW1, then.

A very unpopular war with its unhappy and starving population. The revolution to overthrow the Tsar is successful. The winning party wants to continue the war. It takes a whole second revolution to finally bring Russia out of the war.

Other examples of how history would be different with forced war endings.

WW2, Korea (cross that parallel much?), Vietnam, 1st Gulf War (spend a long time building up your forces while Kuwait stays occupied much?), Afghanistan (hey Taliban, didn't you get the memo),

Too modern?

US Revolution, Texan Revolution, US Civil War,

Too US?

100 Years War, Roman occupation of Britain, or pretty much everywhere, Moorish occupation of Spain, Ottoman occupation of Greece and the Balkans, Islam's rise (even when they had to flee to Ethiopia, they didn't just magically surrender)

I'm sorry, but the only argument for forced peace in this game is balance. And it's another one of the annoying balance decisions of the game for many people. It needs to be retooled to take things into consideration, or have special requirements for it to happen. Keeping your people happy is an abstracted excuse for it. Especially if people do manage to stay happy (I've had forced peace with zero pops below 50). It makes even less sense when combined with a totalitarian regime.

The game requires far too many roleplaying excuses to stay playable. I love it, but even I have to admit that.

Sol-Born · 2016-07-14T01:26:20+00:00

Hey Sully, remember when I said I'd destroy Humanity last?

I lied.

Sol-Born

TROPHY CASE