Re: Gama Structure Petition

Zortarg Calltar wrote:

the main point is that ppl that dont have the research should not be able to build their own ct/prototype

Hit the nail on the head.

Those of you lucky enough to have your lives, take them with you. However, leave the mods you've lost. They belong to me now.

Scarab Kill Count:2

Re: Gama Structure Petition

Hunter seriously get off my sack.  Either post an intelligent response to the reasons you think the current system works. Or agree that the system needs to be changed.  All your doing is trolling me and complaining about the system that's already in place.  My point about the seths is just support that price isn't an issue if a single person or  producer can afford it.  As for population - steam is around the corner and this is something the game can benefit more from sooner than later.

Re: Gama Structure Petition

Hydra Merchant wrote:

Hunter seriously get off my sack.  Either post an intelligent response to the reasons you think the current system works. Or agree that the system needs to be changed.  All your doing is trolling me and complaining about the system that's already in place.  My point about the seths is just support that price isn't an issue if a single person or  producer can afford it.  As for population - steam is around the corner and this is something the game can benefit more from sooner than later.

you makes me laugh... disagreement equals trolling for you. smile

The theory of mutual interests
Why the crybabies wins?
Где Ханя - там победа (с)
DEV Zoom: No need to speculate...

Re: Gama Structure Petition

Maybe I got a bit wordy with you.

looks like 9 suppor
              1 non support

30 (edited by Hydra Merchant 2013-11-03 05:59:00)

Re: Gama Structure Petition

double posted by accident

31 (edited by Hydra Merchant 2013-11-03 05:58:10)

Re: Gama Structure Petition

my apologies I wanted a petition not a debate.  Fair enough You made 2 points of why you didn't like the idea.
I got a bit wordy with you.

looks like 9 support
              1-2 non support
               1 guy who posted and didn't say

with a total of 437 views

This petition could be going better.

32 (edited by kot 2013-11-03 10:51:23)

Re: Gama Structure Petition

I support it too.

Sure, the T3 terminal investment is slow to pay off and even with 5X multiplier it will require a lot of materials, but MPC has a lot of other items too that producers can benefit from.

Maybe T3 terminal production is something newbies should not think about much either.

Re: Gama Structure Petition

I see the problem not that much in T3 terminals, but in general T2+T3 buildings at all, for me terminal is one of the the most useless structures to bring to T3.

Major problem is the fact, that a building CT is even expensive if you don't need to proto. You get usually not that many buildings from a ct, with 7-20points degradation per run depeding on building.

On long term I think that should change, but for me this requires a general change in a lot facettes of gamma structures (way to take over "hostile" structures, behavior of different buildings, effort needed,...) as well as I think this requires larger playerbase with more healthy market in several aspects. So I support the general idea, but would not like to see this happen next 6 month.

34 (edited by kot 2013-11-03 11:52:13)

Re: Gama Structure Petition

You can already take over pretty much everything but the terminal. Terminal take-over would be nice indeed, but how would the enemy loot be handled then?

Re: Gama Structure Petition

I think I already mentioned after the research patch that buildings will eventually get the same treatment like robots and be part of the prototype circle too. When that should happen is another question, right now it's deemed low priority.