1 Reply by OptiKhan

(18 replies, posted in Balancing)

I figured it out... here is the protection / molecular timer issues that hopefully could resolve the need to balance the "free look" at a pvp zone.

Require a beta or gamma teleport to be locked by the robot.

GG

Go to forum: Balancing

2 Reply by OptiKhan

(18 replies, posted in Balancing)

Another solution I had shared with me by I believe Rocky from NSE was to tie BOTH timers to a set amount of time, regardless of connection.  If your connection is bad or you are running a cardboard computer and can't render in reasonable time then you run that risk.  Be more careful with your ***.  But the current paradigm is flawed.


PLEASE FIX THIS!!!   winktonguelolyarr:cool:

Go to forum: Balancing

3 Reply by OptiKhan

(18 replies, posted in Balancing)

Line wrote:

What's to the rest of stuff - despite of connection issues you shouldn't have protection lasts more that instability because other players need a timeframe to try and kill you. If you're prepared tanky bot - that's up to you but that's not the same that being unkillable because of protection.


Totally agree with this. Very cognizant observation.  Protection should never be longer than instability... however BOTH timers should be tied to client handshake rather than the current scheme.  Where the protection is timed to begin with server side render on terrain and instability that is tied to client handshake.

Go to forum: Balancing

4 Reply by OptiKhan

(149 replies, posted in Balancing)

Ewar OP!

Go to forum: Balancing

5 Reply by OptiKhan

(18 replies, posted in Balancing)

Excellent feedback Anni, ty for that.

I would disagree with you, however, on a couple finer points:

Instability makes "sense" from a realism standpoint. 

You suggested that there are 2 main "reasons" for instability.  I suggest to you that your latter reason is flawed because there is currently code that makes a DC' absolutely silly to do as an "escape".  There is no escape with DC except in one instance and that "trick" is unavoidable under the current paradigm.  I won't spoil that trick here either, as it is clearly an exploit and I prefer not using or talking about exploits in public.

The first suggestion of a reason is totally flawed because jumping back and forth can be accomplished with a tanked unit anyway.  Inda can describe the silly fun he had with his tanked up Sequer on a beta / gamma port (even more dangerous) that despite the current molecular instability issues he was still able to escape our mighty grasp and run off freely.  Because we were flagged and he wasn't basically... so the molecular instability served its purpose in that event; specifically due to the extended stability related to a pvp flag.

So that is my retort for Anni.  Hopefully it remains well-received. 

cool

Go to forum: Balancing

6 Reply by OptiKhan

(18 replies, posted in Balancing)

I would further point out that this "unkillable" zone only exists at 6 teleports and 3 beta terminals, out of how many on beta / gamma?

Really, you blobbers are worried about "unkillable" scouts?

Sad...   lol tongue

Go to forum: Balancing

7 Reply by OptiKhan

(18 replies, posted in Balancing)

Jita /fail

That is correct.  It is unkillable and only useful to look at the terrain around the "unkillable" ground.  Meanwhile there are several fits that accomplish the same thing.  Unkillable scouts.  So what?!!

This is a balance issue related to de-sync.  Not "fairness" in one factions capacity to gank agents in a black screen.

Go to forum: Balancing

8 Reply by OptiKhan

(18 replies, posted in Balancing)

lol - okay Anni with the flames

so... you admit it is broken?

Go to forum: Balancing

9 Topic by OptiKhan

(18 replies, posted in Balancing)

big_smile

While there has been a large debate, although some time ago, about the instability timers I wanted to approach you guys with my version of things.

First I havn't reported this because I was exploiting it.  Second, I am now reporting it pre-emptively because I will seek a reimbursement for every loss suffered by this bug.

I say this is a bug because I don't believe it is performing in the way the Devs intended it to perform.

The "bug" is as follows:

Instability = molecular instability (ie the amount of time it takes the robots "molecules" to form a cohesive structure after teleporting from one zone to another, undocking etc.

Syndicate protection = a no-lock protective mode on jumping into areas to alleviate "unfair" gate blobbing issues or the capacity to eliminate another agent before the agent has actually rendered terrain and can "fight back".  This protection timer is specifically implemented to allow a time frame in which the local client can handshake with the server.

This all seems well and good, but here is what happens on terrain to people with terrible pings.  Such as US west coast, Alaska (me), and Australia...

OptiKhan clicks teleport / undock, OptiKhan "materializes" on terrain and only one timer starts.  The "protection" timer... why is that?  (cuz the Devs don't play) Aren't OptiKhan's molecules visible on terrain to the other agents in the area??  Don't the resident agents at the destination have a SIGNIFICANT advantage by seeing this agent materalizing before their eyes??  Yes, and yes.

So while OptiKhan's protection timer is running out, molecular instability HASN'T EVEN STARTED YET.

So... I ask you why is it that I can be killed after ANY TELEPORT action because from Alaska I can often experience such horrendous de-sync that my protection is completely worn out before I even begin the molecular count down?

How is that a "fair" mechanic from a so-called "playable game" point of view... and further how is this function even realistic??

It is NOT realistic at all, even in Hungary.  If molecules are visible on terrain the "molecular stability" should begin IMMEDIATELY.  Meanwhile since Syndicate protection is intended to allow a "fair fight" on landing the timers start points should be swapped.

Solution:  Begin protection timer when client handshakes (currently tied to molecular instability); Begin molecular timer when agent renders on terrain at destination (currently tied to syndicate protection).

SWAP THE TIMERS  !!!  All is well!

If people complain about too much time, and that enemies get a "free look" at beta side action, then thin out the protection timer.  Since it is tied to client rendering the terrain (out of the long *** black screen) then it can be much shorter in duration to allow about a 5 to 10 sec of protection before being lockable.

Please FIX !!!

Go to forum: Balancing

10 Topic by OptiKhan

(3 replies, posted in Bugs)

The following link shows the three differences between battery tiers:

http://imgur.com/JgWzxIH

It is my contention that there should be more outgoing conns than incoming and/or that both should grow when the tier is raised. 

Similarly the outgoing connections on backbones should be +1 for each tier.  Although it looks like a stepping stone approach was used for most T2 facilities in that the major bonus of upgrading wasn't reached until T3.  Still the outgoing conns are much more viable on a battery than incoming and I believe this to be a bug / error.

Could a dev please verify this sillyness and in some fashion explain their logic of what would be the purpose of having 5 incoming connections on a battery??????

Go to forum: Bugs

11 Topic by OptiKhan

(31 replies, posted in Bugs)

I might be mistaken here, however I thought in the "old" gamma system people were not allowed to deconstruct buildings while they were in emergency reinforcement phase?

Apparently this is possible in the "new" gamma system.

Is this a feature or a bug?

Go to forum: Bugs

12 Reply by OptiKhan

(21 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

This is worthy of serious application.

Please make the suggestions in the OP happen...  stat!

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

13 Reply by OptiKhan

(7 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

But ... but... the patch means certain doom for the game!

How could you be so callous and aloof!

Like this silly little game doesn't even matter one iota to you... does it!?

Well it does to a lot of other people you are alienating by your ill-mannered attempt to ride the middle-path.

What tripe!

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

14 Reply by OptiKhan

(2 replies, posted in Bugs)

+1 for Opti  tongue

Go to forum: Bugs

15 Topic by OptiKhan

(7 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

This is a tribute to the GREATEST suggestion in the world!!


REVERSE THE PATCH!!!!!! 


Now before all the tribbles hit the swimming pool and multiply!!!

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

16 Topic by OptiKhan

(2 replies, posted in Bugs)

With the change to the % based detection / masking system to a point based system someone forgot to migrate this to the detection / masking spark.

It is adding .05 rf instead of 5 rf to both stats.

Please fix this as the masking /detection systems are now horribly broken as it is.

Go to forum: Bugs

17 Reply by OptiKhan

(50 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

For Alaskans this is a great opportunity to get in on the game.  Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend is supposed to be around $1900.00 US this year.

This would make a great game for other Alaskans to buy for their Steam friends!!

Waiting until after October 1st or even the 10th will help facilitate this inevitable Alaskan influx of interested gamers!!

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

18 Reply by OptiKhan

(54 replies, posted in General discussion)

Master once say, "There is never any valid excuse for giving your enemy any advantage over you".

and

"Victory in warfare is often determined by foreknowledge."

Go to forum: General discussion

19 Reply by OptiKhan

(57 replies, posted in Balancing)

Spark teleport was OP back then because we could instantly jump into fights.  Now we just use more accounts to jump into fights...

Making a spark change because there is less map area even though Gamma is currently slated for release SOON (TM) is an effort in futility.

Go to forum: Balancing

20 Reply by OptiKhan

(7 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

News:  I deleted my local.gbf file and its now keeping correct focus.

Please "Merkle" this thread... thanx!

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

21 Reply by OptiKhan

(7 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Can u provide a fix?

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

22 Topic by OptiKhan

(7 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Suggestion:

Change the code to allow for LAST CHAT TAB to remain primary focus when docking / undocking / teleporting etc.


Vicinity chat being the default tab is really really super incredibly "stupid".

Thank you!

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

23 Reply by OptiKhan

(19 replies, posted in General discussion)

Woot !!!  Moar content:  http://www.perp-kill.net/kill/258487

Anyone trolololol at the value exchange here??

Go to forum: General discussion

24 Reply by OptiKhan

(19 replies, posted in General discussion)

\o/ yay Content!!!

Guran - you were content ever since you thought you could solo people on hoop with your Mesmer, Zenith and detector.

You were content when you were ransacked repeatedly on Novastrov.   

I love your content!!  TROLOLOL

*dismisses the tryhards*

Go to forum: General discussion

25 Reply by OptiKhan

(133 replies, posted in Balancing)

Are we again fixing things that aren't broken??  Really??

Where is our Gamma islands?  Aren't there more important things to focus on at this juncture in Nian history?


My opinion and responses to the agenda items:

#1: No changes are needed here.  The RF balances are quite adequate.  The changes suggested will only force detection units to utilize alternate techniques to achieve the same objectives.

#2: ECM tunings and ECCMs are reasonably balanced.   My only suggestion is that you limit the tuners to one being equipped on the bot at a time; like evasion modules and ERPs.  The values are currently balanced.

Go to forum: Balancing