Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hello hello,

Long time reader/lurker here, but i spend most of my posting life on ns.com or toymods.

Anyways a while back i believe there was a BF2 battle between ns.com and sau, in the same vein, i would like to CHALLENGE all the best of the best SAU Counterstrike Source players to a battle against the best players from NS.COM. BATTLE TIME!

At the moment we are only assembling/trialing a team so you all have heaps of time, so i guess yeh, ball is in your court, we're calling you out, Challenge accepted?

Cheers,

Mat (aka. S13Power off ns.com)

:D

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/124396-nscom-vs-sau-counterstrike-source/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

took ya time to write this up s13power ;)

ns.com has a large team, roughly 34 players... we are going to cut that team down..

still waiting on you skyline boys to assemble a team :D

as far as servers go, i think i told s13power about EGN/Netspace that rent out servers for free to play css. problem being they will be either 20 or 32 slot server, so gotta cut the team down!

I have a ranking on Gamespace servers, along with my friend. Not saying I am "godlike" but I can hold my own. We play Source at atleast 1 full day each and every weekend on online servers

Put me down for 2 spots if you need numbers.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...