+1 There the mega nuet only makes sense.

@Harpo, the IBG is fine the way it is. Are you suggesting that the SVG be made as agile as the IBG? The toasters have a nation ship that can't run (prom) and a nation ship that can run (svg). The magic blues have one ship that can run (the valk) and one that can't (ibg). Seems balanced the way it is.

I bet this would be useful on a Goli or Dent as well

... or a Prom, or a Hog... or any large port while we're at it!

What are the chances of this becoming a real thing?

Just slowly bump this thread every couple of weeks until Inc finally telss us aye or nay. Tbh, i would like an accurate weapon thar fires at near-neutron rate - positrons really show an ouch when you cant chainfire them, and still do when you can sometimes.

+1

A neutron coming out my large port would really compliment that trident livery I bought :D

Reviving for further discussion

You should have created a new thread and linked back to the older thread. Reviving threads out of discussion for longer than 3 months is really frowned apon here. Incarnate himself also said we must not do that.

You should have created a new thread and linked back to the older thread. Reviving threads out of discussion for longer than 3 months is really frowned apon here. Incarnate himself also said we must not do that.

That's a silly rule. If the topic is still valid it makes no sense to create a new thread and rehash all of the opinions again. This topic is very appropriate for the current discussion and it makes no sense to have 10 topics to cover the same thing just because the prior topic slipped under the radar of developer comment.

It's great to have opinions about rules, but they're my rules, on my forum, and I have good reasons for them:

- When threads get over many pages, they're often unwieldy to find specific discussion points. Or the actual "Suggestion" itself evolves 5 different times over as many pages of debate.
- New threads are an opportunity to "condense" previous discussions into "what's relevant today".
- People who posted on old threads are often not around anymore, or may have been arguing for points that have diminished in relevance due to other changes.

Nothing is being "lost", people can reference the older thread, people can also "quote" the critical aspects of the earlier threads. It cuts down a lot on the "TL;DR" factor.

The more condensed and coherent a given Suggestion (and defenses thereof), the more likely it is to be implemented. Giant threads that require lengthy reading.. maybe not?

So, seriously, if it's an older thread (especially an age measured in years), then link the old one(s), and start a new one. I'm not concerned about three-month-old threads.

In this case, the thread was revived a few times already, whatever, I'm not calling out anyone for reviving this. But in general, please adhere to the rules whether you happen to "like" them or not.

and yet a nearly 3 year old thread was revived by *someone* literally last night to implement a suggested weapon that hadn't had any real player input provided since august 2nd 2016. Really makes one thonk.

No, it was a notification that it was implemented as-is. I usually post to the bottom of any given Suggestion thread that gets implemented, no matter how old it is. I didn't revive anything for discussion. Smartass. If it'll make you feel better, I could lock the thread.

I've booted a number of long-time veterans off of Suggestions, over the last few months, for unhelpful ass-hattery. Being here, and having input on the direction of the game, is a privilege. Keep that in mind.

I will keep that in mind, thank you.

Seeing as how I started this thread way back when I still don't see a down side or anything game breaking about it.