Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

now,mesmer base speed 75, kain 100, arbalest 117, yagel 120. wtf

need make, mesmer 75, kain 100, arbalest 125, yagel 150 ok? or mechs will very fast and will kill assaults lol

Just @ Game

27 (edited by Crepitus 2016-04-26 14:22:07)

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Jita wrote:

I haven't made a single personal insult in the thread. I said his post was bad, he doesn't have a clue about what he is talking about and his idea of a 20% nerf to industry is idiotic.

I mean honestly, can anyone think of a single industry task or mission where you travel 100% of the time? Of course not.

All missions are mostly travel time. All other activities have substantial travel time components. That you pretend this isn't a thing is *** pathetic and self serving; as always.

Buffing assault/light speed would have had the same effect as far as combat balance goes. Why is it always nerfs?

Tell me how nerfing industrial speed was needed *at all*?

Population graphs

<GM Synapse> please don't abuse our fresh players before blowing them up. And for god sakes, don't do that after it!

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Crepitus wrote:
Jita wrote:

I haven't made a single personal insult in the thread. I said his post was bad, he doesn't have a clue about what he is talking about and his idea of a 20% nerf to industry is idiotic.

I mean honestly, can anyone think of a single industry task or mission where you travel 100% of the time? Of course not.

All missions are mostly travel time. All other activities have substantial travel time components. That you pretend this isn't a thing is *** pathetic and self serving; as always.

Buffing assault/light speed would have had the same effect as far as combat balance goes. Why is it always nerfs?

Tell me how nerfing industrial speed was needed *at all*?

Maybe we do missions differently but when I do harvesting missions I'm moving maybe 30% of the time max which would be a 6% nerf. Combat missions you move more but now that they are very easy if your not doing squad missions (and who does) you can easily use a mk2 mech and not have any reduction in efficiency.

The sky isn't falling, dry your eyes.

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: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Jita wrote:
Crepitus wrote:
Jita wrote:

I haven't made a single personal insult in the thread. I said his post was bad, he doesn't have a clue about what he is talking about and his idea of a 20% nerf to industry is idiotic.

I mean honestly, can anyone think of a single industry task or mission where you travel 100% of the time? Of course not.

All missions are mostly travel time. All other activities have substantial travel time components. That you pretend this isn't a thing is *** pathetic and self serving; as always.

Buffing assault/light speed would have had the same effect as far as combat balance goes. Why is it always nerfs?

Tell me how nerfing industrial speed was needed *at all*?

Maybe we do missions differently but when I do harvesting missions I'm moving maybe 30% of the time max which would be a 6% nerf. Combat missions you move more but now that they are very easy if your not doing squad missions (and who does) you can easily use a mk2 mech and not have any reduction in efficiency.

The sky isn't falling, dry your eyes.

You're wildly inconsistent. Even though we disagree about the magnitude here, you're saying a further mission nerf doesn't matter after asking for payouts to be increased for weeks. Even at the level you're talking about that effectively negates 3 levels of EP skill bonus for mission specific extensions. You also didn't answer the question. Nor have the devs.

Population graphs

<GM Synapse> please don't abuse our fresh players before blowing them up. And for god sakes, don't do that after it!

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Crepitus wrote:
Jita wrote:
Crepitus wrote:

All missions are mostly travel time. All other activities have substantial travel time components. That you pretend this isn't a thing is *** pathetic and self serving; as always.

Buffing assault/light speed would have had the same effect as far as combat balance goes. Why is it always nerfs?

Tell me how nerfing industrial speed was needed *at all*?

Maybe we do missions differently but when I do harvesting missions I'm moving maybe 30% of the time max which would be a 6% nerf. Combat missions you move more but now that they are very easy if your not doing squad missions (and who does) you can easily use a mk2 mech and not have any reduction in efficiency.

The sky isn't falling, dry your eyes.

You're wildly inconsistent. Even though we disagree about the magnitude here, you're saying a further mission nerf doesn't matter after asking for payouts to be increased for weeks. Even at the level you're talking about that effectively negates 3 levels of EP skill bonus for mission specific extensions. You also didn't answer the question. Nor have the devs.


Anni quite adequately answered your question so I don't think anyone else needs to - without it industrial mechs have no role. And its hardly a nerf, you talked about  20% industry nerf which is patently ridiculous. Most industrial stuff is done standing still such as mining and harvesting. You perhaps had harvesting missions in mind but 6 isn't 20 and that's one very small part of the wider picture.

Harvesting missions are actually better nic than any other mission for a one character player so arguably a nerf isn't a bad thing even if I believe mission income as a whole could do with a boost.

I'm not inconsistent, balance is a nuanced game aspect and this change had some great positives with some minor negatives. Yet here you are with your bolds and reds and long winded attack posts on the Devs for one of the few minor changes that makes total sense. That's why your post is bad, your statements about balance are idiotic and you don't have a clue - you should stop posting and listen to people like Syndic and Ville who actually post changes of value some of the time.

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."

31 (edited by Gekko 2016-04-26 18:09:26)

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Speed redction is good for all HM because it'll feel more realistic, so those machines will actually walk and move instead of sliding.

The problem of walking time is not a problem of base robot speed. It's more because of the lack of warp/cruise/glide mode of robots(like +200% speed, -70% defence, -70% dmg, -x% demob res and glide animation). Or other ways to travel faster.
Increasing the base speed just because of travel time is a bad idea.

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

I would say its more a problem of content density. Compared with some more theme park MMOs where its 10 seconds walk between spawns it seems sparse. Faster walking doesn't change this, it just makes a game feel small.

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: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Jita wrote:
Crepitus wrote:
Jita wrote:

Maybe we do missions differently but when I do harvesting missions I'm moving maybe 30% of the time max which would be a 6% nerf. Combat missions you move more but now that they are very easy if your not doing squad missions (and who does) you can easily use a mk2 mech and not have any reduction in efficiency.

The sky isn't falling, dry your eyes.

You're wildly inconsistent. Even though we disagree about the magnitude here, you're saying a further mission nerf doesn't matter after asking for payouts to be increased for weeks. Even at the level you're talking about that effectively negates 3 levels of EP skill bonus for mission specific extensions. You also didn't answer the question. Nor have the devs.


Anni quite adequately answered your question so I don't think anyone else needs to - without it industrial mechs have no role. And its hardly a nerf, you talked about  20% industry nerf which is patently ridiculous. Most industrial stuff is done standing still such as mining and harvesting. You perhaps had harvesting missions in mind but 6 isn't 20 and that's one very small part of the wider picture.

Harvesting missions are actually better nic than any other mission for a one character player so arguably a nerf isn't a bad thing even if I believe mission income as a whole could do with a boost.

I'm not inconsistent, balance is a nuanced game aspect and this change had some great positives with some minor negatives. Yet here you are with your bolds and reds and long winded attack posts on the Devs for one of the few minor changes that makes total sense. That's why your post is bad, your statements about balance are idiotic and you don't have a clue - you should stop posting and listen to people like Syndic and Ville who actually post changes of value some of the time.

Anni's post is about further specialization - which I also disagree with - playing with fits is one of the few remaining entertainment aspects (this is supposed to be fun after all, right?). There is nothing nuanced about a flat nerf to multiple bot types. The rest are your opinions, you go on to defend your inconsistency. Nor does it show why buffing the underprivileged would have some how been worse for the game than nerfing the unintended.

The onus to prove why indy speeds needed to be nerfed too should have been on the devs who have given no explanation. Sweeping changes should be extensively tested, put to a vote restricted to active players before being blindly implemented.

Unlike you, I talk to the people you cite. Ville doesn't think the server can handle an assault/light bot speed increase. That might be, but balance changes shouldn't be made for hardware/bandwidth limitations, especially without real discussion. I guess it doesn't really matter since there are ~20 people playing. I'm bored at work so why not argue? QQ got the *** changes put in the game, maybe it can get them removed. cool

Population graphs

<GM Synapse> please don't abuse our fresh players before blowing them up. And for god sakes, don't do that after it!

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Jita wrote:

I would say its more a problem of content density. Compared with some more theme park MMOs where its 10 seconds walk between spawns it seems sparse. Faster walking doesn't change this, it just makes a game feel small.

Maybe you should start on alpha and then try roaming across to and around gammas. Real world travel times are a thing just like in EVE.

Population graphs

<GM Synapse> please don't abuse our fresh players before blowing them up. And for god sakes, don't do that after it!

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Gekko wrote:

Speed redction is good for all HM because it'll feel more realistic, so those machines will actually walk and move instead of sliding.

The problem of walking time is not a problem of base robot speed. It's more because of the lack of warp/cruise/glide mode of robots(like +200% speed, -70% defence, -70% dmg, -x% demob res and glide animation). Or other ways to travel faster.
Increasing the base speed just because of travel time is a bad idea.

true.
but perp is in line with the majority of games theses days, which allow you to "Always run". Due to the DEVs inability to code it, we also have no "acceleration", rendering those three walk-cycle stages that light bots and assaults have into a unknown and superflous feature.

but when you "always run" at zero penalties, what reason would there be to walk or crawl?

Jita:
content density is something even multi-million-dollar, so-called AAA titles do very wrong, when thei work based on quantity over quality. Perp's static spawns had a bit of "quantity", but close to zero quality.
out of 50 spawn locations per island, we had like 4 usefull spawns for grind, and depending on your mission 49 obstacles you had to walk around to get to the one for your mission.

when they decided to make spawns non-aggro orange npcs, the quality dropped even another rank, turning most npcs into bad animated decorations that only cost server-CPU power, and client network bandwidth.

btw, whats really missing right now, are more distinct and specialised slope restrictions for all bots, for example, giving the waspish the best slope capability of all bots ingame would not only be more realistic (its the bot with the lowest profile with widest leg placement. Only yagel and prometheus come close to that.

last but not least, DEVs need to get rid of universal ammo and equalized resists, remove the additional slots from mk2 mechs.

Tl;dr: DEVs need to put back RPS and equipment choices into the game.

*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

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Crepitus wrote:
Jita wrote:
Crepitus wrote:

You're wildly inconsistent. Even though we disagree about the magnitude here, you're saying a further mission nerf doesn't matter after asking for payouts to be increased for weeks. Even at the level you're talking about that effectively negates 3 levels of EP skill bonus for mission specific extensions. You also didn't answer the question. Nor have the devs.


Anni quite adequately answered your question so I don't think anyone else needs to - without it industrial mechs have no role. And its hardly a nerf, you talked about  20% industry nerf which is patently ridiculous. Most industrial stuff is done standing still such as mining and harvesting. You perhaps had harvesting missions in mind but 6 isn't 20 and that's one very small part of the wider picture.

Harvesting missions are actually better nic than any other mission for a one character player so arguably a nerf isn't a bad thing even if I believe mission income as a whole could do with a boost.

I'm not inconsistent, balance is a nuanced game aspect and this change had some great positives with some minor negatives. Yet here you are with your bolds and reds and long winded attack posts on the Devs for one of the few minor changes that makes total sense. That's why your post is bad, your statements about balance are idiotic and you don't have a clue - you should stop posting and listen to people like Syndic and Ville who actually post changes of value some of the time.

Anni's post is about further specialization - which I also disagree with - playing with fits is one of the few remaining entertainment aspects (this is supposed to be fun after all, right?). There is nothing nuanced about a flat nerf to multiple bot types. The rest are your opinions, you go on to defend your inconsistency. Nor does it show why buffing the underprivileged would have some how been worse for the game than nerfing the unintended.

The onus to prove why indy speeds needed to be nerfed too should have been on the devs who have given no explanation. Sweeping changes should be extensively tested, put to a vote restricted to active players before being blindly implemented.

Unlike you, I talk to the people you cite. Ville doesn't think the server can handle an assault/light bot speed increase. That might be, but balance changes shouldn't be made for hardware/bandwidth limitations, especially without real discussion. I guess it doesn't really matter since there are ~20 people playing. I'm bored at work so why not argue? QQ got the *** changes put in the game, maybe it can get them removed. cool

This is why your posts are bad. Even when your plainly wrong you post five paragraphs explaining why you are not.

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: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Crepitus wrote:

Anni's post is about further specialization

you didn't understand my post.

my post is not about further specialisation like all those calls from ville about it. I am against vertical progression in bot choices.

there is a fleet support bot, the termis... useless because a riveler has enough slots to not even do the RR better (one more repair arm + more tunings + more accumulator + more targets pre-locked), its also able to tank more and still runs faster then the termis.

ictus - how many complaints have you see how worthless the ictus became because you could to better with a cheaper industrial heavy (not that i have seen any doing it). with industrials heavy beeing speed nerfed, the ictus got a new bonus - as it can now close in to those RR-heavies.


now for the other speed differences - i disagree. the thing that has to be done, is to make lights beeing fast without having to rely on LWF, and with a review of how medium accumulators work.

*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

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Annihilator wrote:

my post is not about further specialisation like all those calls from ville about it. I am against vertical progression in bot choices.

I don't see how you can avoid that with what there is in game at the moment. I think maybe you all mean the same thing as well - just more choices that are more or less equal with maybe one bonus swapped for something else using existing models. That would be less about specialization and more about picking what topping you want on your ice cream, imo. I'm okay with that.

Annihilator wrote:

there is a fleet support bot, the termis... useless because a riveler has enough slots to not even do the RR better (one more repair arm + more tunings + more accumulator + more targets pre-locked), its also able to tank more and still runs faster then the termis.

You're right about that, the termis is pretty sad, although it's still a go to for newbie miners who don't have the DLC judging by my sales even just this last week. It's likely being used for missions though rather than real mining.

Annihilator wrote:

ictus - how many complaints have you see how worthless the ictus became because you could to better with a cheaper industrial heavy (not that i have seen any doing it). with industrials heavy beeing speed nerfed, the ictus got a new bonus - as it can now close in to those RR-heavies.

No. You'll still see most neuts on Yellow since they can dedicate all their accumulator to it and have more passive HP than an Ictus with a shield does with more slots. Ictuses are paper thin. There are a lot of Artemis MK2s with neuts, the only Ictus I've even seen in recent memory was a mk2 and that one had ECM support from his fleet.

Annihilator wrote:

now for the other speed differences - i disagree. the thing that has to be done, is to make lights beeing fast without having to rely on LWF, and with a review of how medium accumulators work.

Fine with me.

Population graphs

<GM Synapse> please don't abuse our fresh players before blowing them up. And for god sakes, don't do that after it!

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

There was fights where remote repairing rivelers where keeping up with assaults and lights.  That is sad.  This has always been a multifaceted problem:

Step 1:  slow down heavies,   The largest platform of weapons shouldn't be as fast as assaults.  I'm looking at this from a new player experience.  Can you imagine what the mindset would be if your in a T1 assault getting run down by a heavy?  Oh!  There is a perfect example:  Mroq.  See he was complaining about this exact thing!  He thinks you constantly be in a heavy and needs more EP.  Why?  Because of roaming heavy groups is all he sees.  Why because they are fast as ***.

Step 2:  Remove demob immunity from plates and make it, it's own module:  demob immunity should come at a price.  hit points.

The end goal is to stop power projection through in game mechanics not everyone sucking them selves off in a circle.

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.

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

ictus still has some legacy "nerfs" in its attributes

- same base mass as zenith, but by default heavier equipment
- missile slots have no alternative equipment choices, launchers are the heaviest weapons (no way to fit RSA)
- LoS requirement
- shortest locking range, missing the factional locktime bonus to compensate the lack of HEADSLOTS

and you are right. for the ictus beeng the only spec-ops mech that has to get into the Line-of-sight of DPS mechs, its strange that it is slower, and has no armor bonus.

maybe zoom could give the ictus 10% more base mass, together with 30% more base hitpoints
add the pelistal locktime bonus and
give it a 2% less accumulator cost for DRAINER and NEUTS ontop of the existing bonuses.
or a meaningfull bonus for missiles (10% Cycletime bonus per adv. robotics level)

*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

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Ville better show screen, how mech can be faster assault. Its normal? Heavy cant be faster, but mech can... where logic?
also I think the nonsense, your idea of speed. ant to run faster than an ostrich?

Just @ Game

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Ville wrote:

The end goal is to stop power projection through in game mechanics not everyone sucking them selves off in a circle.

No amount of mechanics changes in a low population game will prevent a small group from spoiling the game for everyone else. It's a sad fact of life.

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: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Ville wrote:

The end goal is to stop power projection through in game mechanics not everyone sucking them selves off in a circle.

Well we could remove alts (or at least reduce the number)  from the game ?  There, I said it.. Now watch for the howls of protest.

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

That'd cut population numbers into a quarter lol.

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.

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Ville wrote:

That'd cut population numbers into a quarter lol.

Yep it would, but I guess it depends on how you quantify "population" if you mean mains and alts then it sure would cut it down. If you mean just mains then maybe, maybe not so much.. In any case if there was ever a point in the game when you would consider making such a change it would be now while the population is so low would it not ?

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

I think there's actually very little wrong with the game at this juncture.

Sure, "balance" has a metric *** of issues thanks to Alf (demob immunity, ictus nerfbatted into the ground, EW nerfs, etc etc). That's a HUGE issue, but aside from that it's pretty much good.

It would be nice to see Beta 2's get a face-lift with terminals.

More frequent new content & features is what has the highest chance to bring people to this game. Rehashing the balance won't do it at this point, although it needs to be done "behind the scenes on the backburner" to reverse-engineer this nuclear fallout Alf left you with.

P.S.

Pretty much every time you see someone whining on the forums about Beta, take a peek in-game and check the following was true in the past month;
a) When they owned it, it was great
b) When they lost it, it was bad
c) When they couldn't get it back, its terrible change the game boohoo.

Then ignore that feedback. Seriously I'm not kidding. Too much damage has already been done by 2-3 emotional wrecks spilling their frustrations into the forums with batsh*tstupid ideas.

P.P.S.

This message is dedicated to The Poodle, long may he bark.

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

is the poodle pulling the cart now?

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Naismith wrote:

Pretty much every time you see someone whining on the forums about Beta, take a peek in-game and check the following was true in the past month;
a) When they owned it, it was great
b) When they lost it, it was bad
c) When they couldn't get it back, its terrible change the game boohoo.

Then ignore that feedback. Seriously I'm not kidding. Too much damage has already been done by 2-3 emotional wrecks spilling their frustrations into the forums with batsh*tstupid ideas.

P.P.S.

This message is dedicated to The Poodle, long may he bark.

While this part of your post neatly encapsulates Ville and his flip flopping over extra Beta outposts I don't think its fair in him. Some of his ideas are good once he gets out if the rut of only wanting things that benefit him.

ARF.

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: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

hey Jita i can make a deal and give jokes Lao.  big_smile

Re: Scheduled server downtime - 2016-04-25

Rovoc wrote:

hey Jita i can make a deal and give jokes Lao.  big_smile

I make deals with organ grinders, not monkies.

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."