AriaOfOurs Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 I didn't have a chance to catch the last full line of it, but that's most of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrVonTuckIII Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Probably just the normal stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helch0rn Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 1 minute ago, PrVonTuckIII said: Probably just the normal stuff. I don't think so this looks different *starts translating* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Railgun_Alter Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Ah... so this one's different? I kinda thought it looked not quite like the Second Dream one (it was longer I think?) 3 minutes ago, Helch0rn said: *starts translating* Please post your findings. I can't really deal well with this language >_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helch0rn Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 (edited) 39 minutes ago, Railgun_Alter said: Ah... so this one's different? I kinda thought it looked not quite like the Second Dream one (it was longer I think?) Please post your findings. I can't really deal well with this language >_< it is definitly different this is the old one Edit: even though the letters are different it seems to be the same text. I didn't translate the red text at the top reezawn - foren kaereeer deetekted -orijin unon - suspisheeawn traesikh sighnal reeinisheeaetikh dayepolar rikuplikh awn nawvel kaereeer - bayeo in standbaye for sikooens chek and siink mosheeun kawmpen just as comparision this is a part os the text from the original: ROSAWN FAWREHAGN KARAWR DEHTEHKTEHD. AWRAGAN UHNKNOWN. SASPAKIHAWN TRAKINNG SIHGNAL. REHUHNUHTEHTIHNG DIHPOLAR KAWMEHKSHOWM AWN NAWVEHL KARAWR. BIHO IHN STHANDVAYE FAWR SEHAWNK JEHK AND SEENK. MAWSHUHM KAWMPEHNSASHUHM KAWMPLEHTEH Second edit: since this is more or less the same text as in the original I guess that OP's pc just was too fast at loading to show the rest of the full text Edited July 19, 2016 by Helch0rn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valiant Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, Helch0rn said: I don't think so this looks different *starts translating* Think it is still close to the same (as it seems you've discovered above). If it's the same thing as a while ago when someone else posted about it they also noticed the difference but it ended up still being the 'same'. Think it just had minor edits/corrections but was still about the second dream opposed to a teaser for upcoming stuff. Edited July 19, 2016 by Naith Let's do the time warp agaaaain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helch0rn Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Just now, Naith said: Think it is still close to the same. If it's the same thing as a while ago when someone else posted about it they also noticed the difference but it ended up still being the 'same'. Think it just had minor edits/corrections but was still about the second dream opposed to a teaser for upcoming stuff. maybe the devs are trolling and it was not about the second dream at all. maybe it's a teaser for the war within but that's probably tinfoil hattery Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blakrana Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Hmm...well, having had a bit of a hack at it, doesn't seem a new message. Quote VOID LINK SEVERED REASON - FOREIGN CARRIER DETECTED - ORIGIN UNKNOWN. SUSPICION (?) - TRACING (Tracking?) SIGNAL. REINITIALISING (?) DIPOLAR RECOUPLING (?) ON (?) NAVAL CARRIER. BOW IN STANDBY FOR SEQUENCE (?) CHECK AND SYNCH. MOTION COMPEN The Picture provided in OP came out to this for me, though I've put question marks where I wasn't too sure I'd converted it properly. I really ain't got the foggiest what the word between Recoupling and Naval is meant to be. Same message, even if I have botched it in places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldnacpeek Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 Nothing new. It's just the old message had spell corrections done recently, so it has the appearance of being new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now