1

(69 replies, posted in Balancing)

Sundial wrote:

with a large squad with enough ewar and dps

You just need a HM for the DPS, a EW mech for remote sensor amp support and EW, and your ready to kill any type of observers. 2 pilots is enough with skill ^^

2

(50 replies, posted in Balancing)

Dazamin wrote:

However it would probably be a bad idea for the devs to balance the game around the 200ish players that are actually playing, they do have to think long term.

You are perfectly right, if the "long term" existence of the game is guaranteed....  and that is not the case sorry.

A "future vision of the game" dont pay the bills.

The bad idea would be to displease the actual players (and payers!) of this game. We are the only thing that separate them from bankrupt, remember it. Future players are, hmm, not existent at this time? (gratz captain obvious!)

I dont say "cater to the first guy that come complaining on the forums", but rather "dont add a motive of displeasure over the players head", on a game that seems to interest less and less peoples.

Mixed spawns (dynamic AND static) were pretty fine, there were something for everyone. If the change was made to halt the kernel flow, you are completely wrong guys.

If its a way to prepare next level of pve aspect like arga said, then consider my post obsolete.

3

(50 replies, posted in Balancing)

Its amusing how in time of low server population, DEVs find all the possible ways to detract solo PVEers.

DEV Alf wrote:

On average, NPC spawns contain the same lvl of NPCs as before (meaning sometimes higher, sometimes lower, depending on luck)

Well id like some explanation how, starting from a npc spot that spawned only 5 grade npcs, and making it a range between Xgrade/5grade, you will retain the average npc lvl as before??  Its like i had a faked dice that only sent 6, and someone give me a normal one, and tell me if i shoot 10 times, on average i will do the same sum than with 10 faked shoot. Explain please.

You will say my example is working only on highest grade spawns.  Why are we risking our full T4/HM fits, if not for farming the highest grade mobs in the game?  If i want T3 or T4 , i just go to alphas.... no risk same reward it seems for me.  Greater spawning numbers??  Whats the point, i dont care about quantity i need quality.

DEV Alf wrote:

on BETA you will be able to get rank 4-5 elites

Yeah so neat !  I can now risk my uber pve bot to get the chance to kill a mob that gives nothing interesting...

DEV Alf wrote:

All  those who want to farm specific kernel types can find their spawns as well.

What does that mean?

  You will be able to find the spawn where your kernels drops, but only 1/5 mobs will drop one? (couple that with 50% drop ratio and you can just do something else and buy your specific kernels on the market, that will be less time consuming and safer (some will think: oh yeah cool so the market is more alive.  Just no. Peoples will sell higher prices, offer will be very low, and finally nobody will buy them.)).

OR

Each specific npc type has still one non dynamic spawn?

If so welcome overcrowding and bad behaviors between players.

Like every solo farmer, i feel like this modification hits a bit too hard my playstyle.  Not sure if ill renew.

If i was a dev i honestly wouldnt take into account what said a damn spammer spreading bs everywhere on our forums.

Thanks

Send PM ill come search it anywhere on alpha

Yeah sure i take things far too seriously.  The problem with history repeating, is that peoples tend to forget atrocities of war.

Cowardise of France, at a given time, cost many lives of innocents.
At those times its often surrender or die.  So im asking you, who make so funny jokes about french cowardise, to go ask jew family that lost so many members, i ask you to go see them, look them in the eyes and make the same joke. They will laugh for sure right?

Internet, where your absolutely NOT accountable for anything you say, need you to be EXTRA careful about who can be offended and why.

I wont report because i dont like delation.  I just try to explain why some jokes, heard or read by the good (or bad) person, can be REALLY offensive.

So please, just joke us french about froggies, about snails eaters or whatever you like. It even makes me laugh too when its subtle.  But a fact that cost so many lives, no, really i dont see where its funny.



Trap Card wrote:

Typically all things not on your side ARE against you.

Well in your mind maybe, but i hope majority of peoples dont have such a manichean way of thinking.

Your statement applies when theres only two opposing sides. Reality is much much more complex sorry.

Lana Torrin wrote:
0110011100001111001010001 wrote:

So...Dev Mooooooz


Is reverse smile

Wouldn't that be him running fast backwards? A skill the french has perfected. tongue


WTF are you talking about?  You should not speak about what you dont know anything, id liked to see you a rifle in hands going to a guaranteed death, easier to talk 70 yo bullshit...

Another brainwashed US kid if you ask me....  go save the world and make war to anything thats not on your side.

8

(23 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Tux wrote:

They can leave everything as is and make the ew tuners fit in to turret or mics slots IDC.

  Im 100% ok with you as i said lets have tunings for more modules type, its a good idea and improve diversity.

Arilou wrote:

Oh come on... so go 3 head, 5 chassis.

Thats exactly what im telling, now your idea imply to modify slot numbers and positions for a mech, and if another guy comes up with similar reclamations as me, you ll say: "Ok guys, lets just modify this too!" If your asking for something (feature request right), i assume you already asked yourself if this something would not completely change balance/gameplay in the game, in such a way it would denaturate it completely.

Arilou wrote:

Is the Ictus broken? It's EW. It uses misc slots for its EW.

Some dont understand what electronic warfare does mean it seems...  Ictus is specialized in draining/neuting, wich is NOT EW, even if its a EW mech.  Look closer at ingame help, drainer/neutralizer are engineering. Ictus has bonus to it, but in no way it uses EW on chassis.

Your asking me for more imagination, but you seems to have difficulties admitting an EW mech has mostly Engineering bonuses...

And for the ones saying its logical to have EW mods fitted on chassis rather than on headslots, well were not from the same logic then.

  EW only purpose is to disrupt target specific capacities, like speed, sensor range etc...  To do so they send particular energetic signals, but as signal they emmit very low energy. So its logical to think they can be enclosed INSIDE the robot hull.

On the contrary any module type that need an EXTERNAL shape, like weapons, any type of HEAVY energy transfer, gathering modules etc... all those ones can only be fitted on chassis.

At least its how i guess the devs thinked of it, and for me its pure logic.

Well reading this i instantly remembered Metal Masters !!!!

You like 10 meters long powersaw? 5 tons hammers ? Look at this, and sorry for my oldschoolness

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krWZyw0Y … re=related

10

(23 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Oh ok and why not change everything in the game to fit the "superior idea" of messing all the slot type balances for every type of bots/mechs, btw your telling me that, despite the fact ive nearly maxxed all ecm related skills, i would (well i know that will never happen but heh i just feel like to give my pov) in that case be able to fit only 2 of them.... ahah really guys sometimes i wonder...  you gladly ask to change everything in the fitting world so you can fit a demob and have all your head slots?  Clearly its something asked by light/assault pilots that are annoyed to have so few headslots, so they dont have to lose one on demob.  Just try to get some perspective about the fact everyone play the game differently.

11

(23 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Then whats the point of having a vagabond with only 3 legslots, 3 chassis, and 5 head if all EW goes to chassis??  Im ok for the EW tuning going to misc, than can make sense, and id like to have "arms" on my vaga too, but lol all EW to chassis really that doesnt make any sense for me.

Headslot number is the determining factor for EW capabilities...  Otherwise a kain (with his 4 misc chassis slots) would be more "EW fittable" than a vagabond (2 misc chassis slots). Lol at this idea...

4.  You CAN see the EP needed for next extension level if you mouse over 2 sec over said extension in extension window even outside terminal theres a popup appearing with info needed.

13

(6 replies, posted in General discussion)

"Bah, again nothing about player-built structures *grmbl* - I hear from the back rows. Yes, thank you for your question, that concept is alive and in the works, but still has a long way to go. While it’s one of our priorities, we don’t want to leave you with nothing in the meantime. But as mentioned in an earlier post, the target time for that is still the end of this year. "

Quoted from one of the last devblog

I really cant understand why kernel research is so random. Why not create kernel type linked to specific research trees, in addition to faction and grade reducing result pool.

Like for example weaponry, engineering, EW etc..  Each "tree" need specific kernels dropped by specific npc.  The kernel research results would still be random, but in a smaller item pool.

That would allow solo producers to aim for a specific higher tech, then fill the market fast with one or two T4 module type. Large corp would still have to research all to be selfsufficient, but they could "split" KB between few indies, its better than feeding a single dude until omniscience.

This system is far more realistic than what we have, how could one research everything in the world at the same time.

I guess they selected "everything at same time" research system to ensure that highest tier items wouldnt come too fast, and that a new corp cant compete technologically, by researching fast the only modules they need in their fitting/combat strategy.

BUT  atm i feel like the modules/strategies are well balanced, at a point where FOTM and specific strategies can always be countered by another one. So why not a beautiful research tree, more kernel diversity and less randomness?

In that case kernel %researched result could be lowered too.