You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Active topics Unanswered topics
Search options (Page 6 of 15)
Pages Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 15 Next
DEV Zoom wrote:Kaldenines wrote:Both mechanics heavily favor the larger side.
I thought most of the mechanics do that? Simply because 1<2 will always be true.
But if people flee from a fight using mobile teleports then there is no fight at all so I'm not sure we can talk about sides there.
When you have a straight gun fight, both sides get the chance to shoot each-other. If one side is completely jammed out after the first few seconds, it's not really a fight.
Also if one side shows up with teleports, engages and then jumps out, then its some sort of a fight.
If that side shows up with teleports, sees that they are at a disadvantage, don't flag and simply jump out, then there is no fight.
Does that make sense?
EDIT: yes 1<2 will be true but we are talking about the difference between fighting and being unable to lock anything for a few minutes before death. The first involves some kind of input from the player, the latter doesn't involve much at all.
DEV Zoom wrote:Ok let's make this clear: changes to the game are NOT decided by the players, no petition or poll or whatever will help if we don't think it's a good idea. Players only provide feedback, but development is not a democracy.
Good to know.
DEV Zoom wrote:You made me curious though: I don't really understand what does the mobile teleport flag change have to do with Ewar balance. (Other than thinking that was an "inside job" so it could be done again, in which case I'm outta here.)
Both mechanics heavily favor the larger side. (I should know, I have been part of the larger blob before in this game.)
As you can see from the other responses in this thread, it really touches a nerve.
DEV Zoom wrote:I have said this at the time of the change but I'll say it again then: I have received multiple requests from various corps and individuals over a timespan of 1 year to change mobile teleports. Whatever political agenda you have in this I don't care, but leave the devs out of it please.
edit: also the way you posted this will make this more of a corporation dialogue topic than anything else. I can see the future.
Unfortunately, every thread on this topic becomes a corp dialogue.
This is a balance issue, if I could leave the devs out of it, I would.
Would you care to list the names of the corps and/or individuals involved (have they all posted in this thread already)? I would like to know who decides the future of this game so that I can go petition them directly.
Lastly, how many signatures are needed before the petition leads to changes in the game?
BeastmodeGuNs wrote:Kaldenines wrote:+1
Although maybe keep them off beta/gamma, we don't want people using trial accounts as walking probes.
-1
Though it would prevent that, It would also prevent these peeps from being able to try out beta PvP and see what PvP ingame is like.
Have you seen any 7 day old character die or get kills on beta? If so I would love to see that killmail.
This milkshake always brings the boys to the yard...
I usually try to avoid making partisan statements when talking about balance but I won't bother this time because:
A) The - no teleporting while flagged - change appears to have been made for no reason other than to appease the whining and crying of the largest alliance in the game (Hello Zoom, please tell me I'm wrong).
B) That same alliance is opposed to any changes in ewar mechanics for very cynical and short-termist reasons (No? Please do explain how you have the interests of the community at heart).
So... the current ewar mechanics are simply easymode for the larger group in a pvp encounter. Their effect is to make sure that those who are outnumbered can not fight back in anyway, ensuring risk-free pvp for the greater blob.
While some may argue that this is not really a problem, remember what happened last time all the pvp died off in this game?
So the game budget sized question is, devs, will you do anything to sort this mess out?
+1
Although maybe keep them off beta/gamma, we don't want people using trial accounts as walking probes.
DEV Zoom wrote:Dazamin: you're seeing this too much black&white I think. Obviously hybrid robots will need some balancing too, like not letting people put together heavy mech legs with light robot chassis, but the random system would let us not worry about nerfing each and every possible combination on its own.
And low priority for balancing doesn't mean that we won't change stuff if there are any glaring imbalances, what I meant is that we currently wouldn't want to make any in-depth balancing changes since that usually generates a butterfly effect, possibly making things worse than before. Balancing is a delicate issue and any change needs to be checked from different angles, but I'm sure you know that.
It's nice to see you reply to this topic.
I can't help but think that the glaring imbalances would be easier to avoid, in the first place, if equations like X^(number of tunnings) or Y^(extension level) were not used.
Also it would be nice to hear from the devs what pvp is intended to look like in this game.
How much should be down to chance or EP or skill or numbers?
How active should support roles such as remote repair be?
Should fast tackle also be tanky?
Should retreat ever be a practical option after a fight starts?
Should ewar form the bulk of an effective force?
Should ewar have a counter other than more ewar?
Should certain bots require a hard counter (bring A or automatically lose to B)?
What role should relatively new accounts have in pvp?
How much space should one faction hold with ease?
How safe should pve activities in pvp zones be?
How expensive (in man hours) should a top of the line pvp bot be?
Should roaming be a viable option for finding fights?
Are sap defenders expected to sit there for the whole hour?
These questions don't really have a right or wrong answer but it's difficult to even discuss balance when we don't know what the goals are.
I am not asking for a specific answer to each of those here and now but some idea of the way things should be would be great.
And like other have said, please try to balance with small changes first 
Have you ever looked at the patch notes for blizzard's multiplayer games or eve?
Sounds like it would give plasma bombs a new use 
or are you also invulnerable to AOE damage while using this cloak?
I think it also needs a slight 15-20 second delay between reappearing on the terrain and being able to see people.
It's not really about the number or ratio of ewar bots on the field. It's the way that jamming subtracts from the enemy force and exaggerates any difference in numbers.
Please consider the following example:
3 kains 1 camelion vs 3 kains 3 camelions
What are the odds of the outnumbered side winning?
How one-sided will the fight be?
How one-sided should the fight be?
These are open questions, I am not saying I have the "right" answers to them but I am curious to see what people think the right answers should be.
And yes, theorycrafting is a very limited tool so if someone wants to test this, that would be awesome.
Like I said before, this not a question of balance but rather what kind of mechanics do we want in the game.
You can have under-powered or overpowered ewar quite easily with ether kind of mechanic.
DEV Zoom wrote:Kaldenines wrote:Finally, what makes you think that a terraforming charge that was not used and is sitting in someone's inventory does not warrant reimbursement? What other in game assets do you consider to have zero value? I want to make sure I don't store too many of those items.
Huh? I meant that unused terraforming charges don't need to be reimbursed because uh... you still have them? 
Pardon me, I got the impression that they were gonna be removed all together.
DEV Zoom wrote:Reimbursing charges based on the market is not possible. And the reason is not that we don't have the data, but that it would be near impossible to track all the transactions a single item went through.
Player A buys charge, sells again to player B, player B sells again to player C, etc. Each of these players bought a charge from the market and each of them would want a reimbursement, but we're only talking about a single item. And we don't even know whether the charge has been used or not, ie. a reimbursement is warranted or not.
1) You don't have to track individual items. All you have to do is calculate the net number of charges that each player bought and sold. Then you can reimburse based on the cost of each charge. Besides, how many terraforming charges were actually re-sold by players on the market, can you give us a number on this?
Also, this is something that you have already done once:
http://blog.perpetuum-online.com/tag/pbs/
Issue: Gamma reimbursements required due to changes.
Reimburse the price difference of all purchased terraform ammo in proportion to the new market price.
Reimburse the price difference of all purchased construction blocks in proportion to the new market price.
Finally, what makes you think that a terraforming charge that was not used and is sitting in someone's inventory does not warrant reimbursement? What other in game assets do you consider to have zero value? I want to make sure I don't store too many of those items.
2) The point of reimbursing players when you wipe out their work is to maintain player confidence in the fairness and impartiality of those who run the game. By not appropriately reimbursing players when you decide to delete their efforts, you are making the statement: "you are at the mercy of our whims".
EDIT: and yes BOS should get a refund, it makes no sense that they didn't in the first place. (This is like walls all over again)
... and give us micro jump drives
Terraforming is a really cool and unique feature, yes it is horribly unbalanced but simply wiping out all the large castles and making people replace them with smaller walls and moats that do practically the same thing is not a long term solution.
To be constructive, i would suggest introducing gamma specific ways of getting through impassible terrain. NPCs can do it so why not us?
Also look at the number of turrets surrounding the teleports, that stops all but the most specialized fleets regardless of terraforming.
Your troll-fu my CIR friend, it is getting rusty...
\\\\_ BY THE POWER OF NECROMANCY! _////
The thing that doesn't seem right about ECM mechanics at the moment is that it's a lock and push "I win (maybe) button". It would be good if ewar was a force multiplier instead.
What about an AoE pulse once locked onto a tile without a LOS requirement? Obviously the <EDIT>energy consumption,</EDIT> strength, range, radius and firing rate would need to be adjusted accordingly so this is not suggested as either a buff or nerf, just a change in mechanics.
This would also further inconvenience people who use follow bots either by multitasking on two screens or using some macro/software.
This is an invitation for players to post the main reason they play this game, as opposed to some (that) other game.
This is mainly for new players who may be considering the game, seeing a tonne of complaint threads and wondering why the hell they should bother trying it.
I'l start:
For me the choice is between Perpetuum and EvE. I know of no other games on the market that come even close. So why am I not playing the more polished game with the larger development team?
Meaningful terrain takes group pvp to a whole new level compared to the align/orbit and shoot combat you get in eve. Here the position occupied by each group is hugely important. Explosion damage upon death is the single most awesome feature in this game.
bump, can we link the new recruitment poster in the first post?
I can already see the NPC gate-camp tactic working.
Step 1: Get a tanky bot such as a Tyranos Mk2.
Step 2: Drag red NPCs under a static teleport.
Step 3: When someone jumps in, wait for them to start moving off the teleport and then jump out.
Step 4: Harvest tears.
Edit: maybe I should not have shared that idea...
DEV Zoom wrote:If you want my personal and honest opinion, it saddens me a bit that the community is still not at that point where they would just start organizing guardian squads to protect the miners or the busy transport routes. That would be a true sandbox trait, but maybe I'm just a dreamer.
Are you talking about alpha or pvp zones?
Also I think we should keep in mind that roaming NPCs are one thing. Here we are looking at NPCs that are being, literally, used as weapons on alpha.
p.s. That was my Mesmer that got blown up on the pier in NE Tellesis. Nicely done Earth Muncher. I look forward to trying this myself if it turns out to not be an exploit.
I meant to ask, do I have to decide about linking now or will the option, on currently existing accounts, still be available after the Steam launch?
Crepitus wrote:1.) How is the insane PVE Grind?
heheheeheee *stares at a wall with a mad grin on his face while rocking back and forth*
Posts found: 126 to 150 of 360
Pages Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 15 Next
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 3 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
Generated in 0.065 seconds (83% PHP - 17% DB) with 6 queries
