DEV Zoom wrote:

Lemon: you're talking about the 5% of multiaccounters who actually know about 3rd party apps, while we're aiming at the 95% who multiaccount because the game itself provides an easy mechanic to do it.

The amount of multi accouters used to be 5-10% of Perpetuum, the light client and affordable subscription didnt help slow that fire. I started at 1 account by month 1 i was at 2 and by month 3 I had 6.

My intent is not to cry wolf but simply show the good and bad in order to help you be prepared.
~~~

Here is a MultiBox Example and this will not be prevented from these changes.

Our side is 15 bots-2 Single account players equals 13 bots played across 7 people, all of which are dynamically changing who they support and their actions as the fight goes on.

Then enemy is 28~ at most seen in force, I cant comment on account/player relations.  The change that is going in will only prevent the 'mild' version of this.

Intended? The greatest foe to multi-boxing in PvP you have is your spotty connection nodes to the US, thaose d/c's are a majority of my mutli-box deaths.

Shadowmine wrote:

Sure, remove it completely. it still only really affects pvp. But if it makes you feel better Gunner, I will drive each miner to the field separately. It will add 10 minutes to the time it takes me to clear a mineral field.

Its not about stopping multi account users, its about reducing the competitive advantage gap of single and multi acct users. And if you think this is also the solution to nerfing multi acct industrials, I am all for it.

Lets take Industry and put it in a box and forget about it for now.

If we look at just the combat implications currently both the 'flagged' follow and 'lock' follow limits will only handi-cap your average player more so than prevent or slow down the most grave offenders. I will restate what I found configuring my OWN rig/accounts with 3rd party tools to test the limits, dev CRM can confirm these reported findings.

Example: Mutli-boxing has the drawbacks of pulling your attention away and in some-cases cost you for this.

1x5=5
1+1+1+1+1=5

Note the difference it simply took you to read those two methods of solving and relate that to Manual multi-boxing and 3rd-party assisted multi-boxing. Having 1 guy Play Seth and mirroring his actions across 2-4 more changes the battlefield exponentially. Imagine 3-4 Rivlers who follow that ONE remote repairer in  your corp  ACTIVELY repairing fleet members makes everything you are crying about now trivial.

@ZOOM
The fastest work around and most effective means to mutli-boxing is to take the "different" accounts you have and trade for all of the "same". Then install and upload my isboxer profile to now have all of your robots follow and mirror match your lead robot. Lets see someone beat the best PvPers taking 'roles' and playing them in PvP and simply bringing 4 Seths for DPS flown by Syndic and Lemon takes 4 extra rivlers that mirror his lead one. Oh I forgot bibi sitting in 5 zeny's applying 2x suppression to 10 enemies in the time it takes me to click all 10 for locking.

You simply remove the 'easy' work around the 'hardcore' players who are STILL here after this many years will take days to adapt to work around your 'fix'.

Joke......

@Zoom

What is the 'abuse' we are aiming to solve with the change you guys have come to

104

(235 replies, posted in Balancing)

Sieges wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

The small things like spark teleport and followbot can be put in either of these patches.

What are the issues with these two items? Are Spark Teleports broken, or...? And do we want to add, or remove, the ability to follow other robots? Right now you can approach them and that is sort of like following them, right?

They are going to rebalance how many sparks you can have overall.

they plan to leave follow but make it unavailable on a locked target. This does limit the passive abuse of this but also indirectly buffs the offensive abuse of this with 3rd party tools.

Honestly if gamma is being reset, it requires a response well beyond what my phone will easily allow

So even if we remove follow it takes me 3 key strokes for the following to go down.

Right click>*count to 4>tab>action key.

This enables 1-10+ robots to engage the same thing that the lead cliient is. If I have both mesmers and a zenith I have locked, fired and demobed my target with all my clients after only managing 1.

It's cool tho because no one cab follow anymore. Not like me running 5 mirrored repair bots to repair active targets is more of a issue than bob having bob Jr blind follow.

keep your eye on the target with mechanic changes

posted from mobile

TL:DR Assuming the servers are stable enough for population players will blind themselves with interferance before mass followboting can be used to any destructive means. as long as the enemy can match half to 2/3 of a dumb follow fleet they win with counters.

Honestly with disconnects it's more risky than anything and when you have more than 100 players all of this goes away.

106

(235 replies, posted in Balancing)

DEV Zoom wrote:
Martha Stuart wrote:

Question.

So we have all heard all of these plans in the last 2 months.  In what sequence can we expect to see all of this? So far i am expecting spark tele nerfs, gamma wipes, mission patch, etc etc. how and in what order are we gonna see this?  are we talking days on the gamma wipe or weeks? months?  When is spark nerf coming?

The timeline depends on how testing goes, but right now the priority is the new tutorial, then gamma, and things for Steam. The small things like spark teleport and followbot can be put in either of these patches.

If by "mission patch" you mean stage 2 of the assignment system, that was always slated for after Steam, that's why it was split in the first place.

I won't claim to be current on the happenings of his since I have not played but I have followed the forums. You guys seem to be finally making decisions but don't forget older lessons learned.

I worked closesly with dev crm and Alf in regards to the limits of followbots and 3rd party tools to manage them. The changes proposed in that thread will be a nerf to everyone but 3rd party users. if you seriously want to work to fix it let us know so we can show you just as I did others how we the players can and will break the system, so you can prepare for it.

This is what needs to happen with gamma, player dev team work to achieve your goal. What do you envision as gamma life, we know what it is. tell us the players how you want it, take our opinions and move forward achieve it.

zoom it's time to pull the curtain back and fix everything right once.

This is like you had a huge urge to explain pvp and just vomited this explanation out from your brain. While this is a ton of information, but you kind of left a bit of the direction out of it for people starting out.

You the player need to understand that this is a time based skills which level from 1 to 10, it takes roughly 3-5 Months to 'Cap' your first role. You will be competitive in that role even quicker.

To win in PvP you need to know your bot and every bots "golden limits" in PvP to begin winning consistently. These are things such as:

Never let a enemy close within 200m of a light weight frame Mech, because this is the bare-bone max stock range of a demob.

Always bring a 210+M demob if you dont have neutralizers to counter a shield trioar mk 2 tackle.

Once you know all these rules you will being to instinctively win every engagement by never falling in to situations that can cause your death.

108

(37 replies, posted in General discussion)

Cassius wrote:

Mongolia, your ratio list is limited to the agents who appear on the top 50 kills list. Others with 55 kills or less could have higher ratios, just saying.

I know of at least one person sitting at 49:0 for last year.

109

(163 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Arga wrote:

When my cable company offered me the premium channels for 1 year at special price of $50 I took it, and after the year I told them I was going to cancel if they didn't extend it, which they did because they didn't want to lose me.

When that EP starts dropping from 3 to 2 EP per minute, those players will feel like they are 'losing' something, it's human nature.

1 time incentives may be a way to entice people to a dying game, but the whole concept of GAP is based on Themepark games with level caps and instant PVP fixed sized battle games like DOTA.

The "GAP" in my view pertains to the amount of time one must perform to get back on their feet after a loss. When I go in to combat I can field the right tool for ANY combat situation with my accounts/EP/Assets. Should I lose this endevor it would take me less a few hours if that to recoup the loss if I even felt the need to instead of just grabbing a new one from my 'pile' of existing assets.

New players need to focus on attaining proper use of 1 role to excel in PO quickly with a account with their EP and for most this first role is not a very large money maker to fuel their endeavors. Couple this with the fact that I am the average player waiting for them in the first PvP zone there is QUITE a 'GAP'.

Most of the new-players I interacted with that came in-mass to PO were vet resistant and this only drove to their in-game problems to be exaggerated.

The majority of why this is such a issue currently is simply due to population and the current population trying to chop down what ever their opponent is currently using as their last leg via mechanic changes. There should be no doubt in anyone's minds that both sides use multiple accounts and at this point most likely to the maximum benefit on both sides.

Two years ago fleets were running at a 20-40% second account rate to players. This problem is only exagerated with population issues because the type of gamer who will perform this tends to have more of a vested interest in the game and thus may stay longer. This style certainly makes staying in a game with population issues much easier as you can handle all tasks in-house on your own easier than finding the right people to perform those same tasks.

The second we have population and these tasks are performed by individual players then the benefits of multi-accounting begin to waiver and eventually become more of a handicap than a benefit.

Existing Counters
INTERFERENCE..........
Population.....
Speed fits.....
e-war....
Moving....

The only logical changes that could or should come from this are to take a look at and review 'fire and forget' fits that are able to approach a target and require no user interaction to win the fight beyond approach.


Closing
Anyone who still log's in and plays this game is only building to have a further advantage over the new players coming. Because it doesn't matter if its 1 guy playing 5 or 5 guys playing to killing the 30-50+ new players. Then if they do manage to finally take you down after a few attempts you have another couple hundred fit HM's ready to go. Once they finally spec in to a color of mech though to counter or play together you have such high extensions and war chest you simply rotate your fleet composition to counter their new numbers thus continuing the land slide victories.

New players or single account players will always be crippled until they have the EP and gear to run the proper fits to beat the "cheese" mutli-account fits. It is easy once you have that knowledge and ability but the power to it is the ignorance of your enemy.

The biggest issue really is having the industry to supply your combat with mutli-account play because If I have 4 guys who run 4 Rivler Mk 2's 2-3 times a week I would be hard pressed to get 30 or 40 guys who could produce those same numbers  to fuel our PvP regardless of population. Let alone having the infrastructure to support and manage that many players properly to compete until the majority of them were in near maxed Rivlers.

111

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

This is great, do tell me more about this OP blood sparking.

@Zoom

Is their anything about how moving Epitron to beta will have a direct impact on new players I can clear up for you?


Yes, 1 things will not solve it all however it is always good to know what is broken and be fixing 1 thing at a time to hopefully be getting to where we want to be. I fully understand limitations on being able to deliver developed solutions. Hell much the back lash from this change can be handled with self control from the players.

@Burial

The Vets will always be on Beta/Alpha/Gamma but when you take the Epi and limit its access down to 6 islands. You then have noobs all the way up to the current power-houses interested. The question is how will this effect the average player or the new player? When a Power-house does operations it is quite different then say joe-smoe mining op or ninja op. 

You look at 6 islands for epi and I only see 3. Every island with a neutral outpost is not a option due to the ease a hostile can aggress from there. If we have 2 Power-blocks or even 3 that leaves the 3 other islands available.

Assuming I didnt have the luxury of having my Gamma structures I can tell you that eHarm would take and lock down 1 single Beta 2 Island to use for gathering. The time we spent not mining would be spent reminding others why this is our island and then sparking around the the Beta 1's for freebies.

AIC was formed by the players who left ToG to STAY on alpha and not PvP. They initially had no intentions of PvPing. I do not know of a single corp that has excelled in PvP that formed or grew on alpha before going to beta.

DISCLAIMER: I do not know indy nor do I try and say anything that has to do with balance. So Epi will bring fights however I do not think having your highest experienced and end game players being directed to the same location as your fresh out the station players.

Players want to PvP weather it is lvl 1, 10 or 100 most games just have brackets or zones for the different levels.  I dont play that other game but I am sure it doesn't just force its new players to walk in to the same room as their oldest to pvp. I have seen many quit after facing bots they deemed unbeatable that simply exploited their lack of game knowledge.

114

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

A dynamic that could soft limit this would be maybe some sort of generator system with outposts that allowed it to be tweaked as the populations rise and fall to only allow a "alpha" amount to spark in to a outpost within any given time frame. each spark uses power that recharges or something.

It could tie in to the level of facilities (making this a facility?)

Just spit balling here.

Burial wrote:

Lemon, you think that Gamma is a successor to Beta. That is not the case. They are completely different types of islands and I can see many vets not bother with Gammas at all in the future, simply because they are not for everyone.

If the successor hypothesis were to work, Betas should just be filled with smaller fields, weaker NPCs so-on so-on. With current mechanics, both island types cater to different player types, regardless of vet or newb status.


// typos -.-

I did not say Gamma was a successor I simply stated that new players only have 1 option for PvP BETA. Which is exactly where you are about to stick all your top indy churning corps and their equal in combat protection.

See its not when a new player finds a target and dies at his first taste of PvP. It is when they try and jump in to the island and are instantly shut down and denied at the gates for entire days while the islands are stripped.

Since you need Epi *soon only from beta* naturally developing to access Gamma requires first beta access.

You are forcing the New players to only have 1 choice to roam. Roam the same area where my T4 Rivler Mk 2's have to mine while being protected by my Mesmer Mk 2's.

You are sending them in to a room with a knife while jack there is waiting with his shotgun.  Another 10 are missing from that but who could remember all of them.

Now I am not here to say that this is or isnt a good thing, it defanitly adds to the PvP. However this does have a direct impact on new players.  Expensive Miners means Expensive defenders to match.

117

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

I did not think I needed to be this blunt but Yes, a flat cooldown would not do much to solve anything but create fustrations. However a flat timer will hamper the extreme abuse it wont stop anyone who is well prepared from working around it.

As with any discussion it is up to the interpreter to decipher sound discussion from smeared *** but to each their own.

Edit:

Lets work towards a real fix

118

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

The difference between a Inter-zone and a Spking is quite drastic  for power projection and response. Interzoning is not only vulnerable to being physically spotted in the game world but it also has a limit on how much force can move across it at any given moment.

Again this is not for the players who have multiple accounts and leverage cookie-cutter fits but for the none-hardcore stream-lined corps and their members.

Tux wrote:

You lead the gamma front for your corp which was very short lived .. but trust many of the tweaks and improvements made to gamma were in no way because of anything that had to do with you .. STC/Nebs and its Allies had done more for gamma at this point than any other entity in the game ... STC was one of the first corps to Deploy Gamma terminals... and were still here . .

From the sounds of it if it isnt instant gratification you dont want anything to do with it . . oh wait does arga speak for your corp or just you ?

I to was impressed with how enthusiastic STC and yourself dove out in to gamma after the revamp

However Arga was using a lot of "I" so I would have to say he was speaking for himself. I just want to say that Arga has been pretty spot on for the most part though.

Disclaimer: I do not speak for Arga or any other CIR member. Their words and posts are theirs and mine  alone. My words are mine alone and others alone. Alone my words are others and their words.

Sundial wrote:

Arga: Gamma industry is still worth it. The T3 facility levels combined with the mining auras and current levels of safety means its still worth it to live, mine, and produce on gamma. Even if they took that complete safety away, it would still be worth it. Now we just need to import epriton from players willing to take risks.

We have re opened an old forgotten style of gameplay, the high risk high reward miner. This is good for the game.

EDIT:

In reply to the ganking thing, I was never big on actually ganking miners. I only did it when I was in a roaming gang. I was however huge on ninja mining epriton and other ores on beta.

So basically Gamma is only beneficial in a all-or-nothing sense of investment, while requiring T3 to really only achieve the needed reward?

You want players to build this up and expand all the while supplying their day to day costs?

Tux wrote:

Ide still prefer to mine the unmolested mineral fields on gamma vs alpha. good luck with that one

and you dont think may others would be doing the same>?

these changes only benefit the play style that you and others have had over the years ...  your corp was never able to keep and hold gamma not because you guys didnt want to but because it didnt fit in your play-style. Instant gratification will be coming back soon brosef yarr

I am curious please go on about our play-style and how gamma did or did not fit in to it? Arga and myself are the best people to clear you up on that seeing, as we lead the gamma frontier

Burial wrote:

Right now the little guy is either buying Epriton on the market or throwing ninja mining ops, which would continue in similar manner after the patch hits live. Only difference is that vets with established gamma bases will have harder time getting Epriton, meaning the change actually benefits the little guys.

I should be building my mutli-tile siege bots/ammo and guns trying to kick over your castle competing to be king, while jr over there gets used to PvP on beta.

Which could all consume larger ammounts of Epi.

We need to continue to vertically grow in a time-based game to allow others room to grow. If we get to big for the shark tank all we can do is keep feeding off the bottom once there is no one left at our level and nowhere up to go. Its only a matter of time before the food below runs out.

@Zoom

Might as well flip a coin to make the right choice. Do you design the game to be enjoyable now or to be support a health population?

To not get to head over heals in theory's and possibilities to be blunt the road you are heading down is not easy and could work out or blow up. Forcing the conflict to be over epi is only going to cause a short-term increase in PvP but lead to the same if not a increase the rate at which PO is losing players.

PvP is not occurring and this is in a attempt to remedy this. Why not enable people to access PvP easier than try forcing fights through vulnerability.

How many Veteran corps do you see losing miners, hell go back to when we only had beta and the "veterans" never lost miners. These kinds of changes effect the little guy much more and may create a short-term stimulation but will inevitably in the long run cause more harm than good. How are these players supposed build bots to compete or even gamma building,while still just trying to stay alive to mine? *Epi is in everything*

Lets take this 1 step further.

Published Corporate Fits

125

(249 replies, posted in Balancing)

Tux wrote:

ummmm

http://static2.fjcdn.com/comments/I+m+s … 8a273d.png

Ill step out on a limb and say Ew balance is all about how fittings are done and everything can be countered wink

^

Although Minute adjustments may be justified nothing should change to the system.