51

(304 replies, posted in Balancing)

The comments on that kill made me lol.

I think a poignant part of a sandbox is not over-balancing too much. I like fair fights as much as the next person, but in a sandbox, fair isn't something that should be forced. To understand more of what I'm thinking you'd have to look at the almost limitless capabilities of stockpiling gear and bots. A corp that's been around a while has a dramatic advantage over newer corps because of their ability to draw in to their supplies and basically use attrition to grind new players to the ground. This sort of domination is on a different scale, sure, but it's still the same concept and there's nothing done to balance that. If you want to be picky and make things balanced on a micro-scale, I'd think you would have to on the larger scheme of things too. Just as a good sized squad couldn't deal with 1 T4 ERP fit mech before, there's corps that likely can't be touched by an alliance of lesser corps. That aspect of the game is pretty much bulletproof, it's pretty hard to lose power in this game to anyone who hasn't been around as long.

I did say before though when M2S was in power, only something catastrophic would stop them. Lo and behold... But that's the same with anyone in power in this game, it snowballs. So if we aren't limiting that factor that can be completely overbearing to the nth degree, why should  fits really be much a concern? If anyone can build and use them, the problem is only on what your corp can afford through attrition. The kicker was that the ERP fit was counterable before the nerfs started happening, you just had to have the assets to do it, just as you needed the assets to fit an ERP properly. If you can't get your own FotM fits to compete, you likely can't afford to compete with the guys that can afford to if things were toned down anyway. They'll just use something else and still have more and you'll still never change the power polarizations unless again, something catastrophic happens to the entities in question. Maybe we should have catastrophic failures on mods? tongue

Balancing a sandbox is never as definitive as most would like to think. It's almost counterintuitive to the core idea of a sandbox at times even. Just my thoughts.

52

(304 replies, posted in Balancing)

Yeah Ville, I guess you're right. I should have known better than to post in a public thread, there's quite a few limp wrists that take these internet robots far too seriously. They should offer counselling services when you register for forums, it would probably benefit a lot to learn how to cope with losses.


Lemon, what'd you learn about flaunting? You want your epeen to be nerfed too?

53

(304 replies, posted in Balancing)

Wow, guess I hit a nerve there. I illustrated a point about how little it matters that you're in a heavy when it comes to fitting because of Hunter's delusion that Heavies are the be all end all that should be able to take out swathes of assaults and lights. I didn't make it personal in the least and this thread isn't about you and your loss, it's about the ideals of balances. Your butthurt comments out of nowhere though sure proved counter-productive to how little you cared about your loss. But please, carry on making it personal. Maybe if you make a sad face here when you get trolled like you did when you lost your gropho, your wife will let you 'bang' her again out of pity because of your encounters with the mean mean intarwebz men.

54

(304 replies, posted in Balancing)

You certainly sound pretty bitter about losing those pixels by what you just said. I gave an unbiased view on the situation as neither being on 62's side, nor yours. Your fit didn't own up to the situation like Hunter is creating a clamour about or how it should have, just because it's a heavy. It's funny though how he had nothing to do with what went on, yet because he's on your 'side' of the fence it's ok. You're right, it's pixels. You lost them because you didn't fit right and went out in something expensive without proper backup. If that makes you mad, then don't do it again. Just don't go snap at people on a public forum because you're embarrased by what happened and were used as an example in a thread. But hey, go have more sex and try brag about it on a video game forum. I'm sure after being demasculated as you were after that fight,  boinking was about the only way to get some of those virility points back. lol

Syndicate protection on an inner beta island TP makes no sense. Maybe give someone 5-10 seconds to load? But the full destab time is kinda really bad. roll

56

(19 replies, posted in General discussion)

Yeah, jumping in to alpha someone at a gate would be cheap. Maybe have a short term combat timer and long term. Both enabled when you attacked. The short term would be to prevent people from alpha'ing and then jumping and then jumping back in. The long term would prevent people from flagging and running off to alpha.

57

(19 replies, posted in General discussion)

I think they should just drop the protection altogether on beta. Reduce destab period to 15-20 seconds.The whole jumping thing from tp to tp is annoyingly long and it's even more annoying when someone can sit there and not be touched, on beta. Allow jumping while flagged only between beta tp's and not from beta to alpha. It sucks like hell when you flag and have to stay on the island you flagged on. I dont think people should be able to just run off to safety, but being able to jump to another beta isn't exactly safe either, it just gives attackers more options. Unless you're speed fit and even while speed fit at times, being flagged and basically trapped while god knows what sort of gank squad is coming to your last known location blows. Right now PvP revolves around flags, timers, docking and tp's waaaay too much. It makes PvP feel too mechanical and not as fluid as it should be.

58

(304 replies, posted in Balancing)

My wasp had more HP than that gropho, it's no surprise he got canned by a squad of that size. Hell, I probably could have taken him down a sizeable amount in my assault and finished him with my explosion. lol   yarr

59

(7 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Of course you can PvP on beta, but you missed the point. The idea is to add incentive to go PvP in a specific area for realtime rewards. It congregates PvPers so they can have fun and find other PvPers. As opposed to just roaming and killing miners and ratters with their pants down.

60

(31 replies, posted in Q & A)

I never said it was a bug, it just seemed like odd logic to me. Which is why I explained why I figured they changed it. But I quess we wont know the why unless they say.

61

(31 replies, posted in Q & A)

The changes to locking were added likely because allowing someone ( a group mostly ) to prelock a target and alpha them when the timer ran out was redundant. You were dead the second you walked through to a gate camp that has enough alpha, which I think kinda defeats the purpose of the protection in the first place. Now people peeking through gates will actually be able to get away  from gate camps.

62

(17 replies, posted in Balancing)

This will just make observer kernels even more valuable I'd think. But this is also kind of pivotal on how much research you get out of elite kernels as compared to observers. Either way, I still feel sorry for indy guys who have to pay combat chars to find these.

The whole rock, paper, scissors thing is a good idea. That's why the dev's are working on bot flavor right now by actually creating bots in a weight class ( light, assault etc ) that have diferent roles. I'm not sure if they've said what in particular they hope to try out, but something of what you touched on is already in the works. Combat right now is poorly structured. It's basically bringing ewar and guns to kill the webbed targets. Whomever has the most/biggest guns, wins. There's no real anti-insertrolehere. We can only hope the new roles that bots will have will be in good taste.

64

(9 replies, posted in General discussion)

Winter Solstice wrote:

Damnit - stop teasing and give it to us!

... oh god.  That sounded bad.  >.>

big_smile


o.O

65

(7 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

So, I have an idea for PvP that will actually entertain the notion of sporadic PvP. I'm not really interested in the prospect of roaming betas to kill pilots that are typically only going to be miners or farmers. It's highly unlikely that you'll go out looking for a fight and find someone at the same time wanting to do the same thing in the same places you're going. Sure, if you go squat on someone’s island they'll likely send out the bees and you'll get stomped for being in someone’s backyard. So I figure we need a neutral point, a battlefield, a warfront. Some place PvP'ers can go when they're looking to fight others with the same intent. Where no one has the homefield advantage. Where you're not going to bump in to pvp flag traps. Where you know your enemies will all be out there to fight you and not some npcs. 



The Layout:

A single island with an access point from alpha. There will be no outposts to hide in or stash goods. No minerals to mine. Minimal NPC's that purely roam and have no static spawn to provide an extra dynamic. ( to provide some opposition when no enemies are on the island ) Topography setup to provide choke points, LoS issues and other strategic values.



The Reason To Go: ( aside PvP )

The island will be saturated in random energy field spawns. This will pertain to the new energy credit system. The ways of collecting this could be through a mod/collector fitted in the typical gun slots on a bot. The amount collected could be minimal in comparison to what is normally going to be collected ( obviously to be determined once we know more of the energy system) but will provide enough to be lucrative and outweigh the costs of accessing the island. ( see balancing factors ) The mods will only be allowed to be fitted on combat bots and only 1 per bot. This is not a place for miners, it's for PvP'ers.

The reason to pop your adversaries? Whatever they collected, can be dropped in their loot as per standard looting rules. Eventually they will have to go drop their goodies off, so people won't just be humping fields and staying stationary. The fields can also move around randomly to provide a nice dynamic to the island.


The Balancing Factors:

Only Assaults and smaller may enter the TP that takes you to this island. It could be explained that the island is far away so the TP's aren't strong enough to move anything bigger or some other RP nonsense. This will actually allow the island to stay competitive between small and large corps, rich or poor. Granted T4 will always be an advantage for the rich, but that likely shouldn't be restricted.

To get access to the island, a corp has to create an agreement with the syndicate for how many pilots that can access the island. The costs will scale in relation to how many pilots a corp wants on the island. Again, an RP reason can be because the island is so far off, logistics to get out there are expensive so the syndicate will charge an access fee that revolves around their expense of getting you there. These agreements will be charged per week. I originally thought that a corp could pay per individual pilot and add them to a roster but that would be clunky. With agreements having a set number, that would be the amount of pilots allowed on the island at any given time. This would allow anyone from a given corp access to the island through the corps agreement, but the syndicate won’t ever allow more than what a corp setup and paid for.

The fee for the agreement will be a scaling system, the more pilots a corp wants to have access to the island, the more the fee is per week. This will reduce the amount of large scale combat and allow smaller corps to enter with lesser fees. I was thinking that maybe an initial 1 pilot would cost 100k nic to access the island, per week. Adding another pilot would double the cost of the roster to 200k nic a week, 3 pilots would be 400k a week and so on.

As an example, a corp fielding a 5 pilot access agreement would be paying 1.5m a week

A corp fielding 10 pilots would be paying 51.1m a week

These prices would obviously have to scale with the rewards received on the island, but you get the premise. The more pilots you want out there the more it will cost your corp which will typically keep combat on smaller scale.






I'm sure there's plenty of things that can be tweaked and balanced, as with anything. But I think this would provide a good start for more active PvP and in a way that's balanced to corps of all sizes. We're really hurting for things to do in terms of PvP and it's hard to really call roams fun when you're typically only ganking players not even out to PvP. I don't expect this exact idea ever be used, but I would expect something on the same premise be used at one point. We need a centralized PvP area to fight over, or rather some place where we can go to compete more actively. Right now PvP lacks scalability and purpose  and we need something more modular that will cater to quick, fun PvP and relegate us from the standard you blob me, I blob you back.

I think the problem that most people are looking at is that of content being synonymous with PvE, which it isn't. Content can pertain to really any aspect of the game and it's those facets that PO seems to lack right now. The only difference in character progression in PO from day 1 to somewhere down the road is basically what tier of gear and how heavy a bot you can roll. There's not very many things to achieve beyond that basic principal of what tier you're packing. For a PvP centric game as people put it, the goals to progress in are highly involved in a predefined path that you don't get to choose. Sure you can go cap a beta OP, but for what? So you're closer to noralgis and epi so that you can get those bots quicker? What happens when you've sat on beta for a while, what do you hope to achieve aside a surplus of t4? There's not a lot to really put forth as a tangible goal within PO's parameters. You can see all there is to see fairly quickly and it's that context that burns people out quickly.

Sure you can PvP and I'd like to think that's about the only fun thing to do really. But it's about all we're offered in terms of lasting content. There's no point to the wars in PO aside the ego's. I really don't think anyone here is fighting aside to womp their mouthy adversaries. Not even all the beta land is taken, there's no point to having it, which lends itself to showing that owning beta land is quite unimportant. You can launch ops from alpha just as easily from beta, the only difference is how close you are to more lucrative mining and npc's, which would seem like a moot point to PvPer's, but ironically is not. Right now the flow of the game seems to be a perpetual loop, the PvE aspect fuels the PvP by providing the tech and bots. You go out and blow each other up. Then you turn back to PvE to farm more to go blow each other up again. While it can be fun, where's the actual purpose? When's the last time someone lost territory to a land grab? Where's the politics? Everyone basically sits around and farms while they're not pvp'ing. When they do PvP it's typically a roam that serves no purpose other than to just blow up the enemy. There's no greater loss other than pride, which in turn just makes the ego's flare and more fights happen. Which again is fun for most, but what's the point.

The game really needs some more infrastructure. We need reasons to go to war other than to just go shoot *** because we're tired of PvE content/farming. ( which happens fairly quick with how little depth there is in the current content )

AeonThePiglet wrote:

Or you could, you know, pvp. It's like the whole point. IDGI, if you have piles of money you might as well spend it getting blown up. It's fun, I do it all the time.

I agree, but I'd like more people to stick around and figure that one out for themself.

AeonThePiglet wrote:

He said two pvpers online will make content for one another. I said they'll whine about blobbing.

Video games and real life have nothing in common, trying to draw parallels between them is hilariously fail.

I didn't realize you were referring to just one point as opposed to just the general whining on the forums about it. Also, I wasn't comparing real life to video games, there's quite the disconnect there. I was comparing situations involving people's actions considering that this is a game played by people.

AeonThePiglet wrote:

Nope, they'll just whine about blobbing.

This is a game that emulates warfare and politics. I have to wonder when there has ever been a point in history where a nation and it's buddies ever cited; " Hey, you know, our adversaries don't really have that many assets. Let's keep things interesting and leave some of our boys at home." Never. It's not called blobbing in real life, it's called military might. How do people expunge one of the leading factors of war throughout history from a game centric on war? This game is by and largely a nation/war sim and the scenarios in this game are sculpted by human nature. It should be no surprise when you piss someone off that has more buddies than you that you're gonna get a caning. And hey, nothing's stopping others from doing the same thing in retaliation. Above all, this is a game meant to entertain, but to some that doesn't always mean by having fair fights. Sometimes it's just plain fun to crush the opposition and I doubt many can refute that. If people want a 'fair' game with even teams, maybe they should play volleyball or something because PO clearly isn't for them.

This isn't about game A vs game b, or how people shuffle in to different brackets. Here we’re looking at people who do fit in to the “I like PO” bracket. Obviously no one is being forced to play PO and that's not really a point to expand upon and it would be a poor choice for a dev to ever say like it or lump it. The point to expand upon is how to keep players that like this game, interested, and you can't really pin the solution on saying that the players need to find their own way to keep themselves amused. The expansion and appeal of a sandbox game is by how much you can do in it, which inherently caters to a very diverse selection of players if done right. Sandbox games are called such because of their preset style of being able to loosely do as you please. But that's directly related to what systems you have to work with in the first place.

When you develop a platform, here being a 'sandbox' game, you need to provide tools/systems ( content ) to keep people on your platform. The success of your platform is pivotal on the content you provide for people to interact with and how they can interact with it. There can be many off shoots and player driven events based off these tools, but we can’t look past the point that these tools initially have to come from the developers. From people I know that have quit and the general postings on the forums here, people aren't leaving because PO is fatally flawed, unstable, buggy, horribly developed, stupid in nature; it's because people are getting bored and not seeing much to do in this game with the current content. Look at the topic count in the feature discussion forum, it's the largest sub-forum in these forums for a reason. People are starved for content, so much, that they're literally throwing piles of ideas at the dev's to try and get them to add something interesting in one respect or another. When people are talking more about what should be in a game as opposed to what is in a game, that just may be a hint that there's a shortfall with the onus being on the developers. Which is exactly the reason why we post all this stuff, we want the developers to know what’s up and what we’d like to see more or less of.

Arga, you're making this assumption in your analogy that what changes the 'game' is the number of players and how they interact with the given tools. But that's not related to the fact that PO is quite lacking in said tools that relate to most anything aside PvP. The longevity that is dug out from this game typically falls to PvP'ing. If you try mission running, arty scanning or grinding NPC's, you'd be lucky to stay interested in that stuff for more than a billing period or two. What keeps people interested in most mmo's is the developers abilities to design enough tools to keep players cycling their interests and playing around in their world. If you only give people a sparse amount of tools, you can't expect them to just stay interested under their own creativity and say that the player is what makes the sandbox lacking in content.

Your own personal creativity can sure drive how much you play a game and affect it, but when you don't have those tools to express that creativity, you could be the most creative person in existence and still run out of interesting things to relate to. I'll refer back to my empty room analogy, throw someone in one and tell them they're free to do whatever they want, they're likely to get bored quick and I highly doubt you can interject that it’s that persons own fault. While creativity and interest in something is very subjective, to simply stamp a game with sandbox and barely have any innovative systems to play with is very misleading. You can't charge people money to use their own creativity and tell them it's their fault they're not creative enough to play the game. Paying for the game also imposes a certain responsibility upon the developer, I’d say even over that of the players, to actually keep players engaged by providing interesting tools to spur creativity. If that wasn't the case, development of a game would mean little to nothing and it would be the luck of the developers to have ‘creative’ players in their games and making them interesting. Who markets a game like that? Come play our game, we have such innovative players that carry our lacking systems!

Joining a corp shouldnt be a solution to the games shortcomings. If this is a sandbox game it should cater to all walks of players, but it doesn't. Right now, PO is little more than a PvP game. Where's the corps dedicated to PvE? They don't exist because the PvE content right now is lacking. You could join an indy corp, but that basically only fuels PvP. There's little you can do in this game that doesn't somehow relate to the war machine. The tools to really be able to call this game a sandbox are missing right now, terraforming is a big one. So yeah, unless you like PvP, PO is not a good game for you. If you do like PvP well, join a corp and get stuck in, because that's about all there is to do in this game that has lasting replayability.

People blob in this game because they can and they always will be able to. The larger this game gets, the more people there will be in blobs. It doesn't matter what anyone says to the contrary, they happen and if you don't have enough friends to counter it on any particular day, well it's your turn to stay docked up my friend.

This game is quite PvP centric, so given that, blobs should be even more expected. When the other systems in place are mainly conduits to getting bots and mods to PvP with, it's quite inescapable. We have plenty of reasons to fight in this game, but there really aren't many systems to distract or deter from it. While this may be a sandbox game, it focus' mostly on PvP as opposed to all spectrums of an MMO, thus it draws in more people to crowding PvP. When that happens, how can you tell people to not fight together when that's about the only interesting thing to do?

I don't think this would happen. When they added extra islands not too long ago, they did so to support the growing population of the game, or at least in anticipation of it. The problem isn't the islands and their stature, it's the lack of players in the game to fill them. To repurpose them would only be a temporary solution. Eventually they'd need more again if they did get more active players. But the problem remains that they made them to cater to larger crowds, but haven't perfected the bringing in of the crowds part and keeping them.

75

(131 replies, posted in General discussion)

Devs were warned about things before that players have found to be destructive in nature, but they did nothing until they saw the glaring truth of the notion in action. Here we are again.