As long as the word "disinterest" is taken in context and is not confused as to be synonymous with "indifference", that definition of altruism is acceptable. Going by your logic, there seems to be an assumption that no one can be selfless - because all humans who do anything are selfish by default. So the points this discussion should be debated over are - 1. Humans who do nothing are selfless (For example - the mummy?) 2. Humans who do anything are selfish (For example - Action: I eat to live. Motive: I want to live. Conclusion: Therefore, I'm selfish) 3. How less selfish are people? OR How more selfish; relative to a standard measure. Example 1- standard measure: social morality, less selfish person: altruist, more selfish person: selfish (narcissist?) Example 2- standard measure: personal morality, less selfish person: ??, more selfish person: ??

The word 'selfishness' is derived from 'self' or the 'ego' - an integral part of every one of us. If you can visualize the scale of our egos, it'd look like this - Altruism<----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ego-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->Selfishness Going to either extreme can satisfy you on some level.

I like to think it'd be even more balanced if there was a system of "slots" for heavy/light/med hulls on both sides for team games.

Looks like this turret will be more suitable for defenders/campers (that's artillery by definition, right?). Some people are going to have a tough time digesting this I think. Like the fact that the isida is not exactly designed for DM. This has no self-damage, correct?

Quite honestly, I don't know. Eventually we hope to find out. Thanks for showing support!

I think a better idea than creating a dictionary for you poem is just mention a note with it saying that you are inspired by Edgar Allan Poe's Annabel Lee. That speaks volumes. This is only a suggestion ofcourse.

I'm curious - is there a poem or poet you like?... and why do you like it/them?

Thank you, much appreciated! If you think it has merit enough, would you like to support our petition requesting moderators to have this topic "pinned" to the Game Discussion section? (Just a yes/no suffices)

That laser though... are shafts gonna lose their job?

LOool. I still can't easily make out the front/back of this turret.

Contrary to what people have said so far here, I say get twins or thunder. Hammer is incredibly easy to aim with. Twins/thunder will be comparable. You will find smoky aiming a pain to adjust to. You also need to do a reality check. Even with missed aim, you're going to deal damage with twins/thunder/hammer. They are more forgiving, easier to use weapons.

Ok, :D :lol:

Isn't absolute zero like –273.15°C or –459.67°F? Why is it impossible in tanki?

Yeah, I just noticed the wiki definition, which concurs with yours. I just don't refer the wiki enough, my bad. What do you say about the other question though?

The concept of absolute zero (no pun intended) is kind of wonky. But I just read the wiki definitions. Like you say IAW, apparently they consider the temperature too. So does that mean when a tank reaches absolute zero, it just dies? Again, no pun intended. Lol.

I thought temperature decrease was something that does not have any implication on damage or freeze effect. While temperature increase(read firebird) has a definite effect. Isn't the freezing rate (as opposed to a cooling rate) just used to determine how fast a substance freezes? Like, taking the freeze attack scenario, After fixed time-frames like below - Freeze level at 1 sec = 0.1x0.6x1 = 0.06 Freeze level at 2 secs = 0.1x0.6x2 = 0.12 Freeze level at 3 secs = 0.1x0.6x3 = 0.18

Yeah, I complain against flat protection percentages levied under the same pricing. It should ideally affect the pricing of the turrets. I'm not sure if the devs just missed this point completely or they've left it there for a reason (to complicate stuff? Can't see any other anyway).

I was wondering about this too. The freeze inflicts a freeze level of 0.1 to a prey turret and hull according to wiki. So I'm thinking mechanics would be constant as far as an attacking freeze is concerned, but plays out differently depending on the prey turret/hull characteristics? So when under a freeze attack, if you have a slower turning hull, it's going to be painfully slower to try turn it. You may then rely on your turret more. So if you use firebird(high rotation speed), you'll likely get some damage done in defense. But if your turret turns slowly as well (like railgun), you're a total goner. For light hulls, the misery ends faster - their lower health. For heavies, they just suffer longer I guess.

That new turret looks like a headless chicken.

If you look at the modules available to buy, smoky is the turret with max protections offered against it - link. Also, smoky protection is a little OP (more bang for buck). Whether you have 10% or 50% protection from twins, you're still going to die faster to twins fire than to smoky (no drugs scenario). Here's a chart by @Tani_S showing what I mean - Check #13 Number of Shots against Unprotected vs Protected Hulls.

^ Point. This would make a huge difference in player attitudes.

This too shall pass.

:P Yes, yes. If any of you doubt that, you can check ANY game discussion topic and you'll be pleasantly surprised at how enthusiastic his species are.

Yes, we're a pretty active bunch of nerds. I'm on sick leave until further notice. On a prescription for procrastination :P @wolverine848 is probably hibernating. We got a some caws and claws, but the cause we have unwittingly pledged our allegiance to calls you and us alike to contribute to this noble mission of "A Vision". Donations accepted in thoughts, charts and tables.

Thanks. Silly me, forgot about the wiki.