151

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

I still feel like no one read my posts fuuu

152

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

This reminds me of one of the times I messaged a dev and said, "hey remember that op thing you didn't believe come watch me do it"

oh did I demob your rivaler from 800m in a cam through a mountain.

Sorry did my rep tank last for well over a hour and a half against 11 players.

Was I 1 shoting NeX through syndicate protection after the system was changed to prevent this.

where gammas not totally revamped  to new building rules around tps.

Where walls complete abused after implementation as foretold.

These are just a few examples, the list goes on for features changed after the damage was done and players were driven off.

9/10 players won't say anything about something broken until it isn't just their trick, don't be fooled however to think a few of us submit these things privately to avoid mass abuse by the playerbase.

Stc lets be real you have players who were here when their was populatoon. However your corp was not here during that time so many of you don't have that experiance, not to discredit you but being honest here.

I don't see anything CD about how me and merkle are discussing this mechanics use or abusive ways. If we don't drive to the end of each other's argument how am to see your view or you mine. Involving cd would be me saying "I killed 20 stc when you were all new so listen to what I say." The ones who stayed from that group are here now and wouldn't die like that again but it's those players I want to protect and make sure lube is used when they get *** be it by you me or someone else.

153

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Prepare

154

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Shadowphile wrote:

Spark teleport has no impact on a small group of players pvping on the beta islands. It may play a role in a small group of players trying to take over a beta outpost against a numerically superior force. But I still say they aren't gonna be able to do that even if you were to get rid of spark teleport completely.

When you are labeled the noob slayer for killing troves of players by the 10's and even 20's Numbers is nothing but a variable that factors in greater or lesser degrees based off of both the experience and capabilities of your opponent.

It is safe to say that when something can be abused against certain groups of players I speak from experience.

155

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

To be frank a group of sub 2 month old toons wont have the lock times or ECM power to stop me from wiping  a group of 10-15 with 2-3 people.

3 months they would need some solid direction and well spent EP with proper gear.

What I dont want is for a player like me to hold NC and Dana and then 30-40 players come to siege my island from me and I am able to do the following.

They attack NC I can bait them in and swap a entire fleet or just the necessary counter fleet from Dana to perfectly flank. Vice Versa.

As the attack vs a equiv opponent in defense they will be able to counter fit you and thus need less numbers and less desirable terrain.

If you and I went at it over NC/Dana this would not be a overly large issue. However to the general population vs the proper group this feature is just overwhelming. This would actually also be decided in 1 fight as you and I both  know we tend to dance until the other miss-steps and then we full wipe to generally not see the other want to do the dance again for a month or so.

Also Attackers have no surprise seeing as the defenders know there sap vulnerability times and there own units on the field. They also have to account for which of 3 saps and bring the necessaries for it.

TL:DR
We are really starting to look at far to many factors and variables but the short is  that your average player either cannot or will not be willing to deal with the smaller faction of players who would look to leverage this feature against them.

156

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Ludlow Bursar wrote:
Arga wrote:

You still have not presented an argument FOR having instant travel, other than majority rule

Zoom did. http://forums.perpetuum-online.com/post/83102/#p83102

And we can also add to that "until we've solved the problem of contracts"

And to think a blanket cool-down is a fix is juvenile at best, that is another knee-jerk resolution that only con volutes the issue further. A simple rule that prevented the setting of multiple outposts on the same island would seem as  still to be a less than desirable fix. We want to resolve the abusive behavior with out inhibiting the day to day use on your average PO player.

I did not realize in depth mechanics discussion involved so many one liners.

@Merkle I am speaking as the defender being the one able to abuse this feature, effectively rendering any sub-perfection exit strategy as viable. (with perfect squad composition)

Yes as far as you being able to effectively jump in front of them to the only neutral outpost being possible on 3 islands is true. Then again we are talking in the most extreme situations.

If say another group such as RPS (STC) comes in as 30-50 strong do you think a focused effort by them on a single island to break your "global" hold would even be possible?  I mean assuming you wanted to hold those it would take you what 1-2 haulers to stash every bot you would need to outfit the 5-7 guys needed to wipe every fleet they ran. Key here is that they would never even make it off that island.

I am talking about giving those attackers a chance to be viable with out bringing out everyone and there brother each and every time. A give and take scenario where even if they attacker loses they can still see the light at the end of the tunnel and not a HM outclassing them at every turn.

EDIT: you take in to consideration the abusive behavior leveraging multiple high-EP toons and your able to field multiple fleets instantly strategically all over a island.

This beta area to me conceptually should be a area where pirate/roams and the like can move and be relatively agile and loose with movements and not be instantly shut down once trying to operate in the area, the opposite of a gamma.

157

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Martha Stuart wrote:

We are the majority.  This argument defends my position.

False, The majority doesn't play this game. This is why we have a population issue. You may be able to argue you are a hardcore vs casual player but by no means are you the majority of gamers' or the "Average Gamer's"

The "majority" left STC and PO a long time ago. To suggest the 10 active guys who play still within your corp to be the "majority" is quite a statement you are making. Not trying to be harsh but seriously?

I already stated one scenario where this can be abused, who cares if a corporation can move between 10 outposts on separate sides of the world. The issue is being able to rapid-idly re-deploy within the same area by abusing this mechanic. I welcome someone to leverage a argument against or for this behavior but this is what I beleive should be resolved.

Every player should be able to instantly move to redeploy to defend persistent player objects that can be lost when undefended i.e. Gamma. I really dont think anyone is calling for this to be patched tmw but rather just discussing it. 

Point and case: there is not enough reward in putting forth the effort to prove how the system can be abused. If nothing is done till it is abused fine be it. However once again we will have somewhere to pint and say "We told you so" as it gets nerfed again as fortold.

If you go kick a bee's nest you cant get upset when 3 or 30 bee's come out. you should have taken that in to account before kicking it.

158

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Burial wrote:
Arga wrote:

If you're implying that adding a timer to sparks is going to make you stop playing, you know that devs can't be held hostage like that. Maybe the fact that I'm not actually playing gives me a more unbiased view, which I've always maintained regardless of my corp tag.

No. He is talking about the other 95% times you use spark teleportation and get stuck with cooldown on some remote part of the world, needing to wait out the timer. I understand you might not even remotely think about those situations because you don't actually play.

It seems like you are just trying to make your opinion win without covering all the bases, even worse is that you are baseing it all on word of mouth, never actually playing it yourself.

No Arga is discussing the concept behind spark teleportation and the proper way to fix it and not bain-aid it. He makes no claim to know all sides of the discussion but rather expresses his views on it very strongly and well thought out.

Again this has nothing to do with 99% of the way sparks are currently used or implemented but rather with how it can and WILL be abused in specific situations in t he future.

We are attempting to determine a solution, there will alwayws be people who throw out extremes and vastly off base ideas and solutions. Discussion is how you best present your case to discredit their ideal. This generally involves things much beyond "they dont play anymore", "they are only doing this because our tag" ext ext.

159

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Arga wrote:

If you have an actual counter-arguement about how instant (0-5min) troop movement is not bad for the game than that's a valid response, because that is exactly what the current game mechanic allows.

No one in there right mind should be debating that being able to instantly teleport to defend your vulnerable gamma assets should be changed.

The only time this mechanic can be abused in a way that is detrimental to the game is in regards to beta island play. However if we drill down in to the issue it is not the fact that players are able to instantly appear and deploy. It is that a force can instantly navigate to active islands and once there consistently redeploy drastically greater assets between multiple terminals on the same island.

You have to resolve this by not gimping the mechanic but simply putting up restrictions on the abusive manner it can be used.

If for example I engage your plated HM at Heydel and disengage to go to ICS-B just to have you already there in-front of me, to turn and try to move to a external gate to then have you teleport ahead of me.

You can see how this goes from being a simple feature to get you to the fight to completely controlling it.

I don't necessarily know what a proper fix would be however I do stand behind the need that regardless of the situation, being able to instantly travel to vulnerable player structures is a must.

@Martha Again the key to balancing a mechanic like this is to not prevent people from utilizing it but to not allow a minority of motivated players access to abuse it to ruin the experience for the majority.

Example: Learning how to manipulate gate timers to kill players that are in black loading screens or how to 1 shot them due to client lag through syndicate protection when gate hoping.

Identifying and reporting these things make for a better overall game, the problem is always how to best resolve them.

160

(153 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Tux wrote:
Merkle wrote:

Hm, getting a bit defensive.

lol Merkle, I think hes saying is he doesn't want to try to put the effort into actually doing anything and that the game should be turned into a FPS so he can log in and shoot stuff. If it takes any type of effort Im sure its apparently not worth the time. You know with his huge eeping abilities and everything. lol

Yes, I am very defensive and hurt while offended over my internet robot's. Please make it easier for me, it was very tiring and difficult. So difficult playing against you guys I can count all my heavy Mech mk 2 losses on 1 hand can you?


Lemon wrote:

I am mad....
I want to log in and all die. Game is to hard. Thanks

Cant Argue with that...

161

(153 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Merkle wrote:
Lemon wrote:

We had to face a group at launch that only had 2-4 months EP advantage on us with resources and knowledge. You know what that perception did for the moral of the players during that time.

Yet shockingly you are still here subbed, and on top of the world.  Your a living witness that is possible! Good for you!.

I am mad....

I want to log in and all die. Game is to hard. Thanks

162

(153 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Merkle wrote:

Lets just restate this again...the unlimited fields you speak of, are on beta and alpha as well...


Just dont complain when heavy's triple in price and the mods to fit them do just the same.

Its laughable to compare mining to m2s right clicking and insta 100 heavy mechs.

Been giving you far to much credit this whole time apparently.

I dont care about limited or unlimted fields, my point has to do with the stock-piles and the EP difference between us and new players. I am stating that the game cannot handle the population needed to offset the advantages we have over them. In order for them to even have a fighting chance.

In the event that a population rise does happen and it is not at the proper level they will have the same experiences and results as many of the corps in our past have. They will face enemy's who appear to be unbeatable and never ending assets. Being low on EP and lack of experience there ability to combat the vets will be almost not existent. It will be like running on beta 4x4 box on beta with a arkhe with no guns, except they

We had to face a group at launch that only had 2-4 months EP advantage on us with resources and knowledge. You know what that perception did for the moral of the players during that time.

Do you see what I am getting at or should I finger paint it for you guys? limited or unlimted resource, If they arn't worth gathering then it wont matter which they are.

163

(153 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

We would need so many players to flood this game that the servers it is hosted on and the infrastructure supporting the server could not handle that volumes needed to negate the advantage we vets have.

I mean seriously I can say that with me losing 20 HM's a month for the next year wouldn't make me flinch. We saw the impact that a body of players with what appears to be infitite resources has on the active population of the game from back when m2S duped. During this time many players left because they could not mine/produce to compete with 24/7 active and able pvpers who didnt have to do the same industrial work. Only harass everyone else trying to keep up.

I mean look at the damage I alone was able to inflict on players. I took a super tank bot to camp in noobs who didnt know the mechanics to counter it. That bot was then nerfed to oblivion and that ENTIRE body of players is no longer here because the damage was done.

I like this game but I mean ask STC with out the right players who have the thought process to develop proper fits and counter fits  you will die horribly and see no light at the end of the tunnel. Not to even bring up EP differences.

164

(153 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Tux wrote:

I agree .. the current system works well

Dont change anything ... PLEASE !!!

If players want pvp they know where to go for it ... its not like people dont know where others live ....

what this whole thing is about is people wanting lazy pvp, theres no reason to up end the resource system so a few people can go gank miners again.

+1 Martha

Why can't I go out for a Hour or maybe 2 and get a decent challenging PvP fight on this Wednesday evening? 

1v2, 2v3, 5v7,12v16, 20v30...... Just a good fight after my hour or 2 of travel win or lose.

165

(57 replies, posted in General discussion)

Arga wrote:

It's a troll thread.

But since there are only about 3 posts per day, trolls are better than nothing.

Continue to entertain me.

PS. Get your news by playing instead of surfing forums posts, as it's now 95% troll, 5% BS.


Its ok, We have more forum trolls than they members online.

They are still winning the war! They have take all the beta's, destroyed all our bots we used to gather on beta and locked us out of those crucial NPC outposts and there L2-2 facilities!

Looks like we have can only go mine safely on gamma with L3 facilities.

How about we talk about if a group of players doesnt have a sufficient leader within PO they will simply flop and die due to the environment and how to address this. Because unlike every other MMO that is adding to its playerbase by making it more accessible and instant gratification we are still waiting for a patch from how many months ago?

166

(57 replies, posted in General discussion)

Martha Stuart wrote:

lemon, the reason you have so many bots is because you don't play.... believe me, if you started logging in and looking for fights, we would gladly oblige.

How I wish this were true. The fact is if i Log in and go looking for a "fight" the only thing i would find are players who have not learned how to play safely in the PvP area's. 9.9/10 times this player wont even be worth a 30 second skirmish because I will most likely Vaporize them.

Now once i have killed him there will be 1 of 2 reactions.

A) *Given the players* "Its lemon lets go kill him 5+ come for me solo"
B) *Not enough Playerrs* "Ite Lemon, He probably has friends and its only us 2"

Now if I come prepared for A then B says I am blobing them with my alt accounts or bringing to big of a mech.

If its B and not A then its "I am Naped to the server or a blobing" for brining to much.

Honestly I love how a blob is 10 people, I remember when a blob was 2:1 Odds of 30 vs 60 or way back when it was 30-40 vs 100+. The fact of the matter is we are in a dieing eco system where the big sharks have eaten up all of the food supply to where they are fighting over mino's, doomed to never rebuild the food supply just wither away and die.

PS: Lets talk the Server Population and Power before I returned Last Feb and what happened. It funny how the 5-10% who played a role in that power shift only about 3-5% of those are left today to argue that power. While the game is probably what 50% or more of its population on that date?

167

(57 replies, posted in General discussion)

Tux wrote:

Axe Grinding

Yeah Tux! you grind that axe.

Tux its great to know you have so many bots, It sure is a shame to hear some members wouldnt even pvp with you giving them bots. I have lots of bots to, I never get to use them since no one wants to fight me :*(



Edit: I see PO as the kids claiming to be king of the castle after recess is already over lol

168

(57 replies, posted in General discussion)

Burial wrote:

I didn't mention the times before your corp joined up with PHM, AIC, 12 and 62nd at all so I'm not sure why you are dragging it into discussion. If you are saying our strategy was different before and after those events then you are right. smile

Was it not PHM, AIC, and neoChoas vs Merkle n Co + 12.

TBH the fact that if the officers within a corp log in can cause a drastic shift to the power within- game then we have more issues than arguing the accuracy of history. Hey, then again 3 of 30 is 10% lol

169

(57 replies, posted in General discussion)

Blackomen wrote:


Lemon: While I know your just trolling, I'll give you an actual response, this isn't "my" news, it's information I've gathered from some 20-40 forum posts I've cobbled together. And this thread, (We're you able to read it.) is me asking for confirmation of the accuracy of it all. From the posts so far, seems it's all fairly accurate, with minor incorrect details here and there.

Blackomen wrote:

1. Nebs and STC defeated CHAOS and PHM and CIR

It is always entertaining to read other perspectives and how they define events. I guess if defeat is having 49 Kills and No deaths, I am eager to see what happens when I am undefeated.

I was being serious, I would love to hear someone explain what lead to our defeat and demise.

170

(57 replies, posted in General discussion)

Blackomen wrote:

*News*

Can you add me to your news source : zLemon@gmail.com I enjoy these stories lol

big_smile Syndic Do you still have the logs from when one of my quotes started the Dom civil war?

I dont have them on this computer.

Xadhoom wrote:

You are full of *** lemon, you ask Omen for help and he talks Nebs into assisting you on nova. You even provided the bots. Then we started taking Norhoop, and we planted you *** corp in intia because you were crying you had no were to live.

then CIR returned and a new war started...then Nebs teamed up with STC and retook alsbale.


Deja Vu

You didnt learn last time?

EDIT: I forgot, the guy who got all of your panties riled up jumped ship at the first chance he got after the bots started poping.

Martha Stuart wrote:
Syndic wrote:

stuff

I think RAWR would beg to differ.  Secondly we didn't get pulled into M2Ss war.  We were constantly attacked by lemon and what is now PHM/Police, after playing the game for less than a month.  I forgive you for not knowing all this, because this all happened after your temper tantrum at the devs.  Lemon who repeatedly stated that he didn't attack newb corps, proceeded to take 3 STC outposts: Dana, Initia, and Kara.  This all happened because Lemon and Eharmony could not win against M2S/Hun or RG without the rest of the CIR fleet.  So they picked targets that would be easy to kill.  Anyone else see a pattern here? 

That being said, STC wanted fights, we wanted PVP, we were in it for the long run.  Most new corps are not this resilient, plus, we came in when the player population was much higher, so there was more things for us to do.

I mean I know you have more sense than that. The stories from on the other side of the fence really do amaze me.

For theatrics.

Took Dana: Because my *** was inside and you locked me out. (your CEO rather lock me out)
*Created eHarmony- maybe 10 people in the process*
STC+RG Pressure Alsbale for free PvP.
M2S/HUN Roam and only Alsbale are caught
Eharm, Beats STC on its own and RG on its own but cant fight you both at once.
STC took Hoop and was in togy's backyard for e z pvp.
Omen+Alsbale approached me to make a pact to help them out which we would both benefit from.
eHarm takes Hoop and drops dana for STC to be with RG in a tree. K-I-S-S... oh sorry.
Then the alsbanistans threw the agreement and We made ToG pay the price for it.

I never did like hoop but I'll cut the history lesson short just before the rise of what was NATO and The great STC migration off Dom

** Almost forgot when I started paying <12> To give us the few more we needed to beat STC+RG+(Insert cannon fodder corp) after I declared i was going after Alsbale. (After karapyth)

EDIT: I left a lot of little things out that made a lot of this happen, but we need a historian here and logs everything.

174

(100 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Xadhoom wrote:

Why don't you post on your main, oh wait it's probably banned.....lol


Grazypoo What happened to you, you used to beat bigger bots, larger numbers on a daily basis. I recommended NeBs to you so they could have a head on there shoulders. It is such a shame to see what they have done to you and who you used to be, never fun seeing a player you know chained down.

Remember that fateful day, how could you let them engage me on my favorite terrain yesterday?

175

(110 replies, posted in Balancing)

Dazamin wrote:

Nope, that would be a flat nerf to everyone who runs beacons, thats not the point of this change, the point is a nerf to those running multiple beacons simultaneously on Gamma. This is the most effective solution to that problem. Whether you agree that it is a problem is a separate issue.

Im sorry where was this stated as the problem? How, out of all of the forum post's this week did you deduct it was the # of beacons being done at a time together on gamma as the problem.

The silver-lining to the disgusting excuse of a "problem" is hopefully this enlightens the devs to exactly who is crying right now and how much thought they have put in to the situation. They are upset with how many beacons "we" can do, dont pay attention to the missions, allowing us to make the nic to buy so many and giving us the tokens alone to buy them.

I mean if this is the kind of mentality or even thought process going on in NeX, no wonder it failed.