You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Well the price will crash and then as peeps stop buying stabilise again. You can expect the same from epi nory and all that shizzle.
Free eco...all good things!
Gremrod wrote:And now ICE prices get ready to rise and rise........
Jesus you people suck at economics. Ice prices will fall.
Umm yeah I was thinking the same thing. Nic aplenty and people will spend a premium on anything ... Limit Nic and buyers dry up and sellers need to lower prices to move product. That's my understanding anyways.
Although a nerf needs to be applied to the beacons, please consider the bigger picture. On its own the AoE rules on Beta and Gamma are sound in their own right, but when you introduced the ability to terraform, these mechanics allowed efficient farming of the beacons. Even the mission system, for the most part, is a sound system ... Players in these types of games need a stable and reliable method to grind for either standings or Nic or minerals or whatever. The problem arises when you introduce new mechanics that allow old mechanics to become quite easy. So nerf where needed, but please undersrand why a nerf is needed and maybe correct the actual problem.
I'm fully aware in the sense of the missions that you are aware of this and are in the process of revamping the mission systems ... It just hasnt happened yet and in the meantime its make hay while the sun shines.
Its ironic how the call for this particular nerf came about, and those who are for it and those who are now against it.
Well the price will crash and then as peeps stop buying stabilise again. You can expect the same from epi nory and all that shizzle.
I said they would rise, not stay there. Also it doesn't mean they will rise becuase I said so.... 
Its ironic how the call for this particular nerf came about, and those who are for it and those who are now against it.
Edit: I don't care tbh.
The problem is that you are still thinking in "powerblocks". Who will stand up for everyone else who are not part of any beta/gamma powerblock and are just simple players?
These 'powerblocks' only have a slim numbers and any real population could push them all out of a beta very easily. As far as gammas go, well thats until there is enough players to siege them and take them within a reasonable ammount ot time to make it worth it.
But isnt this creating that "conflict" players need to fight over? Controlling the nic flows?
*Remember how much that nic flow is/should, be reviewed*
But why are we "removing" instead of "adjusting" a pro to being on Beta which rolls in to supporting gamma life?
I have funded my gamma/play exclusively off buy tokens from beta players, thus no need for me to go near the beta's and letting them grow/learn.
Nerf it, you have my full support.
This one
Anni hit the nail on the head with this one.
it was a mere coincidence, really. Everyone here in this topic probably had more direct contact with DEVs then i had in the last 1,5 years.
from support ticket back and forth to ingame chat, or playing with their alts ingame... if there are such
I agree I just like to bust your balls, its too much fun.
Its going to be nerfed, get over it.
DEV Zoom wrote:The problem is that you are still thinking in "powerblocks". Who will stand up for everyone else who are not part of any beta/gamma powerblock and are just simple players?
These 'powerblocks' only have a slim numbers and any real population could push them all out of a beta very easily. As far as gammas go, well thats until there is enough players to siege them and take them within a reasonable ammount ot time to make it worth it.
While this is true, that would simply replace one powerblock with another, and for any kind of CSM thing, powerblocks that all voted for one candidate would be at an advantage, despite the fact that these powerblocks will likely represent a minority of game pop.
Also I feel I should clarify, when I said exploit in this thread earlier, I wasn't implying Merkle or anyone else was cheating, more like bad design was being exploited by the players to earn NIC out of proportion to what was originally intended, and that given that was happening no one should be surprised when the nerf bat hit.
I don't understand why everybody in this thread is whining.
Just because you loose possibility to place 4 of them that near, that you have chain reaction on 20 NPC at once? There will still be enough fun if you can set only one beacon a time within 200m.
And it is still easy enough farming Beacons after patch. But please whenever economy is going to suffer from unbalanced game feature devs are required to react fast and proper.
New player will not stop playing because that feature got removed, he will stop playing, if he feels that he cannot compete with old corps unless being on Gamma.
Also I feel I should clarify, when I said exploit in this thread earlier, I wasn't implying Merkle or anyone else was cheating, more like bad design was being exploited by the players to earn NIC out of proportion to what was originally intended, and that given that was happening no one should be surprised when the nerf bat hit.
Thanks, I'm quoting this too because this is what this is about. Trying to somehow do a workaround only to grab on to some unintended but lucrative mechanic would be just a can of worms. We can certainly look into beta and gamma income rates, but when we change something there then at least we know what we changed it for, instead of it being a side effect of something else.
Even at 500m you can build a funnel and drag them down to do the same thing tbh. The problem is the popcorn effect due to explosion damage not the number of beacons. If someone put down 50 beacons without explosion damage they would just have an ultra hard spawn.
Possibly do the placement change on Gamma, because this is where beacons plus terraforming = unproportional Nic ... But leave the multiple beacon placement possibility in effect on Beta. This would allow more danger for those running the beacons in the sense the NPCs tend to charge the players and other players could "interrupt" the ones running the beacons. Since Beta is "worthless" this would give some incentive to do something there, and with risk.
To balance the # of beacons doable at a time simply reimplement damage to containers and modify the field can's hit surface size to adjust the % damage taken to a reasonable amount. This will allow you to throttle AoE-Chain farming but still keeping it as a means to gamma income.
Review the total reward you want for 1 player running missions on Beta, make it enough to support the risk and be rewarding. Adjust beacon cost or token rewards to tweak the balance of beacon flow.
Review this system for multiple accounts. Should a mission be more rewarding with 1 random variable preventing multiple accounts, while less rewarding missions are static and multi accountable. Obvious if using multiple accounts is allowed is still to be deterined but we should just tweak values and throttle it where we want it.
It is a great flowing stream of income/nic across the market both helping new-aver-vet players. Just control the flow dont stop it.
Edit: What if we make Token's that rare resource people fight over?
Edit: What if we make Token's that rare resource people fight over?
Welcome to two months ago.
There are good reasons why containers should not take dmg by AoE. If you have a NPC spot on beta where NPCs can't be "pulled" you would have no reason left farming there.
And if you need to do beacon after beacon, you have still enough to do on Gamma, as this is still "better" than any regular NPC spot.
Killing the patient to cure cancer, comes to mind...
It is fun shooting beacons. Well its fun if one does not spend two weeks all day long,,,,,shooting beacons.
The gooo needle goes from one beacon a week to 1000 beacons a week. Taking addicts off their goo juice cold turkey can give the game a heart attack...
Three beacons at a time, is fun,,,for me,,,with my friends... on a Sunday morning. If you are changing the beacon activation numbers,,,Three is the correct number....
One player can hatch three beacons. it is the same as one player one beacon...and it still gives advantages to the beacon grinders. The correct number is three.
If all the numbers are crunched and a balloon is launched with the answer,,,,Three is seen by all.
A totally biased oppinion from me is that Three would be cool as the limit on beacons placed in one spot......
If i cant hatch three beacons at once,,,I will shoot this dog.
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 3 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
Generated in 0.055 seconds (76% PHP - 24% DB) with 24 queries
Copyright © Avatar Creations
