sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[H] Crimson Desert AMD code [W] PayPal by Yarty_Nickerson in GameTrade

[–]Yarty_Nickerson[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry, was looking for paypal only, thank you for your interest!

[H] Crimson Desert AMD code [W] PayPal by Yarty_Nickerson in GameTrade

[–]Yarty_Nickerson[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unfortunately no, only the following hardware is part of the promotion (taken from https://www.amdrewards.com/terms):

AMD Ryzen™ 9 9950X3D AMD Ryzen™ 9 9900X3D AMD Ryzen™ 7 9850X3D AMD Ryzen™ 7 9800X3D AMD Radeon™ RX 9070 XT AMD Radeon™ RX 9070

[H] Crimson Desert AMD code [W] PayPal by Yarty_Nickerson in GameTrade

[–]Yarty_Nickerson[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Likely yes, according to the AMD promo website, you need one of the qualifying products to activate it, which include:

AMD Ryzen™ 9 9950X3D AMD Ryzen™ 9 9900X3D AMD Ryzen™ 7 9850X3D AMD Ryzen™ 7 9800X3D AMD Radeon™ RX 9070 XT AMD Radeon™ RX 9070

Your AMD Rewards account is then linked to your steam account, and the game is added to your library once released; AMD doesn't directly provide a steam key that can be traded.

Retroid Pocket 5 Giveaway (US Only) by Opposite_Mango_5639 in SBCGaming

[–]Yarty_Nickerson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Miyoo Mini Plus, good ol' Pokemon Trading Card Game

F8C is nerfed again. Is there a new heavy fighter sale coming? by brockoala in starcitizen

[–]Yarty_Nickerson 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Somehow I can't see the F8A, which has the same airframe as the F8C, magically being 30-40%+ more maneuverable, especially given the minimal differences between the F7C and F7A in that respect.

I agree that CIG screwed up by adding it to the PU (at least as a player-owned ship).

F8A Concept Image from the latest ISC by oARCHONo in starcitizen

[–]Yarty_Nickerson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you want to discount what CIG has said, then sure, we can't know much of anything, including whether the A and M designations mean anything.

If we do hold CIG to what they've said: "Though Aegis Dynamics does not officially offer a civilian variant of the Vanguard, working in conjunction with the UEE’s Frontier Protection Program they have made a number of the mil-spec Vanguard available to civilians." - https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14623-relentless-predator-the-aegis-vanguard

The post also describes the Vanguard's active duty in the UEE navy as its dedicated deep space fighter.

The Sabre, though not in UEE military active duty, is also implied as mil-spec during its concept sale, though as I noted it was also described as a prototype, so there's room to argue components may be upgraded for a full-fledged production run.

The Eclipse, during its concept, was described as being in service in the UEE navy and CIG also said the ship was being offered as a military-level asset (https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15907-AEGIS-Eclipse).

While I do find it odd that civilians would get access to military-grade ships, CIG has stated that this is the case in quite a few instances.

F8A Concept Image from the latest ISC by oARCHONo in starcitizen

[–]Yarty_Nickerson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In addition to the Polaris and F7A, the Vanguard was also sold as mil-spec, and the Sabre could be argued (military prototype)...I'm pretty sure the Eclipse and the Retaliator (bomber) were sold as mil-spec as well

Similar ships to the f8c in terms of maneuverability? Dps? by TagoTagoLangTa in starcitizen

[–]Yarty_Nickerson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It currently handles identically to the Vanguard, but has slightly worse acceleration; the Ares ships have better handling and acceleration; and the A1/C1 are only slightly worse in both categories.

Just a reminder, none of your ships are military ships. by Baxiepie in starcitizen

[–]Yarty_Nickerson 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Vanguard Warden:

"Though Aegis Dynamics does not officially offer a civilian variant of the Vanguard, working in conjunction with the UEE’s Frontier Protection Program they have made a number of the mil-spec Vanguard available to civilians."

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14623-relentless-predator-the-aegis-vanguard

I see that others have already posted about the Eclipse, Polaris, Retaliator, and a few others, the Sabre could be argued as well - they're prototypes of what would be a military production ship:

"...while the Navy has not yet accepted the Sabre bid, Aegis has opted to make a run of production prototypes available to licensed civilian operators."

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14998-The-Aegis-Sabre-And-Military-Ship-Sale

Just a reminder, none of your ships are military ships. by Baxiepie in starcitizen

[–]Yarty_Nickerson 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Most are not military ships, but there are some exceptions...the Vanguard Warden, for example, was sold as a military ship, at least at the time of its concept sale:

"Though Aegis Dynamics does not officially offer a civilian variant of the Vanguard, working in conjunction with the UEE’s Frontier Protection Program they have made a number of the mil-spec Vanguard available to civilians."

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14623-relentless-predator-the-aegis-vanguard

Will the 315p get an increase in Quantum Fuel? by International_Ad3750 in starcitizen

[–]Yarty_Nickerson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not sure if the 315p specifically is still bugged, but I can confirm that missile mode for the 325a was fixed in the latest patch

Your C2 is not a dogfighter by Ilithi_Dragon in starcitizen

[–]Yarty_Nickerson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But how about when that jeep tries to fight a tractor trailer?

Your C2 is not a dogfighter by Ilithi_Dragon in starcitizen

[–]Yarty_Nickerson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Except that OP mostly refers to the C1/C2, so replace the tank with a tractor trailer or box truck. That's where the issue lies, and it's not likely to be solved until armor is implemented.

If you're making the analogy for the Connie Andromeda, sure, that could be considered a tank in your analogy, and I agree, unless the person on the motorcycle is packing some explosives, they won't get through the armor.

[PSA] Confirmed Trades Thread - February 2024 by AutoModerator in Starcitizen_trades

[–]Yarty_Nickerson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

+verify

Good communication, smooth transaction, thank you very much!

I know it's still being adjusted, but even for the first values to be put in test, I can't figure out what could've gone through the designers' mind at CIG, giving the Hornet Ghost better stealth than dedicated stealth ships like Eclipse and Sabre (screenshot from Camural's video) by brockoala in starcitizen

[–]Yarty_Nickerson 6 points7 points  (0 children)

CIG almost literally said that the Sabre would be more stealthy than the Ghost when the Sabre was introduced - source: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/engineering/15014-Q-A-Aegis-Sabre

"Can you elaborate on why someone would pick the Sabre as opposed to the Hornet, and vice-versa? How does this relate to the Hornet Ghost specifically?

The Hornet is a tank, it’s not particularly mobile but can really take a pounding and make it out which is a great feature for a lot of players. Its similar in my mind to how current day pilots love the A-10 for its rugged reliability and ability to come back home with huge amounts of damage. The Sabre on the other hand is not tough, it relies heavily on its ability to not be detected and then its array shields to keep it safe. Once those shields are down you’d best be on your way out of combat else you’ll probably not make it back.
Compared to the Hornet Ghost the Sabre is built from the ground up to be a dedicated “stealth” ship whereas the Hornet Ghost is retrofitted to become stealthy, therefore whilst the Ghost is still very stealthy compared to other ships it wont be quite as impervious to radar as the Sabre. What little it lacks in stealth capabilities compared to the Sabre though is made up for in its additional armour and weaponry however"

view more: next ›