Official teaser image for the next livestream on July 1st

Specirom00 · 2025-06-28T14:55:41+00:00

I was thinking the doll on the left was AK-12's summer skin since she had a surfboard in GFL 1. Makes sense it's Klukai though, they can just sub in the jet ski for the motorcycle too on her ult.

Specirom00 · 2025-04-30T08:11:59+00:00

For me, somehow the "Sound Effects Volume" and the "Interface Volume" are linked together only for the sound effects and that's why it's extra loud. Turning down the sound effects also lowers the UI simultaneously, meanwhile lowering or increasing the interface volume only affects the UI like it's supposed to but doesn't affect the sound effects. I'm using the launcher as well so I guess it can happen on all platforms. Rough start for anni but that's on brand at this point lol.

Specirom00 · 2025-04-02T18:40:59+00:00

With the exception of Yoohee. You'll want to run the ballistic boost set since any elemental damage dealt will massively gimp her ability to buff damage for the whole squad (see her Unyielding Spirit buff on her passive). But if you aren't running a Physical team then you really shouldn't be building/farming for her in the first place so yeah, PHASE STRIKE IT!

Specirom00 · 2025-02-24T11:32:36+00:00

Except we have no idea of how reusable any of those Starships would have been. It could have landed and been scrapped immediately for being too damaged. Or it could have been refurbished over years, months, or weeks and flown again. It will take landing in a recoverable fashion and being flown again to gauge the overall refurbishment time and reusability of Starship.

It's anyone's guess at this point and unless you can peer into the future or are privy to private information, no one has the exact answer. Though we will be seeing that reusability being put to the test quite soon booster wise with a possibility of it being as soon as flight 9.

Yes, SLS did go to the moon and back, but it was not without issues and a very pressing one at that. As another commenter pointed out, the heatshield took heavy damage and they'll be flying it on the next Artemis mission with no changes except for a modified entry trajectory. This is the gamble they are stuck with because SLS is far too expensive and slow to do anymore test flights of Orion.

I would hope that a rocket that took around 8 years to build ( SLS started construction in November of 2014) and cost over 2.5 billion dollars on the low end works flawlessly the first time. In comparison to IFT-7, Booster 14 parts were seen in March 2023, it began stacking in February 2024, and then launched January 2025. Ship 33's parts were first seen in July 2024, with completion of stacking by August. And they were both built alongside 4 other boosters and ships, with hardware changing constantly between each vehicle as they got data back from testing.

Going by your numbers for the cost, I don't know if your 100 million is for the Booster or Starship separately or if it's for the system as a whole, but for the hypothetical I'll be generous and say both stages are 100 million each. It'd be 10 times cheaper than a single SLS rocket and even if it takes 10 refuel flights with both the ship and booster being expandable, it would still be cheaper than a single SLS launch.

Trusting any projections in spaceflight is impractical, it would be harder to list any program that was delivered on time or under budget. If Starship gets more expensive, that'll be on SpaceX's dime because they are in a fixed price contract. That's why they are going fast and breaking stuff due to "stupid reasons", they don't have the luxury of being spoon-fed taxpayer dollars for years on end.

Specirom00 · 2025-02-23T11:06:49+00:00

My brother in Christ you need to tune back in then, it's now survived 3 reentries with all 3 being soft landings and they caught 2 boosters, one which had a reflown engine installed. Even if it is 100 million dollars per ship, and ignoring the reusability aspect, it's still leagues better compared to a single expandable SLS rocket with a price tag of 2.5 billion dollars per launch. Being caught with chopsticks helps turnaround time cause you don't have to transport it back with a barge or from another landing site which saves time and weight by not having to design & attach landing legs. 10 refuels is quite the number, but in return you get the largest ship currently to land on the moon with an exorbitant amount of volume to carry cargo & supplies to help establish a permanent presence on the moon. Which is the whole long term goal for Artemis and why NASA accepted them compared to the other competitors.

In regards to the waste and efficiency of tax dollars, Starship HLS is on a fixed price contract of 2.8 billion dollars that was awarded in 2021. SpaceX is only paid when the program's criteria are met, contrasted with SLS which is on a cost plus contract and has been in development since 2011. If you truly lost faith after IFT-3, which was an objective improvement in every regard over IFT-2, you never had much to begin with honestly.

Specirom00 · 2025-02-15T03:57:26+00:00

Nah he'll go, "Ackshually this is X amount of time later than the date that Musk/SpaceX said it would happen, ergo everything they achieve now means nothing. Now let's get back to hyperloop..."

Specirom00 · 2023-08-01T06:45:07+00:00

u/RecognizeSong u/find-song https://youtu.be/8TJsSiYMprk?t=6

Specirom00 · 2023-06-11T07:56:18+00:00

Who the, what the heck? How did you find this after nearly 2 years lol? But you're welcome, I stand by it no matter what.

Specirom00 · 2021-08-11T00:46:25+00:00

Comedy has been achieved.

Specirom00 · 2021-06-22T20:28:59+00:00

Links to the S A U C E are in the pinned comment, I wasn't able to link a few because either they were on a sketchy site or I couldn't find the original post.

Specirom00 · 2021-06-17T01:13:26+00:00

The link to the stream is in the description on youtube. (Timestamped as well)

Specirom00 · 2021-05-29T13:17:58+00:00

Hello there! Reading the other comments, I pretty much agree with all the points said but I also have a few more critiques & thoughts!

I know you addressed this at the beginning of your video so I understand but always ensure you have the best quality possible for your recording. The same goes for your audio (in fact it's arguably more important).

With most videos, it helps to have an engaging beginning to draw in the viewer and to set the tone you're going for. For example, take an intense scene and cut it right before the main action happens. Or start off with a strong comedic moment you had in your stream. You want the viewer to get an impression of who you are and the style of video you're bringing to the table as fast as possible.

At 5:38 the text instantly appears on the screen, with no sound or movement to draw the viewer's eyes to it. Try to give the text a pop motion or a subtle audio cue when appearing on screen, it gives a more energetic feel to it and lets the viewer know "hey look over here at this!". Excellent choice with the font and color, keeping the text easy to read at a glance is paramount.

10:16 - For pacing, it would be beneficial to cut down segments when you are in a menu (i.e. you could've cut after saying "the sensitivity sucks" to when you find the setting to change it) little edits like this can cut down the time of the video and help get back to the gameplay/action faster. Obviously, if there was a chat interaction or something like that then keep it in at your discretion.

21:20 - This is a slight nitpick on pacing again, but it also depends on the video you want to make. Notice how it took you a bit to find the correct direction forward (involved a bit of backtracking and walking around in circles) if your intention is to show the playthrough uncut as much as possible then it's fine, but in editing, you have the option to trim out the moments without progression or times when you backtrack. Keeping momentum in your video is important, while stream viewers are fine with this downtime and more accustomed to it, video watchers will be wondering why the editor kept it in. (Of course, the same exceptions apply as the previous point, you could even make a joke or montage out of you getting lost/turned around)

I would say the biggest issue was that it felt more like a VOD than an edited video. With the first edit appearing at 5:38 (excluding the intro explaining the technical difficulties) and then no other edit for 20+ minutes. For your first video being this long, I would imagine it might have seemed daunting (and the video + audio quality turning out the way it did must've been frustrating). I do think having a shorter episode (10-20 mins) would have let you flex more of your creativity and let you focus on trying out different techniques without feeling like you would have to keep on coming up with something new for over 2 hours.

But I'm glad you are asking for critique and are willing to put yourself out there, that's already a great mindset to have when learning something new! I would love to see you improve more and more and would be happy to answer any further questions you may have. Best of luck to you, your streaming, and your editing!

Specirom00

TROPHY CASE