126

(34 replies, posted in General discussion)

Ville wrote:

Not going to happen beast, only two sides.  Ever.

Styx

127

(249 replies, posted in Balancing)

Martha Stuart wrote:

LOL, give me my Zenith with 2 ECMS, an ECM tuning, and a suppressor and I will lock you out of the entire fight.  And thats only using 4 of my 6 head slots.  Barring you putting 4 ECCMS in your head slots, which would completely destroy your Mesmer build, you are down and out no questions asked.  To point out another gaping hole in your argument, can your Mesmer fire through a mountain, plants, small hills, or buildings?  didn't think so.

I have no problem with EW at its current level, the problem is that Zeniths/Vagas, don't need LOS.  They can do there thing from any place that is in range.  No other type of offense can make such a claim, and it shouldn't be this way.  All Jams/Supp/Neuts/drainers/demobs should be LOS, or they should all not be LOS.

Hopefully this means if I ever play again I will see more of you now that you have a fit your so confident in. I by no means am saying that EW is balanced however we have a lot of radical ideas being shot out. I would be glad to theory craft out some fits or openly discuss how it may play out or even go as far as to play it out.

You are running 1 account for this bot or what because any response by me will be 2+ of my own accounts. Given this is not balanced but when you speak to me then that is how it goes. In general I will agree a Zenith can shutdown a Mesmer 1v1 and deny his death. However He would have to maintain his flag and himself never kill the mesmer thus creating a stalemate of each player working their strength to their best.

128

(249 replies, posted in Balancing)

Burial wrote:

Anyway, you are completely missing the point here, Arga. This thread is not about vets going head to head. Vets will adapt to changes without problems.

So how is forcing the players who choose to attempt to e-war to their demise is good. They pilot maybe a camillion or even equip e-war to their arbalist or Kain to then have to walk in to LoS of a  HM to jam it? A bot that will lock them back after that jam in under 3 seconds and if for some terrible reason they are lacking in EP or Gear are now dead. You would need to completely redesign how the bots and modules as well as shields work to balance this.

@Martha

Arga was saying how silly that WOULD feel if they were FORCED to stand in LoS as ictus do now.

@Roaming

Speed and mobility is what wins here and a EW Mech is always faster than a HM and will always just outrun them assuming equal skill.

Arga wrote:
Blackice001 wrote:

I don't see a problem.... stc can't defend 13 beta sites against  dozens of hungry new corps... they will only defend the ones most beneficial to them, and the new guys can brag in general chat all day.

I bet they can.

Basically, 2 vets bots can roflstomp 15 new players quite handily.

My personal  record is 1 player using 3 bots killed 22 2month olds with no loses. The problem is that even if they killed that bot ithey still didn't impact my economy or wealth. I could do that another 50 times before I blinked. those are quite the odds to overcome and outlast.

@ep
a player has to have the knowledge and execute on that knowledge after leveraging it for 3+ months to only then be able to on par. They then need to have better gear to overcome most of the gap however I am forced to choose t4+ or t4 because I have that much to use freely.

We saw how many burnt out trying to keep up with the few billion m2s duped. I very may well have drastically more personally than they lost worth of duped gear.

130

(249 replies, posted in Balancing)

@ burial

You need to look at the whole picture, you assume a skilled vaga pilot. However if the mesmer for example is equally skilled it would take 4+ ecms to even slow me down. 10 second ecm with a 40 to 60 % to jam a target that relocks in under 3 seconds nd fires every 5.

You would nerd suppression to  lock the mesmer out of combat and one Eccm makes the supressions miss . You now have 2 bots trying to stop 1s dps. All this has to be done before you are 2 shot.

131

(5 replies, posted in General discussion)

Are you able to null all m2s kills on itself. I know they used a sequer mostly however a * could make same point.

Be cool to see lines ploting corp loses against kills, show how they developed in PvP

Awesome thanks ludlow that is awesome.

I think a new server being launched on a clean slate server in the most ideal location to supply the world would be the best avenue should any grouping of players 5k+ gain interest from steam.

The lesser server will always die off when you have two in any case as well.


Seems we have some CD overflow:

It brings a tear to my eye to see you all grown up STC, was just a little over a year ago that the very corp you are condemning enabled your corp to grow and thrive.

A lot is being said here and as the poster child of Noob slaying especially in regards to CIR. It is very tough to say we put any focus on them with me only having 1 kill on Blackhorn himself on Alpha. *Note I did let his follow bot get away*

Ludlow would it be to difficult to see a graph for the last how long showing the peaks of #Kills and then off to the side shows the top 5 corps. I know when I stopped playing it was always due to a dry spell of fights.

134

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Cassius wrote:

So you are saying the players who don't play are the ones who the Devs listen to? You spend $10 to have one account so you can post on the forums to attempt to influence a game you don't play. I spend $50 on my 5 accounts but also only have one voice on the forums, and find myself put into a position to defend a game I play against people who don't play.

You are completely stupid if for some reason you think I voice my opinion here simply for my own advantage. I am well aware, as is most of those I play with that the game is at a critical junction. If the game is not attractive to new players and cannot retain and drastically increase its population, it's done. Do you think I want a faulty mechanic in a game just because of my own benefit?

***, all we have is a difference of opinion.

Close, The "Majority" of gamers (yes even just sandbox games) do not play this game. This is a niche game it will not be everyones cup of tea, however there needs to be a way for the game to entice and support "peasant" players if you will because we have none.

We have a handful of die hard PvP players and another handful of Alpha indy/goal players that is it. Look at how WoW has had to adopt simplifying itself over the years to maintain its subscriber base. I am not familiar with stEVE but I am sure his growth has a pattern to its development style and growth. PO is not in that sweat spot and we need to get it there.

The kiddies need their instant travel, It just needs to be limited and governed properly.

135

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

This kind of thread really shows you just how different everyone views the game and situations within the game.

@The Blob Wins
Sparking is not currently broken having 30 attack only to have 100 spark in to defend. It is when those 100 show up and drop 20-40 to keep you busy, while another 20 or 30 are sent to the other remaining outpost that is located to your flank and deployed from. We are talking about a force having the ability to move undetected to gain instant superior positioning and secure a victory every time. This is 1 Island with many outposts that this is possible. To resolve it we need to prevent being able to not only spark to a specific island to deploy and engage becoming detected but to also  stay docked for sparking to another outpost that is more favorable to engage from as the dynamics change.

No one has done this to me but we all know this is possible. Any means to produce the same mobility on terrain makes you susceptible to being detected by either a detector main or follow account thus notifying me or the players of your movement. Which is drastically different than me dropping out of a terminal in front of you in a Kain being shot and flanking you in my Mesmer mk 2 6 mins later.

@Tux
Yes I choose to roam the sake of killing miners and running, I hate trying to be engaged in a challenging or engaging fight and if i could lose forget it I am docked.

@Beta Incentives
They exist, could they be more sure however beta is meant to be a building block to gamma. Beta is not meant to be the feeding ground for gamma. Rather it should be where people want to risk a little for a better reward while avoiding the competition for "safe resources".

We vets are supposed to be making our multi-tile siege bots focusing on taking out each other sand-castles while newer players are preparing to build their castles on beta and alpha. As we progress onward to more a growing population would ideally fill in behind to expand and explore the new content.

What we have now is a 0 to 100 by joining the existing power blocks and you are really only limited by your EP because if you know the right vets they are rich enough to supply you until you are self sufficient. When I  was new I wanted to go to beta to be able to expand my research faster than alpha players and to kill anyone who tried cutting in on my spawn farm. Today their i can freely farm on alpha uninterrupted and if I go to beta their is a high change I die to a bot that kills me before I even show him on radar signature.

@Zoom
Let me ask you, Do you think that anyone could take Hokk from the hands of Styx with 30 siddy's following him on Hokk with the spark system? Not even 200 Steam players could pry them off that island. Bigger, Faster, Farther Shooting, harder and  Higher Masked bots coming at them from every direction but hey they are still just trying to figure out how to go faster than 70KPH

Could you imagine the interference of 200 people, hope they would know what it is lawl

136

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Shadowmine wrote:

If this game becomes about who wants to spend the most time walking and dropping teleports. Then this game is dead where it stands.... Forcing players to spend 30 minutes traveling everytime they want to have a chance of pvp, and 30 minutes traveling back to where you came from afterwards is ***. And it is poor game design.

Shouldn't have to choose between mining or pvping. I should be able to do both.

It was once so however it was more like 45mins+ to get to that possible pvp. This is also why a lot of us stopped roaming to PvP. Its never fun to get all dressed up for the party to only get stood up </3

Lets look at  the fact that as a attacker NOW I need to still spend 10+ Mins in route to get to PvP. Once there I attack someone say a Miner. The defender now knows where I am as well as what I am using. They are then able (Assuming all preparations are made) to Teleport to the nearest base, deploy counter bots to engage.

So they are on this island, you are flagged and they now are responding to me the attacker. They can now simply deploy from 1 nearby-terminal or any other terminal. Assuming my enemy is of equal skill and size, they will beat my every move and turn period with the mobility provided from multiple deployments from terminals on the same island in PvP.

I want to prevent a group of attackers from being utterly shut down at every PvP  attempt  on their island roaming or sap.

137

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Cassius wrote:

The majority of you posting in this thread about changing SpT voluntarily stopped playing the game, continually preached how Beta's were dead and worthless. So you stopped actively playing the game, Beta's are worthless ... but the most important thing now is to change SpT because we are the dominant power in the game and control .. wait for it, .. all the Betas?

I've bolded and underlined the important part here. Perp is a game of conflict. Of course the largest and strongest corp is king of the hill. It's not broken, It's exactly the way it's meant to be

Most just post to be constructive and attempt to detract from some of the more extreme views that have been portrayed. This is also the only hot topic on the forums ATM that is current and not absurd.

Yes MOAR land so I can hunt even farther for the elusive Perpetuum player across all the islands.

138

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Merkle wrote:

This is quickly turning into defends have too much of a advantage.

You make it sound like you are going to lose something vital? Prior to sparking as the defender you had to either blood-port or be there to engage/defend. Now you are able to arrive and re-deploy as needed to maintain the upper-hand at all times.

Having personally fought against "blobs" and being One, seeing congo lines of bots coming from stations as fast as they die. I really doubt limiting the directions they can come at you is game-breaking and will save more than those it harms.

Changing this limits the gap between a experienced veteran and a newer-average player by not allowing me to obviously and freely outmaneuver and out deploy players. My bots shoot farther, Run faster, better hidden, and last longer so go ahead and let me always out position the attacker. They will never get very far if anywhere at all.

ESIT: With station LOCK OUTS the attacker is pants down once he is on your island and spotted. I am very surprised by the players here arguing that the attacker has the strength, when in fact their is not a single thing the attacker could bring that any of you, with that you would not have the EP/Fit to perfectly counter making it useless.

139

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Arga wrote:

This is what I'm talking about though, you've typed "comes in and flags up", except if they really outnumber the small group by that much, they all don't need to flag; and a smart FC will ensure they don't so they can spark elsewhere; this allows the FC to have more troops onsite without having to make the strategic decision to deploy them there for the lengh of the timer. If they really do have many more troops than the smaller guy, you simply can't 'trick' the smart FC with the timer, as they will only deploy the minimal amount needed to deal with site 1, while keeping enough reserve for the little guys that may try to hit site 2.

Arga

He is one of the players we are trying to protect. Hopefully he will become aware.

140

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

@Burial

We only need to set rules about Same island sparking. This will be a commonly used tactic if say 20-30+ people live on that island and it is their only land. Unlimited resources does not force larger groups to own larger territories.

Who says if they re-spark in to the same beta-terminal again after death is balanced.  What I want prevented is being able to leverage same island sparking to not only gain but secure superior positioning over any enemy force SAP or Roaming that comes on to the island. what is wrong with forcing players to make a tactical choice when deploying to a island that they have multiple deploy locations on, the defender already have the ability to properly counter the force present and dictate the engagement all/any engagements.

141

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Ok again you guys are still just screaming bloody murder and making this personal.

The problem is not 10 or 20 maybe even 40 sparking in to 1 terminal but the fact that they can do that and then *If * they want spark and deploy again within that same island to rapidly redeploy.

This is about the added movement that is allowed even after you have arrived and are in the active zone or desired area.

142

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

@ Zoom

I really am not surprised by the response to this. Increasing the PvP flag has nothing near a positive impact in anyway.

mongolia made great points to this.

This is getting a bit overly complicated in what the abusive means of sparking is and what needs to be limited to balance this.

143

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Shadowmine wrote:

So it is spark teleport that broke the game this time? What will you guys use as an excuse next, I wonder? None of you guys had a problem with it until your corps all caved and left the game. Sorry you guys cant hang with the big dogs. Keep working though, you will get there.

Cant change all the game mechanics to cater to 3 man corps. Its just not how it works.

Salty...

144

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

There is more than one way to keep a roaming group of assaults/mechs/HM's flagged and tied up on the field be it legs of plates or properly fit turtle tanks.

The idea is not for me, but rather the game as I love the ability with spark teleportation currently. However your average joe facing you or me utilizing this against him and moving bots that appear to be godzilla to him at every corner. He will not want to keep playing for very long.

If I were to spark to alpha I would need to have a bot large enough to move a interzone or beacons and the travel time involved+charge is significantly longer than spark-counter fit-deploy-intercept-win.

As the attacker you have already shown your hand once spotted by a defender. I am then able to pick and choose the perfect hand to beat you and deploy as the defender. You hand them almost guaranteed superior positioning no matter your move. The odds are very quickly becoming stacked in favor of one side, especially in a full loss death game.

145

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Burial wrote:

That's something that can happen regardless of Spark Teleportation. There's many stations that could be used without even using Spark Teleportation on Tellesis and Attalica. If someone wants to do it he will find means.

So maybe this is just me but I am not making a connection on how redeploying from the nearest alpha terminal is the same as sparking and redeploying from another terminal on the same island after already engaging someone.  Would you mind clearing that up.

If the majority thinks it is healthy to allow what I have stated then by all means lets allow it. I will wait to see if this is another "I told you so"  or I could be entirely wrong and it is balanced.

The record to beat is 3 days from the the first use to the balancing patch, currently held by the debut of the ERP Artemis.

Second place is either the L-Demob nerf or the Teleporter mechanic revamp.

I really am not comfortable with a flood of new players showing up knowing that I can on my own kill upwards of 25 at a time. Then be able to instantly move around to maintain supior positioning and mobility, while also having the ability to drop the red curtain in the same fashion. They tend to provoke that behavior in me and other *cough *cough

146

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

@Cassius: Amongst the screams of bloody murder I am simply trying to voice my reason.

TBF When discussing mechanics I really don't pay attention to corp tags as ATM with the current political situation it would be impossible for you to stop us from taking 1 island. ATM if we simply sent 10 guys to 1 island you could easily defined 1 front however if we attacked 3 over the course of 2 weeks lowering any/all stations we could just wearing your 10 guys out. It would be only a matter of time until we owned it.

Now if we had 10 factions of 10 players then the Player to ->Area ratio is much different. As a dedicated PvPer and back-up FC with my 7 sparks I will have 1 at Beta 1 at Gamma and then the rest around my PvP active zones be it 3 on 1 island or across 3 islands.

A lot of the threads are very silly to anyone who has actually tested the mechanics and can you blame people for starting a political campaign to win something in-game since it has worked in the past?

Also I really cant control what people post and I tend to get flamed when I do so I simply post when things get a bit out of touch from whats best for the game.   Point and case throwing blanket timers or any sort of band-aid botch job on to spark teleporting. I cant change everything but I can damn well try to guide some of it.

TBH now that each side is giving their scenario's the dev's can see how it would/could play out and hopefully make a more informed call on the design of the mechanics if leaving it or changing it is necessary.

Ok done spamming this till it plays out more.

147

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Burial wrote:

If someone decides to commit on one area and use a chunk of their sparks to securing it to the fullest then why can't they?

Because you want to enable both parties to get a few hits in before the fights over.

Lets Take Novastrov for example: If we remember back to the first battle of my last return to play you will see a lot of similarities.

Lets pretend one of us decide we want to own/roam NC and we go to its first sap with 20~guys. You get all dressed up and decide your fits and move out.

All it would take is the proper 3-5 bots to keep that group busy or harassed while you can spark in to Dana and full equip either larger or counter bots to engage from the flank instantly.

Lets pretend I flank with 15 bots that is a rank wall.

Now we can dive down in to who will win or not win but regardless of who does in this situation both parties have a fighting chance if the right calls are made.

There is no possible way a new player who is limited on his in-game ability and must rely heavily on his knowledge of the game to overcome fights will be able to combat or even acknowledge what is happening as they die.

I can count the FC"s who could even give me a run for my money If I was the defender on 1 hand. If this is the number of players who have the knowledge and awareness to combat this then how is this possibly good for the game?

EDIT: by no means should gamma sparking be limited. I know these are extreme situations I am bringing up but they will be common in a flourishing environment.

148

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

@Cassius - I/WE do not play because we have nothing new to set out and accomplish. The last time we did play we were lucky for 1 good fight  a week. I would prefer to wait until it is back to the 2+ a day I remember early on.

Myself and probably many others know that we have plenty of faulty mechanics and minute things to list and discuss on how to solve and address them. The fact of the matter is that this is the topic everyone is discussing for now thanks to Ville sparking it up.

Sorry if you thought this was about you or STC but I was just arguing for the good of the game.  This is why we have seen the game being revamped from trial onward. Not to mention the fact that vets have just been given bones now and then to stay.

149

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Burial wrote:

Devs, DON'T CHANGE spark teleportation. It has effects the guys in this thread can't even imagine.

Tell us what we cant imagine that is so terrible if this were changed or it nothing but whispers and worries.

Burial wrote:

It would also mean that he would have to have bots in each of the terminals and don't give me the answer that it's easy.

Ok maybe you just forgot how I play but is that a serious question? It would take me under 2 hours to fully stock 3 stations with enough fits/bots to handle anything from each terminal for the next Month.

its called a scarab mk 2

If I only OWN or WANT 1 island this is not hard. If i have 10 or even 7 sparks why do you seem to believe it hard for me to set them to a single island.


*To increase the PvP flag timer is silly because it will have a negative impact by keeping the the one with out access vulnerable just as long as the guy cannot teleport.

We want to make it so once a player Teleports and engages in PvP that they cannon t abuse the rapid redeployment.

150

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Guys Sparking in general is not the issue.

We just need to limit the abuse of sparking on the same island in rapid succession and deploying to Betas.

A simple Timer as Arga stated for islands that are abusable to prevent this exact scenario from being plausible.

Whether or not sparking in general is bad is a far seperate discussion to how the current implementation can be abused and needs to be prevented.