Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Burial wrote:

Work on low-time high-impact updates that make the game more enjoyable to everyone, not just the select few.

That's the plan. We're discussing our roadmap today and you'll see it in a devblog in a few days.

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Naismith wrote:

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.

That's one of the reasons why we suggested opening up Beta 1's.

Naismith wrote:

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.

One of the main drive behind this change is breaking up the two-sidedness. Sure, one entity might not be able to hold everything, but without considerably more islands, two can.

How many islands would only serve as SAP loot farms and how many islands would actually be in use.. ?

Big fights are fine. Alliances are fine. Joining an alliance being the only viable way of growing beyond Alpha is not.

103

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

DEV Zoom wrote:
Burial wrote:

Work on low-time high-impact updates that make the game more enjoyable to everyone, not just the select few.

That's the plan. We're discussing our roadmap today and you'll see it in a devblog in a few days.

If you implement any of the rebalance plans i put forward i'll send you some hungarian hookers at xmas nbs

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."

104 (edited by Obi Wan Kenobi 2015-07-21 13:38:51)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

*Warning wall o text … sorry sad *

TBH the more i think about it the more im starting to agree (in principle) with the general ideas Jita & the pro "remove locking" camp. But could I propose another way to tackle this.

First off I like & agree with what Jita has said about emergent game play. In a sand box game where players are given a variety of tools, the possibilities for player actions can be endless & thus more entertaining smile 

So when looking at this Issue why not embrace risk vs reward even more.
Why remove a feature when instead we simple expand the options & the rewards given.

As it stands right now there is no reward (or not enough) for a station owner to keep their station unlocked.  The fact is you get greater benefit by locking a station (less risk)

The idea is this.
Why not allow a station owner to decide for them selves if they keep a station locked or unlocked like we currently have BUT provide some real rewards for station owners that keep their outposts open.

An unlocked station could allow the owner to maybe:    

  • Set the rate of market tax

  • Set a Tax rate on Missions or..

  • Get a nic reward from The Syndicate for missions that players complete that were accepted in their station.

  • Allow a corp to recoup a % of the waste from refining ( could even add a new skill for CEOs that allows a corp to do this)

  • Maybe even unlocked stations get the ability for higher level missions..

A locked station tho might get say.

  • Reduced ability OR no ability to manipulate taxes

  • A greatly reduced recuperation % of the waste from refining

  • But you get 100% security from people not being able to dock.


Doing something like this would also give added benefit & a boost to Beta in general.

In fact you could extend this idea in some form to Gamma outposts. This would encourage emergent game play & the formation of neutral alliances ( NRDS ) on these islands thus opening up even more content to new players & corps while they are young & unable to hold there own in PVP or economy.

Any way something to consider smile

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

105

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

I like the idea of that but I don't think you need locking. If you make station services lucrative enough its worth fighting for anyway.

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."

106 (edited by Obi Wan Kenobi 2015-07-21 13:42:06)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Jita wrote:

I like the idea of that but I don't think you need locking. If you make station services lucrative enough its worth fighting for anyway.

Well thats the thing why not just leave it upto the players. Doing that allows for far more emergent game play than just removing it whole sale

I forgot to say tho that the ability to lock or unlock a station should have a very long cool down so to stop corps locking & unlocking station when ever they feel like.

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Obi: the problem is that people are very hesitant (and rightfully so) to put anything into a base and live there if there is even a slight chance that one nice morning they will be locked out for whatever reason, with their assets stuck in there.

108

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

DEV Zoom wrote:

Obi: the problem is that people are very hesitant (and rightfully so) to put anything into a base and live there if there is even a slight chance that one nice morning they will be locked out for whatever reason, with their assets stuck in there.

Exactly right. And the point of the change is that not every Corp has the muscle to force the issue and beta shouldn't be shut off to these people.

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."

109 (edited by Obi Wan Kenobi 2015-07-21 14:30:19)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

DEV Zoom wrote:

Obi: the problem is that people are very hesitant (and rightfully so) to put anything into a base and live there if there is even a slight chance that one nice morning they will be locked out for whatever reason, with their assets stuck in there.

Risk should always be part of the game smile infact that is what your game is built around

First:
The thing is players will take the risk to prove my point. look at that other game stEVE. 10,000s of people have their assets in stations which they can loose access to. why do they do this? in part there is the content. the reward. the pvp. & the game play style that so many enjoy.

Second.
If they do loose access you have a number of options.
1. see your going to lose & evac out.
2. if you have already lost access remotely sell your items on the market OR
3. make a contract to move your items out.

Third.
Perpetuum has some stEVE is only just putting in. Free port mode. how long does it take to be able to lock a station? about a day? why not increase the stability % needed from 50% to 80% or 90% ?

Risk is not the reason people dont live on Beta it never has been. The problem with Beta is reward.

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

110

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

First:
The thing is players will take the risk to prove my point. look at that other game stEVE. 10,000s of people have their assets in stations which they can loose access to. why do they do this? in part there is the content. the reward. the pvp. & the game play style that so many enjoy.

Most of those alliances started out in low sec and npc 0.0 where they had some of the risk but not all. Thats what we are trying to create here.

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)

Jita wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

Obi: the problem is that people are very hesitant (and rightfully so) to put anything into a base and live there if there is even a slight chance that one nice morning they will be locked out for whatever reason, with their assets stuck in there.

Exactly right. And the point of the change is that not every Corp has the muscle to force the issue and beta shouldn't be shut off to these people.

But that's not an issue of outpost control. that is an issue of power projection & the ability to crontrol large areas of the game world either directly or thru proxies.

Jita wrote:
Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

First:
The thing is players will take the risk to prove my point. look at that other game stEVE. 10,000s of people have their assets in stations which they can loose access to. why do they do this? in part there is the content. the reward. the pvp. & the game play style that so many enjoy.

Most of those alliances started out in low sec and npc 0.0 where they had some of the risk but not all. Thats what we are trying to create here.

Those do exist as Beta 1 NPC Stations
Sure why not put a NPC stations on BETA 2 islands.

But when it comes to outposts give players more options & incentives.

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

112 (edited by Obi Wan Kenobi 2015-07-21 14:01:51)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Man this is a convo that would be really great to have on TS lol

JOKE TS ? tongue

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

113

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Honestly Obi, we've done this argument to death for the last three months. The decision has been made to try unlocking and this is to discuss how to make it successful and ownership aspirational.

Keep up with the damn discussion big_smile:D:D

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."

114

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

Man this is a convo that would be really great to have on TS lol

JOKE TS ? tongue

I'm all for a get together to discuss proposals in a couple of hours if the devs feel it would help

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."

115 (edited by Obi Wan Kenobi 2015-07-21 14:16:12)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Jita wrote:

Honestly Obi, we've done this argument to death for the last three months. The decision has been made to try unlocking and this is to discuss how to make it successful and ownership aspirational.

Keep up with the damn discussion big_smile:D:D

The thing is tho corps do need to have locking as an option at some level of stability. History testifies to this. Just look at what Lemon did to foom.
what m2s & others did way back in the day.

Even with locking station camping can still be done but it now puts the risk on the camper.
If this is removed wholesale, the trolls will have a field day. And the forum threads will start up demanding locking. it may not happen over night. but it will happen.


Jita wrote:
Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

Man this is a convo that would be really great to have on TS lol

JOKE TS ? tongue

I'm all for a get together to discuss proposals in a couple of hours if the devs feel it would help

sent you a forum PM

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

116 (edited by Burial 2015-07-21 17:34:55)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

Risk should always be part of the game smile infact that is what your game is built around
...

The risk of losing assets during island usage is fine if the players can at least break even with the increased reward. The problem is that the current next step for corporations looking to grow beyond Alpha immediately has the risk of losing everything in the outpost within a couple of days.

As long as it's the case, corporations will stay averse to moving out of Alphas.

---

People suggesting more land as a fix for population reminds me of people suggesting the game needs bigger population to attract more population. Neither of them is *** true. 18 islands should be more than enough for the population to grow out of what we have now, if the underlying mechanics worked.

You can add islands and they'll fail just like all the influxes did because the game doesn't provide intuitive growth mechanics for corporations looking to grow out of Alpha.

Forcing corporations into alliance is not intuitive growth mechanic.
Forcing corporations into 3 stations to get ganked over-and-over is not intuitive growth mechanic.

Get that right and the population will grow along with the corporations.

Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

The thing is tho corps do need to have locking as an option at some level of stability. History testifies to this. Just look at what Lemon did to foom.
what m2s & others did way back in the day.

Do you really think new corporations, straight out of Alpha, will even try to get an outpost from big alliance(s)?

Options right now is either join an alliance, or grow on Alpha until you're ready to claim an outpost from an alliance, and defend it from getting locked off. Players will stick around if they're behind but still can have their way of fun. If they're that much behind, and are forced to live on Alpha, they'll leave.

Perpetuum has to be one of the hardest games for new players.

117

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

DEV Zoom wrote:

Obi: the problem is that people are very hesitant (and rightfully so) to put anything into a base and live there if there is even a slight chance that one nice morning they will be locked out for whatever reason, with their assets stuck in there.

Zoom, you should know very well that a corporation cannot awake one morning the be locked out of their outpost. This fear alone is a miss interpretation of why people are avoiding or hesitant in venturing out in to beta as one normally would while progressing.

A Corporation must first take ownership from a corp and then defend that sap until the station breaks 50% stability to perform a lock.

I can reference a number of examples where I have taken a station, locked the owners out and either gave them their assets or with held them and those players no longer exist/play PO.

This is a feeble attempt to stimulate play but again REWARD, is needed on beta for emergent game-play. This game was designed with rock-paper-scissor balance and has done nothing be step farther away from this with each update and balancing pass.

If Alpha is pure safety, Beta is full risk, and Gamma is self-secured. Beta should be the most beneficial to live as it carries the greatest risk. (takes longer to crack a gamma station than beta and lock the player out )

Focus on enabling INTUITIVE methods for asset/nic generation that is GREATER than Alpha and Gamma for combats and trade offs for industry that out weigh Alpha but can compete with Gamma.

I used to out farm alpha spawns on beta with explosions for loot pre-beacons. Now i can do a weeks worth of farming in a hour or two using beacons. THERE IS NO REASON TO BE AT RISK CURRENTLY on beta and unlocking stations doesn't change that, the only ones who do risk it are the uninformed, thus they are punished.

Re-Balance bots BACK to rock-paper-scissors with fits that are viable, the current balance allows for longer fights than previous balance but its a stepper curve for new players to conquer because current fits come down to best in slot modules and max extensions to 'brawl'

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle

118

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Burial wrote:
Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

The thing is tho corps do need to have locking as an option at some level of stability. History testifies to this. Just look at what Lemon did to foom.
what m2s & others did way back in the day.

Do you really think new corporations, straight out of Alpha, will even try to get an outpost from big alliance(s)?

Options right now is either join an alliance, or grow on Alpha until you're ready to claim an outpost from an alliance, and defend it from getting locked off. Players will stick around if they're behind but still can have their way of fun. If they're that much behind, and are forced to live on Alpha, they'll leave.

No new corporations will be able to achieve without a vet literally guiding them each step of the way, period.

even then the vast majority of that vets job will be minimizing losses to prevent burn out because competing toe to toe with vets who are targeting you in the current state is ungoldy.

You may as well be fighting M2S all over again with their duped fleets.

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle

119 (edited by Burial 2015-07-21 15:45:01)

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Lemon, I agree with you, however I think we should provide developers with set of concrete ideas that they're not going to develop for years. Players know a lot more about the game than they do.

120

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Lemon wrote:

THERE IS NO REASON TO BE AT RISK CURRENTLY on beta and unlocking stations doesn't change that, the only ones who do risk it are the uninformed, thus they are punished.

This is true. Unlocking stations and changing sparkls are two pieces of a puzzle. Without the reward you wont get the tip over needed. That said we have to get one piece at a time sorted.

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."

121

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

So what do we have to look forward to? Station Games?  As it stands now if you go onto an island you don't own looking to get a sap you have to commit your fleet.  If you open stations all that's going to happen is "Oh were out numbered" Everyone docks and no pvp is going to happen.  No need to run gank fleets when you can just jump into station.  This has to be one of the worst idea's the dev's have listened to.  Isn't there already an unlocked Beta terminal why not keep those the way they are and allow people to produce out of those? Production seems to be the only argument people have about opening up the stations so that's one positive with how many negatives.  Come'on

122

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Rovoc wrote:

same old

We have had this discussion over and over. Your a little bit right and a little bit wrong but the point is there needs to be progression and that's what we are going to get.

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)

Lemon wrote:

THERE IS NO REASON TO BE AT RISK CURRENTLY on beta and unlocking stations doesn't change that, the only ones who do risk it are the uninformed, thus they are punished.


really, i want to see anyone who says that, running around beta during peak activity time, starting with max 10M nic and a 1 month old account.

oh, and doing anything else then ninja epri mining with an argano or artefacting.
please proof that you have zero risk when you are just "informed" how things work, and without access to proximity probes aside of the ones you can afford, or multiple alt accounts...

*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

124

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

I have a series of questions I'd like to ask Avatar Creations in a whole:

What do you see for your Beta Islands?

1.  Alliance Held property where large groups of individuals hold faction specific islands?

2.  Smaller Alliances independently holding each island one in it's own?

3.  Entities on a Corporation level holding different terminals on the same island?

Before we continue this discussion it would be wise to figure out which the "developers" have in mind for owning Beta because there is specific things that have to be reworked for each of those scenarios to be true.

Steam achievement Unlocked:  Being a Badass
http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/239407
Dev Zoom: I think its time to confess, Ville is my alt
Dev Zoom: Ville can be sometimes so sane it's scary.

125

Re: A prediction (about outpost locking)

Ville wrote:

I have a series of questions I'd like to ask Avatar Creations in a whole:

What do you see for your Beta Islands?

1.  Alliance Held property where large groups of individuals hold faction specific islands?

2.  Smaller Alliances independently holding each island one in it's own?

3.  Entities on a Corporation level holding different terminals on the same island?

Before we continue this discussion it would be wise to figure out which the "developers" have in mind for owning Beta because there is specific things that have to be reworked for each of those scenarios to be true.

This is true.

I personally would like to see the space an opportunity for all three. Wouldn't you?

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."