You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Perpetuum Forums → Posts by Paragon
considering the number of gamers who are in or end up in some form of science
That and getting a bunch of human brains to act like a compute cluster is gonna be pretty damn powerful for tasks that humans still do better than a CPU.
But, acheivements would fall into a seperate category, more for individual goal setting then competition.
They should have more to do with actual achievement then, and less to do with things that will inevitably happen if you just play long enough. Instead of just "mined a bajillion U of titan," make it "mined X amount in 1 hour". Indies could get ones for minimizing production line downtime. Traders could get them for obscene ROIs. Not "killed 1000 NPCs", but "killed a mech while taking no damage". Varying degrees of difficulty, of course.
Best that they aren't simply a matter of maxing extensions, but actually reward player skill.
Your argument was flawed because there was no argument.
This makes no sense. It can't be flawed if it doesn't exist.
You did not present anything that supported the premise of random magical boxes of goodness.
I never said this was my goal. I was arguing that your "no freebies" position is illusory. By showing that you actually do accept freebies, I also show that you shouldn't be so adamantly opposed to random drops (at least not on the basis of anti-freebie arguments).
I am not (in favour of free cheese).
I'm gonna call No True Scotsman on that.
There are posts that talk about rare drops and other posts that want frequent drops....... It isn't even a feature, yet the hands are already out...
That some people have crazy demands is not a reason to reject the feature outright. By analogy, if someone asks for Grophos to be able to one-shot everything in the game, it doesn't mean that all balance requests should be tossed out.
Only if we can have "pirate" extensions that let us bypass the licensing restrictions and DRM. 
[edit: forgot obvious pirate smiley]
Achievements are sawdust in the content meatloaf. Tossing out cookies for reaching arbitrary milestones is just... dumb. If you have to do something, just keep track of a bunch of gameplay stats and let us decide how impressive someone's odometer is.
But, for this game to be successful we need to have content and mechanics for every player type of the bartle categorization.
If you try to be everything to everyone...
Even though your post was designed to be about as sarcastic as it could be I felt the desire to show the flaws in it anyway!
I was actually quite serious. And you failed to show any flaws. You did clarify your definitions, but that's not the same thing.
The fact is, there is no hard line between handouts and core game design in a sandbox. Name any game mechanic, suggested or implemented, and I can outline a point of view for calling it part of the box, and another point of view calling it a handout.
By your own categories, if a patch added the random loot and the Devs said, "this is how the game is now," it would fall under "the rules of the box." By your own definitions, you'd be forced to accept it as part of the box.
And what are highways if not "effortless benefit?" If you're against accidental effortless benefit (random loot), how could you possibly be okay with guaranteed effortless benefit (highways)? Any argument that shows highways are a non-handout would also apply to random loot: if one is a handout, so is the other. But I don't see you demanding that highways be removed.
What I am is a realist and someone who has no pity and/or sympathy for someone who is not willing to do for themselves.
Why are you posting here, then? Shouldn't you be starting up a new thread about how you think we should build our own NPCs to shoot instead of having them handed to us? Or that you want highways to cost NIC/second to use instead of them just sitting there for our effortless benefit? Why should a market interface be handed to you when there are field cans and credit transfers? And if players are truly supposed to "design the sand," shouldn't you be petitioning to have all the rules and graphics removed from the game so we can make them ourselves?
Don't kid yourself. You might be less generous with handouts. But you are in favour of them.
I would love it if the path finder was applied to the "interact" and "approach" functions.
If you want things handed to you because you don't want to put any EFFORT into your own fun then go fire up your console and button mash some zombies to death.
You're overreacting a bit. The random finds would be pretty rare. My guess is they'd be rare enough that it isn't worth your time to actively search for them. They wouldn't contain game-breaking amounts of valuables. They'd just be a nice little surprise while you wander around looking for a fight or scan for minerals or something.
Also, I find the "I'm hardcore, I put effort in" argument isn't normally used by players willing to put a reasonable amount of effort in, it's more often used by people who don't have full-time jobs and are willing to obsess over a game. It is possible for a game to make you work too hard to find fun.
Can I get a free respec
:facedesk:
Simple answer: unlikely
But why would you even want to reset your character? If there's a new direction you want to go, just start training for it. The easiest way to prevent reset abuse is to not allow resets.
Thanks for the great post. I never got around to Ultima, but it sound like what I hope for in "open PvP": that the possibility of PvP is totally inescapable, and people just learn to live with it. Alpha/Beta and PvE/PvP dualisms are ultimately harmful.
but this way people can debate them over as the changes happen and devs can perhaps gain insight that they wouldnt have otherwise.
Why would this matter? Pre-patch whining will not result in last minute changes.
I guarantee you, players will not, from patch notes alone, give the devs any insight they didn't already have. Descriptions of how the changes actually affect the game might reveal something new, but the patch has to be active for that to become apparent.
Was just thinking the other day that the Prometheus looks a hell of a lot more badass than the Baphomet, which IMO looks more like a grinning cricket than an instrument of destruction. Furthermore, the Prom is simply a much better-looking model. But since no one really uses lights after a month, it's sexy spider grimace is too soon relegated to an undeserved invisibility.
So the proposal is simple. To have appearances fit roles more aptly, swap the Bapho and Prom models, scale as necessary. Simple as.
Seems fussy, I know. But I'm visually oriented and this sort of thing makes my brain itchy.
'Cause these lone wolves would never "just happen" to fight alongside the corp their indy alt is in. Nope not ever.
There has got to be some simple(r) stuff you could do prior to any of the bots even spawning. Like what Aeon mentioned about giving the groups a more tactical squad composition. You could watch player traffic maybe, and have indies only spawn in low traffic spots (so they stop spawning there if they become a farm target) and maybe some attack spawns target high traffic areas (sometimes you'll need to shake them off at the terminal or on the highway).
I don't even really have a problem with how the AI actually fights. The little bots seem un-terrible at knowing their role and keeping distance or finding cover. I dislike that their tendency to just stand around in groups waiting to die screams "I'm a ***!" and tears apart anything the lore claims about their advanced society or whatever. Of course, if players would group up as predictably, we could get some serious pew going...
Needs to at least* take into account beta/alpha and whether or not the player has changed bots. Preventing too-fast tactical refits is one thing, and may (not taking a stance here) be a choice for sane gameplay. But take pity on the little sparks who just want to grab an assignment or another stack of scan charges and get back on the road.
*if we can't have shorter times across the board
"Grind" is relative, IMO. I see having to farm mobs or chase down artifacts to fund my EWar bots as mindnumbingly grindy. (For some, OTOH, PvE and artifacting are awesome and the only things worth doing in PO.) Apart from these, the "variety of ways" a PvPer can fund themselves amounts to an alt account trained for a more lucrative profession, or being good enough at PvP to raid for profit. Regardless, that "a combat player does not have to grind" is ridiculous.
On the "terrain familiarity" bit, I may have misread post #39 as a response to me, when I now realize it could have been meant for EXILE CORP. Assuming it was directed at me, my point was roughly aimed at the fact that repeating tasks for slight personal gains each time wears many masks, and doesn't have to manifest as slowly-changing variables in a character file to qualify as a grind.
But, fine, if "grind" is only and exactly some kind of repetitive task whose sole purpose is to run up a particular quantifiable attribute at a predictable rate, then yeah, you're grinding and I'm not. If grinding, however, is more generously defined as something repetitive you don't like doing that enables something you do like doing, we are both definitely grinding and probably in several different ways.
I'm also pretty sure I suggested to replace assignment-sourced reputation with one that comes simply from being a frequent user of a particular facility (no assignments). I sympathize with your complaint. Having to geoscan and bounty-hunt to get a factory manager to like you is absurd. 
OTOH, pure extension-based efficiency seems just as off to me as having to run unrelated missions.
Maybe, at heart, the complaint has more to do with it being too hard to turn a profit as a younger player? Obviously reputation wouldn't be such a long grind (even in the current system) if it was for better--as opposed to merely some--profit. As you said, an upcoming patch might help with that, but more could probably be done to fix the pacing for indies. Otherwise, I'd just have to wonder how someone can choose the grindiest profession of every MMO ever and then complain about having to grind. 
That's exactly the point, they terminal takes a 'cut' of the refined materials as payment, and the better your rep the less they take.
I was just suggesting another way to make the grind activity more related to the goal. Rather than explicit assignments, simply doing a lot of your own industry in the same place might be an option, and for specific, one-base-only gains, not general faction or even corp gains.
The problem isn't with that mechanic, it's more that the rep grind is important to one group of players while another group can ignore it completely.
There's a lot of grinding that comes from the ridiculous amounts of active experience needed to gain tactical advantages in combat PvP. Intimate knowledge of local terrain, the ability to guess another person's skill and fitting before engaging, it all takes ages of active work to internalize. Indies are self-sufficient (NIC-wise) as industrialists; you earn money doing what you're earning money to do. Combat PvPers need a lot of grind time in non-PvP to fund new bots and replace losses. So there are two "grinds" that aren't shared by industrialists. Fair, but not identical.
Other roles have their own unique grinds, too.
Doesn't make much sense for reputation to be NIC purchasable. It is, after all, supposed to indicate whether a faction likes you or not. It would be an odd society that allowed me to sell off my university degrees and job experience to some rich guy when I'm hard up for cash. "I realize you thought I was a reliable worker, but I sold that to Tim. So he's the one you think is reliable now." You can't commodify everything. 
I'd be very in favour of both manufacturing missions and linking facilities to sub-faction corps instead of the whole faction. Those are fantastic ideas.
Another possibility might be raising your productivity for a facility through repeated use of that same facility. It would represent things like familiarity with that base's equipment, and being considered a "regular" by local staff. A downside is that it could anchor you to a single location. But long-game players could also build competitive advantages by developing relations at multiple bases.
Remember that "fair" and "identical" are not interchangeable. Progress in each profession should have its own unique gameplay characteristics to give the game as much variety as possible. Relations should remain more useful to some than to others. Same goes for things like NIC, territorial knowledge, fitting skills, etc. Variety keeps games fun.
I'm thinking specifically of the new waypoint entry and advert price modification windows (and others like them) where the window's only purpose is basically to take a small amount of text from the user. I think ideal default behaviour would do this:
Appear with text box already focused for typing and (preferably) any existing text already selected
Accept the Enter/Return key as confirmation (i.e. same function as clicking "Okay")
To illustrate, instead of:
trigger the window
click text box and/or drag select text in box
delete text
add new text
grab mouse and click "Okay"
I'd like:
trigger the window
type text
hit "Enter"
Small change, huge difference. Even adding just the "Enter key to confirm" bit would be a great usability boost. Thanks!
While I agree a recent change looks a tad suspicious, I don't think all beta islands should be created equal. It's good for there to be a variety of factors in choosing an outpost. Among them should be: Don't like that someone else has a super good one? Take it for yourself. Don't want to be fending off challengers constantly? Settle for a less juicy spot. Risk v. reward in action.
I'd second this sort of thing only if the tools came with extreme drawbacks, like climbing tackle being very heavy (gimping the open space speed) or jump jets significantly reducing accumulator stats. This helps ensure the tools are only useful for specific tasks, and don't become "must fit" equipment.
Totally agree with each and every point above. However, some prioritization would be necessary IMHO...
Heh. Just goes to show how different people's priorities can be. I'd go (top to bottom):
Useful:
1) Mostly to preview fitting requirements, though. Robust 3rd party fitting tools will exist soon enough.
3) Very handy; can always be swapped after a misfire. I'd much rather shoot something than nothing. Learn to not screw up if you're RR-fit. Options to prioritize by range or hostile-only would be gravy.
Can wait:
2) Fewer clicks is always better.
6) Can be annoying. Agreed.
Not needed:
4) Your EP costs are usually meaningless to others and you can't spend them in the field. Therefore, no need to know them in the field.
5) Not needed at all. Get to know your bot. When you're running out of acc. you will be low on acc.; time to leave. The numbers will be approximate at best anyway due to cycle times, intermittent use, and the occasional neut.
You can change the bindings to get your second set. It just wouldn't affect the order of the HUD buttons. So for your example fit, set slots 1 and 4 to f1 and f2 (and so on). And get used to double-checking your settings when you change bots/fits.
Check also to see if you could rearrange your equipment at fitting to get the keystrokes you want.
Being able to rearrange equipment visually would certainly be handy, though.
Perpetuum Forums → Posts by Paragon
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 3 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
Generated in 0.101 seconds (97% PHP - 3% DB) with 6 queries
Copyright © Avatar Creations
