Cornflakes

they both had the gravity drive core as supplementary drive system, they both also have antimatter engines. as is clearly visible when you look at them from behind

"the normandys main propulsion is provided by four large antiproton thrusters" http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Normandy_SR-2 as with every military ship in the mass effect universe and as its clearly visible in that cutscene they dont deactivate them when cloaked https://youtu.be/TNJ4QstURcQ?t=1m10s

Mass Effects "cloak" made perfect sense the way described, besides the fact that they still could use their nuclear-death-beam-of-doom antimatter engines wile staying cloaked.

@CaptainTwerkmotor: stop accusing Velenka (or anyone else) of being a griefer just because his opinion differs from yours. @Velenka: the thing with borders, or rather with limited-throughput choke points, is that they make strategic combat less of a "i have more cannons than you" slugfest but make them more dynamic. with free FTL the attacker can just drop his attack force on a chosen target without much thought beyond "do they have more guns there than i can bring", with reinforcements/supplies making a beeline to the fleet through interstellar space. whereas with bound FTL or gates the whole ordeal becomes a lot more involved and needs actual strategy. "can i get there" "how do i get there" "can i keep the route safe for my supplies" "can i cut off their supplies" "can they cut off my retreat" and so on and so forth. with free FTL its straight up firepower vs firepower at any interesting installation. with bound FTL you can have large power multiplication effects if either side is smart. a well placed fortress can defend many installations at once by holding a gate connection to the weaker defended backyard, even against technically superior forces. a smart attacker can get around strong defenses when he finds/builds a gate connection around the fortifications. its as simple as that limitations in strategic movement would make more interesting gameplay.

Because that totally needs voice chat and cant possibly work with text chat. /sarkasm

And "the amount of back doors" you are using as an argument is inferred from what exactly? From what i gathered about the game its that gates will be frickin huge and expensive, nothing any small time privateer could casually plonk down if hes in the mood. And if they arent expensive enough and the game becomes too unfun clusterfark, its a game and numbers in games can easily be changed. All in all i dont believe that the amount of gates will be that large.

partially true. But the point is that gates enable choke points at all, and not just completely remove the possibility of them being there in the first place. you /can/ fortify subsections of settled space and not just individual poins. It'll be hard and needs monitoring of your space to prevent backdoors being installed/undefended. But its at least possible, and encourages thinking and player interaction on both sides of a war. Instead of the attackers just beelining to their target. Both the defender and attacker would have to search for ways into the defended area and control them for their own goals, coercing/bribing/pressing the owners of other gates into service for themself

To use the words of someone who had the same discussion with me years ago: "The battle of Thermopylae wouldnt even be a footnote in the history books if the persians could have taken a million other ways" Freeform travel opens up so many ways of getting somewhere that strategic choke points cease to exist. You couldnt stop a force in its tracks by holding a strategic "bridge" or "pass". Because they dont have to use them in the first place. In short: freeform travel removes all semblance of strategic blockades from the game and reduces controlled territories to the points which are directly in range of defense weaponry. Twerkmotor: how would freely available FTL remove the point of the continous world? Continous FTL very much reinforces that its a single world and not a series of discrete rooms And EVE is single shard as well, theres only one game world for all the players (ignoring the test universe). The world of DU wont run on a single piece of server hardware as well, it just subdivides differently. Not along hard area/volume borders but by population density. There'll still be servers along which the players will be distributed, though https://devblog.dualthegame.com/2014/09/26/a-single-shard-continuous-universe-one-world-no-boundaries/

good luck trying to teach a computer "similarity". Easy concept for humans, incredibly hard for computers And neiter amd nor nvidia outsource models, they sell their already done silicon to the others and they place them on PCB's. Their business doesnt change

and how many resources does google spend i have yet to witness google image search to turn up anything useful :V and google's customers dont use lots of server resources for hours on end but only a few minutes a day. and then compare googles server and development resources with this tiny speck of something here

source where? do you have any idea how large of an effort it would be to compare every and any newly created blueprint with all already existing ones? it has to compare thousands (or even millions or even billions for the hugest devices) of voxels with all the other blueprints that already exist. thats thousands of compare actions with endless amounts of blocks. i dont want to pay the power bill for the poor server which has to do that theoretically possible? yes feasible in an MMO environment with thousands of people putting in blueprints? not by a long shot.

"abundance of materials", about 5 earth masses for the sol system. spread over a volume many many thousand times larger than the solar system. mining or hiding isnt exactly effective if theres a single rock every dozend solar system volumes

and the further of those two is somewhere between half the way to the oort cloud or mere 2 percent, depending on which distance to the oort cloud you take from wikipedia. sooooo....

compared to an oort cloud every planet is "right next" to all other planets.

you call whole solar systems "One position"? and why are you insinuating me for not wanting differentiated environments from my statements that (even remotely) realistic oort clouds are mostly boring and completely uneconomical except for fringe cases we wont hit in the game?

and as oort clouds are as far as i can tell created from the same nebula as the star itself they'll have similar metallicity as the whole system. whereas you again have no advantage in flying that far out to mine them. also: as the oort cloud is theoretised to have only about 5 earth masses of material, good luck finding any of those rocks in a volume many times larger than the inner solar system. With other systems likely having similar oort cloud densities

you dont have to live in spawn while still being able to avoid travelling up to the largest part of a lightyear to get stuff

and how are materials more abundant in the oort cloud than, say, in an asteroid belt or on moons? the oort clouds composition wont be that much different from the inner solar system, where theres enough mass to last for many many years. especially for the tiny civilisation we play in DU. so why bother flying noticeable fractions of a lightyear to get what i can get as easy on a planet right next to me?

@wickedcody123 how on earth should mod support work in an MMO environment? who should guarantee that the billion and one mods that will be tried to be pushed onto their servers arent game balance breaking in any form or combination? how would you prevent uber cheat mods getting into there? (trolololo i modded an uberlaser into the game with 0 mass and no energy or ammunition needs and a single rock as build cost! i own the universe now!) (trolololo i modded in an uber refinery that makes indestructible construction material from rocks!) who would be responsible if the mod you submitted causes a server crash with player data loss? the list goes on and on and on and on.

"Filled with helium" would be the "unless specifically built to do so" And as liquid hydrogen has a density another order of magnitude smaller its still unlikely that something not built to float there would float. A spaceship with 1% metal content per volume isnt exactly viable :V

Unlikely that any spacecraft thats not designed to be buoyant in a gas giant would float.Considering that the (predicted) density of /metallic/ (solid, it doesnt get much denser for it) hydrogen is 0.8g/cm³. Where as water has 1g/cm³, iron has 7.8g/cm³ and aluminium 2.7g/cm³ So a spaceship will have a higher average density than any fluid in a gas giant and thus sink.

no laser can conduct any charge. including the link with the wrong title. the laser in your link is created using a new process which the author somehow interpreted as the laser transporting charge in its beam. its normal UV light created using a new process. no charge transport there. your "more complex" point is something else as well. the laser itself doesnt conduct there as well, but it ionises the air (or any other medium they happen to use) and the ionised medium then becomes a conductor. whichs path coincides with the path of the laser beam. no charged light there as well. the EM fields in IR lasers and gamma lasers are in nothing different but the frequency with which they oscillate. there is no difference in "charge" between them at all. very simple source for that light has no charge: wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon Electric charge 0 Edit: an electrical field is no charge

You can turn antimatter engines off. You just cant do it with mechanical valves but with electrostatical ones.

*nitrous oxide. Not nitrogen :V Nitrogen is enough in the intake air

You know that lasers have no charge... no? So "neutrally charged laser" makes no sense at all just link me the source then i'll have less aneurisms