Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Done my edit.

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

I just go back to the land of the living and am blown away that the Jokes crew that is comprised of 8 people who only come onto Perp to PvP ( and barely any time doing that ) can dictate to Dev Z how the game should be changed.  These idiots have no idea how the game should change, they have no idea what it takes to do indy, mining, artifacting etc as they have not done any of that since the changes to Gamma 1.0 to 2.0.  This is a terrible idea IMHO and I think I should have a good idea as I have no life and spend countless hours of my time in Perp.....

Do nothing in relation to this idea is the right thing.  All my brothers at NSE will agree, but I will let them speak for themselves.

I expect JIta and the Jokes crew to troll the *** out of this so in advance Jokes QFT, and go ask CCP to change Eve as that is where you guys spend 95% of your day playing and quit trying to eff up a game that you say is not worth playing because it is dead anyways and that I enjoy playing the way it is.  There are many other ideas that many other have come up with that would positively change the game.  Jokes just wants this change so the game fits into THEIR agenda and conform to their style of gameplay.  Please Dev Z, listen to the people who ACTUALLY spend time in the game doing all aspects of the game rather than listening to Jita and his game of General Chat trolls.

My 2 cents....

78 (edited by logicalNegation 2015-07-21 03:07:16)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Vocal minorities are an issue with all voluntary survey techniques.  Forums probably more so.
I do not mean to say they are either wrong or right, but rather people speak out more when they feel strongly, or negatively about a subject. 
Grain of salt, and all that...

I will say, Zoom, I remember a gen chat discussion when you were around for a hotfix.  The idea was lifted similar to what is being discussed here (based on what I've skimmed).
To address the feature of a more 'open beta': adding either beta islands with no Terminals, and/or betas with one or multiple NPC terminals. 
The idea of a beta with no outposts but some strong PVE content, like a NPC 'base' (undockable) with its own special SAPs I think was something worth noting. That also addresses the concerns raised in this, and many other topics.
Same with betas with all NPC outposts.

I think this, added to the current beta mix, will hit on all ends of the spectrum, empty->open->open/lockable->all lockable.

Reasonable compromise, would you agree?

79 (edited by Jita 2015-07-21 06:22:48)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Well the point is in order to make Pvp happen people should live on beta and not just visit to ninja mine epi, do what amounts to consensual sap Pvp and collect sap loot.

Living requires stations.

Why don't people live there now? I think station locks are part of the answer. Sparks are another part. Lack of beta industry incentive is another part.

I really don't understand the point of view that says the game is fine, its like playing DayZ on beta. The killboard speaks volumes.

I talked to a station owning corp member today who asked if station were unlocked what the incentive to owning a beta would be. Station services that you can set was my answer. He said this was useless as he lived on Gamma ... And here is the problem. Betas have become politically motivated trophies rather than places to live. The aim of owning a beta is owning a beta, not doing anything with it.

Take that away and you make space for people to grow and move who actually want to use those spaces or arnt ready for gamma. A populated beta causes more content, real Pvp opportunity and hopefully a game worth playing again.

In terms of stations all I would say is that whatever option is tried remember that more stations = more safety from ganks and more opportunity for corps.

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Plain and simple for me....Islands are too small for that nonsense....by all means make more Betas......in a game like this , you should be able to get lost. For goodness sake change the sap mechanic if you must, let the loot drop of you cant do the sap. Add some friggin content, stop removing it.

How about world caches that you scan down, have to fight npcs for. Bring back a decent gamma while your at it.

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

More betas is infinately more desirable tbh. How easy is it to just copy the beta 1 plans and add in another three islands with npc terminals? You could then change the islands over time while the content is still there.

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

82 (edited by Khader Khan 2015-07-21 10:22:21)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Why change what we have when we can add more..... oh wait beta 3s with 2 terminals and 3 outposts all NPC owned. OMG.

Personal opinion let gamma go its failed 3 times over now. shift the gammas to betas and let us add modular defenses to beta 1 islands like 10 guns and some real gates and non-decaying walls. at 50% you can place 1 turret at 100% 10 turrets.

Add station radar arrays like aura +250 detection under station but only on that tile.

Add stuff that makes Beta interesting at 80-100% you can add a module to the base that enhances production time and efficiency.

Masker tower like the gamma one only smaller aura, for near beta op.

TL,dr
Let terraforming go add modular item support for beta bases, increase the reward for owning betas, transform all old gammas to new betas with 5 op/terminals NPC owned.

Participate, Congratulate cause everything else will be seen as HATE.
Max yellow max all skills lvl 10 min max for the win

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

logicalNegation wrote:

To address the feature of a more 'open beta': adding either beta islands with no Terminals, and/or betas with one or multiple NPC terminals. 
The idea of a beta with no outposts but some strong PVE content, like a NPC 'base' (undockable) with its own special SAPs I think was something worth noting. That also addresses the concerns raised in this, and many other topics.
Same with betas with all NPC outposts.

Those ideas are still on the table, but that won't affect the current issue with beta2s. That's why I proposed the idea of adding public main terminals there so they would open up a bit, and this is something that can be done in a few days, contrary to doing completely new islands.

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

DEV Zoom wrote:

I'd like to emphasize again that I'm not convinced either way about the effects and benefits of open or closed beta outposts, but this topic has made me realise that beta2s are most of the time completely shut off from the world. And if they are really underused, it's even worse to think that we have entire islands "wasted" as a playground for a few privileged ones.

As someone in a leadership position in an alliance, I can tell you that Beta 2's aren't that used because their layout typically includes too long travel times from entry to station, making it more convenient to use Beta 1's.

If Beta 2's were superior to Beta 1's, perhaps the extra travel time would be worth it.

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

DEV Zoom wrote:
logicalNegation wrote:

To address the feature of a more 'open beta': adding either beta islands with no Terminals, and/or betas with one or multiple NPC terminals. 
The idea of a beta with no outposts but some strong PVE content, like a NPC 'base' (undockable) with its own special SAPs I think was something worth noting. That also addresses the concerns raised in this, and many other topics.
Same with betas with all NPC outposts.

Those ideas are still on the table, but that won't affect the current issue with beta2s. That's why I proposed the idea of adding public main terminals there so they would open up a bit, and this is something that can be done in a few days, contrary to doing completely new islands.

if you can get the total open beta station level to about 9 it should work fine. I think 6 is too low tbh but its still better than nothing. Why not add in the three in a couple of days and we can reassess at a couple of months?

The reality is there are not more than six entities anyway currently even if we all do a bit of fracturing so its gonna fill the immediate gap at least.

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Naismith wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

I'd like to emphasize again that I'm not convinced either way about the effects and benefits of open or closed beta outposts, but this topic has made me realise that beta2s are most of the time completely shut off from the world. And if they are really underused, it's even worse to think that we have entire islands "wasted" as a playground for a few privileged ones.

As someone in a leadership position in an alliance, I can tell you that Beta 2's aren't that used because their layout typically includes too long travel times from entry to station, making it more convenient to use Beta 1's.

If Beta 2's were superior to Beta 1's, perhaps the extra travel time would be worth it.

Thats a double edged sword really. It offers both protection and hindrance. The travel time is a fact though.

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Converting some of the old Gamma islands into Beta 0's with a few NPC stations on par with Alpha 2, and buffing Beta 1 and 2 so they're vastly superior (and worth contesting) would create space and incentive to go for actual territory.

Gamma's should be deep behind Beta 1 and 2 in the chain, not something you reach from Alpha 1 or 2 in a jump or two.

The overall picture of the game should be structured so it makes sense for a new corporation to work their way up the chain and fight for more territory as they're growing their internal structure and organization.

Blobs are conglomerations of a lot of players, and as someone who terminated quite a few blobs in the history of this game, I would rather roam an island where there's 50 people chasing me after 5 minutes, then roaming 50 islands looking for 5 people playing grabass in some NPC terminals.

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

DEV Zoom wrote:
logicalNegation wrote:

To address the feature of a more 'open beta': adding either beta islands with no Terminals, and/or betas with one or multiple NPC terminals. 
The idea of a beta with no outposts but some strong PVE content, like a NPC 'base' (undockable) with its own special SAPs I think was something worth noting. That also addresses the concerns raised in this, and many other topics.
Same with betas with all NPC outposts.

Those ideas are still on the table, but that won't affect the current issue with beta2s. That's why I proposed the idea of adding public main terminals there so they would open up a bit, and this is something that can be done in a few days, contrary to doing completely new islands.

I'm sorry, I don't understand, what's the issue with beta2's again ? If it's an issue about them being empty then that's a perspective skewed by low population and differing time zones. We live at SI, but it might appear empty because we (surprise, surprise) have real lives, jobs, family, etc. So we can only really be active in a particular time zone, that does not mean there is a problem with any game mechanics.

I've said it countless times before and I'll say again, most of the game's issues are (lack of) population based.

I'm yet to understand how changing a station mechanic could or would cause an increase in people playing the game. I'm happy to be wrong and I'm happy to have things changed. Just don't change things based on a perceived problem that is actually exasperated by a much larger problem ie, number of players, which is also exasperated further by time zones.

The devs are on the right track by adding more content to attract people to alpha initially. Let's keep adding content to the islands. 

Just my 2 cents..

89 (edited by Naismith 2015-07-21 11:33:42)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Adding a public terminal to Beta 2's provides a staging point for anyone wanting to invade outposts on that island.

As someone who actually successfully invaded pretty much every island in this game, it's a lot easier to invade Nauwy or Initia or Heydelhorn then Danarchov/Laosura/Brightstone.

OTHERS live at SI for a good reason.

Perhaps giving more reasons to fight for the stations might be a better choice, if all stations had someone wanting them because they were worth it, I don't see how a single entity could hold everything.

The weak would be kicked out, the strong would rise up to the top. The weak would either join someone else or rebuild their forces.

The game can't be developed around 2-3 dudes being hurt because they can't get a station.

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Blocker wrote:

I'm sorry, I don't understand, what's the issue with beta2's again ?

Answered here:
http://forums.perpetuum-online.com/post/125481/#p125481

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Naismith wrote:

Converting some of the old Gamma islands into Beta 0's with a few NPC stations on par with Alpha 2, and buffing Beta 1 and 2 so they're vastly superior (and worth contesting) would create space and incentive to go for actual territory.

This is right kind of. It would make more sense to open Beta 1 and have lockable gamma (delta?) stations. Basically a Gamma island with four or five lockable outposts and epriton.

Naismith wrote:

The overall picture of the game should be structured so it makes sense for a new corporation to work their way up the chain and fight for more territory as they're growing their internal structure and organization.

I agree with this.

You have the second section of gamma islands that have not been released yet, use them to make these islands. An island that size would support probably five stations and give room to make that extra tier.

Then all we would have to argue about is what that balance looks like.

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

DEV Zoom wrote:

I'm starting from the assumption that in order for someone to be able to live on a beta island, a secure terminal is needed. Beta1s already have this, but Beta2s are completely shut off in this sense. So if nothing else, opening up beta2s would expand the space where players who are not part of the corporation/intrusion warfare (or don't want to be at all, just do high level missions for example) can also play and live.

Thats part of the advantage of owning a Beta 2 though, their under-utilization stems from not enough gain to warrant using them over a Beta 1 island. Your proposal turns Beta 2 into Beta 1 with a worse tp layout, and I dont think that would be an actual incentive to use them.

Engaging in corp & intrusion warfare should be a prerequisite to claiming most of the reward on Beta, otherwise why bother making the effort to scan and show up and fight for it? Beacons and ammo can be aquired from missions, cortexes from artifacting.

As someone in a leadership position in an alliance I would never house our people in a Beta 2 as-is, nevermind if you added a NPC terminal.

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

tbh, Zoom is limiting his options with the idea of vertical progression, unless he wants to hire a few more DEVs for the Themepark.

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

94 (edited by Jita 2015-07-21 12:06:14)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Naismith wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

I'm starting from the assumption that in order for someone to be able to live on a beta island, a secure terminal is needed. Beta1s already have this, but Beta2s are completely shut off in this sense. So if nothing else, opening up beta2s would expand the space where players who are not part of the corporation/intrusion warfare (or don't want to be at all, just do high level missions for example) can also play and live.

Thats part of the advantage of owning a Beta 2 though, their under-utilization stems from not enough gain to warrant using them over a Beta 1 island. Your proposal turns Beta 2 into Beta 1 with a worse tp layout, and I dont think that would be an actual incentive to use them.

Engaging in corp & intrusion warfare should be a prerequisite to claiming most of the reward on Beta, otherwise why bother making the effort to scan and show up and fight for it? Beacons and ammo can be aquired from missions, cortexes from artifacting.

As someone in a leadership position in an alliance I would never house our people in a Beta 2 as-is, nevermind if you added a NPC terminal.


Oh god i'm agreeing with Syndic again.

Beta 2 should be more reward for more work. I think you can easily do this with the mission system and tweaking station services. Its Beta 1 that should be unlocked, not Beta 2.

edit: Syndic, would access to the highest level missions and considerably better station services be enough? Perhaps an increase in mining amounts or stronger nexus would be good too?

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Annihilator wrote:

tbh, Zoom is limiting his options with the idea of vertical progression, unless he wants to hire a few more DEVs for the Themepark.

For a PvE player who doesn't mind PvP if the reward is right, currently the only progression option after alpha2s is the beta1 main terminals. So if anything this would actually add to horizontal progression, by giving them a choice.

96 (edited by Naismith 2015-07-21 12:26:24)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

DEV Zoom wrote:
Annihilator wrote:

tbh, Zoom is limiting his options with the idea of vertical progression, unless he wants to hire a few more DEVs for the Themepark.

For a PvE player who doesn't mind PvP if the reward is right, currently the only progression option after alpha2s is the beta1 main terminals. So if anything this would actually add to horizontal progression, by giving them a choice.

But won't all of that change when you complete the mission revamp and add field terminals everywhere?

I did ask if access to the highest missions will be tied to station ownership or just to the field terminals, did you change your design plan?

Keeping in mind the impending mission revamp, spark removal, etc I have to question if it's even wise to be having this discussion, I doubt you and all of us can begin to accurately predict how the game will evolve from that point. Perhaps this is a discussion best revisited at a later date after the dust settles from field terminals and spark removal.

"Too much, too soon" has been problematic before and could be again.

Maybe space and access won't be a problem even for the vocal forum minority if they choose to actively play the game.

The Alpha vs Beta risk & reward has been a long term problem now, it would be more productive to discuss if missions and field terminals will be beneficial enough with their improved generated missions to warrant players choosing to live on a Beta island.

It takes a lot of effort to successfully live out here, and certainly do industry. The industrial benefits of Beta are pretty much tied to mining Epriton and having 2-3 facilities being 10-15% better then Alpha 2. Obviously it's not enough, as the majority of the Alpha population isn't even attempting to venture out and carve out some territory rather then just PVPing for PVP sake.

97 (edited by Jita 2015-07-21 12:35:47)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

DEV Zoom wrote:
Annihilator wrote:

tbh, Zoom is limiting his options with the idea of vertical progression, unless he wants to hire a few more DEVs for the Themepark.

For a PvE player who doesn't mind PvP if the reward is right, currently the only progression option after alpha2s is the beta1 main terminals. So if anything this would actually add to horizontal progression, by giving them a choice.

Yes, totally agree.

This is why everything should have that progression.

Missions
Mining
Station services
Artifacts
Island bonus

With a corresponding increase in risk:

Alpha 1 (zero risk)
Alpha 2 (NPC risk)
Beta 1 (stations unlocked but pvp area)
Beta 2 (Lockable stations, pvp area)
Gamma (destructible stations, pvp area)

imo the reward should look from an index POV:

Alpha 1 0.1
Alpha 2 0.2
Beta 1 0.4
Beta 2 1.0
Gamma 0.8

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Fact is development is slow. The more complicated the solution, the more development resources it'll take and the bigger blow it'll deliver if it flops.

We need solutions that are fast to implement. Opening up half of the Betas is fast. No resources needed into building new islands and no resources needed into hosting them. Do that, see how it goes and spend the leftover time on other important updates.

Adding more islands is nessecary, but in the future with bigger population that'll swiftly put them to use. There's no need for spending the time and resources right now on something that'll have the same outcome as opening up half of the Betas done in a week/month. Beta1-s are barely used. Talking about a couple of hours a day from 1-2 stations by a handful of players. Beta-2's are not used at all except farming SAP loot and the rare PVP around it.

Open either Beta up and spend the leftover resources figuring out your monetization, improving Beta industry, work on reducing the immense gap between vets and newbies, improve the teleport network and provide other QoL updates.

The game isn't getting any younger. The graphics aren't getting any better with time alone. Work on low-time high-impact updates that make the game more enjoyable to everyone, not just the select few.

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Naismith wrote:

But won't all of that change when you complete the mission revamp and add field terminals everywhere?

I did ask if access to the highest missions will be tied to station ownership or just to the field terminals, did you change your design plan?

I don't think field terminals alone are enough to encourage someone who is into missioning to live there. They are good for some quick in-and-out stuff, but nothing else.

And yes, highest level missions might be tied to station ownership in the future, but with the current revamp we're only going up to level 6 for now (to be safe), and that will be true for all beta bases and terminals.

100

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Burial wrote:

Fact is development is slow. The more complicated the solution, the more development resources it'll take and the bigger blow it'll deliver if it flops.

We need solutions that are fast to implement. Opening up half of the Betas is fast. No resources needed into building new islands and no resources needed into hosting them. Do that, see how it goes and spend the leftover time on other important updates.

Adding more islands is nessecary, but in the future with bigger population that'll swiftly put them to use. There's no need for spending the time and resources right now on something that'll have the same outcome as opening up half of the Betas done in a week/month. Beta1-s are barely used. Talking about a couple of hours a day from 1-2 stations by a handful of players. Beta-2's are not used at all except farming SAP loot and the rare PVP around it.

Open either Beta up and spend the leftover resources figuring out your monetization, improving Beta industry, work on reducing the immense gap between vets and newbies, improve the teleport network and provide other QoL updates.

The game isn't getting any younger. The graphics aren't getting any better with time alone. Work on low-time high-impact updates that make the game more enjoyable to everyone, not just the select few.

Yeah +1

Focus on stuff that takes a week and is visable. The last plan was three major things that took over a year. Nice as they are it's not what is needed.

Proverbs 23:20-21 warns us, “Do not join those who drink too much wine or gorge themselves on meat, for drunkards and gluttons become poor, and drowsiness clothes them in rags."