51

(159 replies, posted in General discussion)

http://blog.perpetuum-online.com/posts/ … ig-revamp/

Should cover your concerns.

52

(51 replies, posted in General discussion)

Yes we can it's orange, read up ^^

53

(19 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Yeah ok fair enough, but it's still a pain in the butt to use search feature. Just make a page that automatically displays the search results of posts from all Devs. Plx?

54

(51 replies, posted in General discussion)

Pak wrote:

More likely they verified that there is no imbalance therefore this is a non issue and they do not care.

What color the faction is depends on how you define the color of a faction. I personally tend to designate each faction with the color of the stripes that decorate the buildings and the structures on the sides of the mortorroads. Thelodica uses goldish yellow colored stripes as decorations.

Aren't we Mr. Cynical today? big_smile

And! Issue solved....taken from in-game help:

Different NPC factions use different kind of weapons as well. '''Pelistal robots''' (robots with green tint) use ballistic weapons, '''Nuimqol robots''' (blue tint) use electromagnetic weapons, and '''Thelodica robots''' (orange tint) use laser weapons.

ORANGE wins!! big_smile

55

(50 replies, posted in General discussion)

Neoxx wrote:

Then you look at the ways that its exploitable and find ways around it.  If every time some exploit was found and the devs just said "well, I guess we scrap that whole feature!" we wouldnt have a game right now.  Dont write something off just because you think of an exploit for something.  Thats just being lazy big_smile

I think thats one reason I like brainstorming new features is BECAUSE my mind looks for such loopholes all the time.  I dont necessarily intend to use them, but thats just how I think.

I see it in a similar way to war decs in eve.  The longer you want to dec the more expensive it costs.  Why didnt people in eve just jump corps to circumvent either the cost or the consequence of being dec'd and force their enemy to make more of them?  Maybe they did?  What was the consequence?

I really cant see having a whole corp jump to a dummy corp just to be able to dock in an outpost.  The logistics of it are just f*cking stupid unless you dont ever bother with corp storage AT ALL.

Alright fair points. But I don't agree that my exploit scenario wouldn't happen. If a corp has all their *** tied in a station they will go to any length to try and get it back. Yes it won't be an everyday occurence, I'm not arguing that at all.

Right so - One the positive side I see that this will be a nic sink, it will make corps think more of who not to trust, and it will make for some entertaining lulz when the bill doesn't get paid.

On the negative it's gonna be a huge administrative *** once we get a critical mass of corps in the game and in current implementation it's obviously exploitable.

And let's leave the RP out of it that should be the least deciding factor wether or not a game mechanic makes sense or not.

56

(50 replies, posted in General discussion)

I don't "hate" the idea, I just think it's far too exploitable in current in form. Also I don't trust you to not have some clever loophole already figured out besides the obvious one I already posted big_smile

Gaulois wrote:

The op's suggestion is called a "Probe" and it will be implemented this summer.

It's already planned.

Must not troll about batphone big_smile

Kidding aside, great to hear. smile

Guns nButter wrote:
Snowman wrote:

well thats flawed logic isnt it.  vanity items have no 'use' and just for looks.

and if you think that noone would use it, then you've never had to keep an island scouted 24/7

Live on a beta island and your attitude would change very quickly.

I love how CIR, the biggest corp in Perpetuum, is proposing an idea to make their complete dominance of a beta island that much easier...

Quit your *** and drop a few people off the strip miner train for scouting. Should be easy enough.

Let's see here. Currently we have 4 scouts on all teleports pretty much 24/7, except when we dont ^^. These scouts are in Arkhes and are worthless to kill. Scouting is a thankless job and the BES is actually quite severe, trust me you will know once(if) you actually have anything to scout.

This change would introduce risk in the form of a mod. Killing the scouts now actually hurts us and suddenly gatescout becomes a mini profession in game, giving more diversity.

I also like Pak's suggestion, maybe we can incorporate it to make a complete scout/counterscount package?

At the end of the day it doesn't phase us either way. Just don't cry about BES when it affects you. But yeah making you not go deaf is wanting it easy street....sheesh.

59

(19 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Sorry but I think it's a great thing that Devs are taking their time and actually reading the individual threads. The latest blog also clearly shows that they are listening to the playerbase.

I don't know how you can see this as anything but positive but to each their own. And this thread is about a Dev tracker, which I thought is something you would welcome, since we get the best of both worlds. Close contact and a central resource for all their comments smile

60

(19 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

What's needed imo with the recent influx of players and, therefore, Dev responses to player concerns in forum threads, is a Dev Tracker area of the forums where everyone can easily see every Dev reply that is made throughout the threads.

This way no critical info is missed.

61

(50 replies, posted in General discussion)

And what is to stop people from just corp hopping en mass every 24 hours to circumvent this, driving up the cost each time, since the outpost owner needs to add a new corp every time. Once the outpost owner removes an old corp, people can rejoin that one and voila docking rights again.

It's horribly exploitable, so a big no to that.

62

(15 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Arga wrote:

My account is over 30 days, and what if your high-value recycling skill is over 6.

It's not a whine, nor is it a 'small' amount of EP involved with a complexity 4 extension. The volume of T2 and above items being recycled would in no way justify 20,000 EP for level 7 High-grade refining.

And, like I said, PVP/beta corps won't really have the option of not producing, but your also not producing for the market and have your own supply of epitron in any case.

Edit: But I do approve of the T1 change to this as well as the CT change. As well as the relation change of course.

Hmmm this is actually ambigious. I read it as for the first 30 days after patch deployment people will be able to do that. Although I possibly lack reading comprehension. big_smile You're prolly right though ^^

63

(51 replies, posted in General discussion)

The lack of Dev response to this thread might indicate that they don't have any idea either and are now going: Wtf gais what color is it?

Can any Dev confirm ongoing fistfights at the office over the color issue? big_smile

64

(15 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Arga wrote:

Um. Is it just me, or is anyone else going to not make any T1 epi based items for the next month? Probably an option for independant producers, but not so much for pvp corps.

The side effect of this will of course be that recycling will also no longer give you any espitium. For indy players that have put EP into this, can we have a refund?

For us at least it will be business as usual. And yes you can have a refund on your recycling:

For the first 30 days you can both add and subtract extension levels in your Agent Profile. The limitation to this is that you won't be able to jump back and forth between full-fledged combat and industry specialization every minute, and that taking any extension to level 6 will freeze it perpetually. There will be an option for a one time attribute reset in this first period as well, most probably via running a trimmed version of the character creator again.

So you'll be able to decrease your recycling skills.

65

(82 replies, posted in News and information)

Nice one!

This is how it has always been. They will release the patchnotes once it's actually deployed not before. This avoids problems where notes don't match the patch (!) because of last minute issues that lead to the removal of things because they break something. Also leaking info early, while server with previous version is still running can lead to a situation where the person who reads em first can capitalize on it (price adjustments, module changes, etc..)

Snow you need to take the tinfoil hat off big_smile

Still +1 what happened to the other thread? big_smile

68

(13 replies, posted in General discussion)

DEV Calvin wrote:

This is a great place to post screenies:

http://massively.joystiq.com/category/one-shots/

I can tell you all, the new mission locations look moar spectacular, than anything in Perpetuum so far.

Screenshots or stfu big_smile

69

(73 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

don't see why not. Expand on that and add the following:

1) # of cycles of successful ECM per participant
2) Amount of acc drained per participant
3) Amount of time demobed per participant
4) Amount of time supressed per participant

If we gonna e-peen let's do it right big_smile Also good intel tool...

70

(43 replies, posted in Balancing)

Arga wrote:

Hauling ore during a mining op can be done continually, so there's ways to mitigate that; not saying it isn't a pain, but it can be avoided.

After seeing 30 + lithus's rolling out of Tellesis however, it does become apparent that there are corps out there needing to move 10 of thousands of U's of material. Now that is something that can't be easily worked around.

I'm going to say that the next generation of bots should have a dedicated hauler, something large, very slow, and difficult to defend. But capable of moving something like 2400U's at a time. There could also be a larger but more tactical hauler following in the 3x capacity line of 720U's with a slower speed than the lithus.

If a bot comes out that is faster with more cargo than a lithus, that will make it obesolete. If it's going to have similar specs then it would need to be much more difficult to drive, so that the lithus would still be viable. Meaning the EP requirement would have to be large enough that the time it takes to drive the 720U bot is so long that it's desirable to use the lithus; something like 3 months of EP, in addition to Indy 10. That sounds like alot, but recall that it's 45 days of EP to get from Indy 9 to 10 simply to pick up a couple slots in the Riveler MK II.

On the other hand, the dedicated hauler can be less EP intensive, as it doesn't have a comparable bot; and would essentially become the base model of cargo bots; Think semi-truck vs cargo van (sequar) or 1/2 ton uHaul (Lithus) that we have now.

I take your super slow bot and raise you one teleport beacon.

edit: Of course for non transisland hauling this would work.

71

(11 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

I like it.

Also it would mean Syndic would have to train another alt to drive the comcan around. Always a plus big_smile

72

(43 replies, posted in Balancing)

Hmmm I'm not sure this would be a good thing. Rememeber that exposure to potential enemies is a deciding factor in pvp. If I can do all my hauling on beta in 1-2 runs instead of 4-6 I give my enemies less time to react and come gank my ***, thus reducing the risk.

That said I do get the pain of hauling, believe me. When CIR moved from Koykili to Danarchov we had something along the lines of 2000 (yes 2k) Lithus loads to haul. Was not fun but we did it in the end.

Maybe we can just reduce the volume of ore instead?

73

(106 replies, posted in Balancing)

Pak wrote:

Things are sometimes more complex than that.

The dominant force does not need to be larger than the "pet". There have been cases of numerically "small" (relative term) alliances that were extremely powerful.

AFAIK the term emerged from the forum dump of one of such forces. The "PvP l33t" members of it were lamenting about an ally corp that, in their opinion, was failing at strategical and tactical levels during a campaign and needed continuous spoon-feeding. Someone called it a "pet alliance" in a rant posted on the internal forums of the more powerful group.

Of course as soon as a forum dump of their private site became public, that "rant" has been exploited by their enemies in an attempt to grow malcontent in their lines, and specifically in the ranks of all their allies, including those that were not actually being discussed. You can easily imagine how the propaganda went: "you are considered a worthless pet by your own ally, just quit helping them".

EvE PvP reality is far more complex than what you see in Perpetuum (at least now). Metagame is common among the most powerful forces. Metagame is not only spies that join an enemy and steal their resources or report their movements/plans. There also is a lot of psychological warfare. Moles planted in enemy lines sometimes actively work to rise malcontent, dissatisfaction and internal conflicts as a way to weaken or defeat the enemy. Internal forum dumps (from a spy or by cracking the forum security), TS/Vent recordings (again by a spy or by cracking the server) and much more are common tools of the trade. As well as public forum whoring, trolling etc. It goes all the way to cracking the enemy servers and/or mounting DDoS attacks of the enemy TS/Vent server during a fight.

As for the use of "pet" and "renter", as Predator Nova wrote: if it's your friend it's an ally, if it's a friend of your enemy it's his pet or a renter.

Whether this is really the case is irrelevant. You call your enemy's friends either "pet" or "renter" anyway. You are planting a seed. If you are lucky someone among them will start asking "are our powerful allies actually considering us 'just pets'?". And maybe a member of the more powerful force will have to think twice before lamenting about an error of the less powerful one (or if he does not he risks malcontent as the allied corp/alliance may suspect you are considering them 'pets').

Planting such seeds may be subtle, but it has been proven to also be successful in many cases. Of course it does not work "alone". It's just part of a much larger set of stimuli that, altogether, undermine the enemy.

If interested you may want to read Secrets of a Solar Spymasters #20: Inside the Failure Cascade.

Also EVE Online: The Propaganda War and Sins of a Solar Spymaster 21: How to Survive a Failure Cascade are interesting.

In fact all the articles in that series are interesting in some way.

Perfect summary. Personally I can't wait until the game becomes large enough for this kind of Meta game to fully evolve. It's what keeps the game running.

Well maybe without the RMT behind the scenes tongue

DEV BoyC wrote:

Found a way to cut the operative memory use of the 3d engine in half. This will also deploy with tomorrows patch and should help some more with the memory issues.

W to the ooot! big_smile

75

(20 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Don't Devs have plans to implement a complete tactical overlay for Squad leaders anyway? Surely this would be part of that.

But yeah +1