You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Active topics Unanswered topics
Search options (Page 1 of 18)
Nooodlzs wrote:Annihilator wrote:ok, because the w(h)ining PvP faction suddenly runs only a smaller selection of bots, "teaches" their new lapdogs whats the "best to use" ... that list is very representative.
Actually it is, comparing the two, the distribution of bots being used has dynamically changed to a few FOTM bots, whereas Octobers listings were a lot more varied.
What it looks like to me is firstly, the arbalest mk2 is way out there for whatever reason and needs to be sorted. So let's move on from that. If I look at the next group I have eight bots that have participated in at least half as many kills as the bot in second place. Looking at Oct numbers, the top bot is almost exactly the same as the one in second, this is better, but if I look at how many bots have at least half the number of kills as the first placed bot, the answer is four.
So if you could fix the arbalest mk 2 issue, you'll end up with ten bots being used at least half as much as the number one bot. Compared to four in October. There may be more 'unusable' boots now, I didn't look at the figures for the least used bots.
Finally, by the numbers, it seems the goal of making smaller bots more powerful has been achieved, while we still see larger bots in the commonly used group.
WHAT ARE STACKING PENALTIES?!?!?!?!?!?!
I'm totally gonna play this weekend 
Nooodlzs wrote:Dazamin wrote:No
Since nothing was well balanced in the first place, it doesn't really matter that its still not balanced.
It was far nearer being balanced than it is now, some bots have been indirectley boosted and others have been nerfed into the dust, as a green pilot with most of my 700k ep invested into Ictus I am extremely dissapointed.
I disagree, its just different now, of course your playstyle might have been affected, that doesn't by definition make it more unbalanced. You may notice that all EWar bots were essentially nerfed, I wonder why??? :iiam: The Ictus was hit hard because of its non standard bonus setup, if required an adjustment to the base level, as with mining can be used I would think, but its not gonna be what it was (I hope).
No
Since nothing was well balanced in the first place, it doesn't really matter that its still not balanced.
DEV Zoom wrote:Those talking about "infinite minerals" seem to always forget that it doesn't really matter that much. NPCs are also infinite but I can't remember any complaints about that, although it's pretty much the same.
What matters is the number of players gathering the minerals and the time they invest into it. Those factors shape the prices, and then there is of course the question of demand.
Its not really being 'infinite' thats the problem, more that its incredibly easy (especially for large groups) to gather resources at a level far beyond their current needs and thus stockpile a lot of materials, either supply or demand needs adjusting.
RIP SAP Ninjas 
Ville wrote:What I liked, was Owning a station and having an enemy live out of it and you collected rent. We can't do this in the current setup because if the stations are open then opportunists would be open season for hitting SAPs,
And to address our Alliance owning all the stations, what do you think is the logical progression for a PVP alliance in a territorial warfare game? It's to get pvp and gobble up as much land as you can to produce those Major fights.
I don't see anything wrong with the first point, you open up your stn, it makes it easier to attack, makes perfect sense, you can still rent it out, there's just downsides to that, which is as it should be.
On the second point, getting PvP and gobbling up all the land are not the same thing, and they can work against each other. If you want fights on beta, people have to live on beta, if you own all the stns, they won't. I mean there's nothing wrong with taking all stns, but then to complain there's no one to fight, well ofc theres not, that's just the reality of the situation.
Ville wrote:Station stability might "Sound" like a good idea, but was VERY poorly executed. Because the bonuses for the stations do not provide enough reward in production efficiency to justify moving a production out to a beta island without it being at 90~100% all the time. It would be most efficient to just produce on Alpha, which is what most people do. Fighting for SAPs is a fun mini game but like I said one guy in a waspish can cost a production corp millions. Which is why no one lives in Beta. Just for the Epi.
How to fix these problems? Stop rebalancing things. Give new content to people, make the Stockpiles of bots and modules WORTHLESS by adding new tiers of goods, better bots. Make those stockpiled assets move. This is how you combat these items guys, not rebalancing content.
But as long as 1 guy in an assault bot can jack up a corps logistics no one will live there. Viva Intrusion 1.0!
I meant to add, yes stability is a bit *** and intrusion 2.0 makes me miss the days of the original intrusion system (which involved fights at 4am). But in terms of rebalancing you're wrong, its the right way to do it, this isn't a themepark MMO and I'm not sure why if you object to things being rebalanced, but don't object to them being made completely useless through power creep.
Gwyndor wrote:Anyone should be able to hold a terminal if they can defend the saps. If they aren't there to defend the saps they shouldn't have the terminal. That's whatthe devs intended and that's how its working. If you aren't capable of stopping one assault from taking your sap every 8-16 hours then you should stay in archage
Yeah pretty much this, there's an easy way to stop one man corps owning stns, send two guys to fight them.
There's no way I'm gonna read all of this thread, so I'm just gonna assume that the Perpetuum community reacted in their usual considered manner 
Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:When we had the cargo exploit 1.0 a year or so ago that was being used by most of the games population or at the very least every corp in game. The issue of transport missions being use with this exploit was brought up back then. The DEVs were told about it & Zoom said it was all "sorted".
Zooms post about this specifically said they found no one using the cargo exploit, are you saying you know different Obi??? Spill the beans 
Stranger Danger wrote:If the reward for the mission or activity is worth doing, and its fun, lots of people would do them, and you wouldn't need to search out some way to create efficiency.
If it can be abused, someone will abuse it, some people will search out the most efficient ways of making ISK, Mining, w/e, nothing wrong with that in most cases, some methods seem closer to the limit than others. Creating profitable missions won't stop that kind of behaviour, fixing 'unintended' gameplay is the only way to stop it.
I would like some high end content, a reason to PvE on Beta, it could make things more interesting, but it wouldn't solve these kind of problems, and if not done carefully it could cause the exact same kind of issues.
Pretty obviously a problem that needs fixing imo (and seems the devs agree). But I guess Joke knew about this for a while, so maybe tone down the righteous indignation? Also lol at CIR & friends complaining about 'manufactured' forum drama. Carry on
Btw, how many ppl posting in this thread have never been banned or had things removed from their accounts for previous infractions? I wonder 
DEV Zoom wrote:Jita wrote:The mission change was supposed to stop this abuse. The Devs need to resolve it.
Yes it was supposed to, but apparently there are not enough missions in that category to make them care about the randomness.
Have you ever considered fixing the actual problems? 
It's not the players job to balance the game imo
Ville wrote:Dazz why don't Rad do pvp training? Why don't you standardize your fits so your fleets aren't Hodge Podge? Instead of all these people pointing a finger, why not do more? You have some great resources in Rad. I.E. Mark Zima. Watch pvp videos posted. Learn from them. Like well rounded fleet comps, primary target priority, terrain usage, how to kite, fittings and teach your ewar pilots how to us ecms properly.
Why anyone else doesn't do it idk, for me, its because I've done it before in Squid and Hokk and it was a lot of work, I'm not gonna dedicate that sort of time to the game how it is, although tbh most of the standardised fits we did 3 yrs ago are still fine due to lack of any changes. If anything roaming and territory warfare are even more time consuming than they were, so no thanks. Mark and other vets in corp are also around far less, so draw your own conclusions about their views, but I'm sure everything is great and we're all just lazy...
Syndic wrote:Dazamin wrote:You can do some variation of the everything is fine post as much as you like, meanwhile as it has been for the past three years or w/e, any influx of players has been followed by a mass exodus, numbers from steam launch have already dropped off a cliff. So, if there are no broken mechanics, theres no problem with power projection, etc, etc. Why does this consistently happen?
It consistently happens because every newbie CEO comes in, and despite ample advice and warnings, thinks he's smarter then everyone else and aligns his newbie corp with a vet alliance too soon. A vet alliance is usually involved in a campaign against another vet alliance, and the newbies simply can't survive in that enviroment. No EP, no stockpile, no experience. Dead meat.
+ Lack of content was also a big factor in the early days.
So once player 2.0 is developed that plays the game properly it'll be fine
Syndic wrote:Biffa Buttocks wrote:I'm totally against a reset as a new player, if I was an old hand I'd stop playing but Rex's suggestion makes the most sense well that and forcing the big groups to actually fight one another somehow and get through some of their resources, maybe make infrastructure really expensive too.
Dude.
There is no big groups.
There is 2 vet corps saying BOOO.
There is 10 vet corps saying EEEK HALP HALP ZOOM THEY RUIN TEH GAME DO UR GEWB.
You can do some variation of the everything is fine post as much as you like, meanwhile as it has been for the past three years or w/e, any influx of players has been followed by a mass exodus, numbers from steam launch have already dropped off a cliff. So, if there are no broken mechanics, theres no problem with power projection, etc, etc. Why does this consistently happen?
Crepitus wrote:As someone who had ~2 years on multiple accounts and spent $300+ on boosters at Steam release I'd like to personally tell you go *** yourself 
You do know that one of their biggest selling points was supposed to be a persistent world right?
This is it, I mean I'd like a wipe in a lot of ways, various groups have taken advantage of various bad game mechanics to become rich, ep gap between a few vets and everyone else is huge, etc. But you cannot do it, its a persistent world, and people have put their hard earned money into it on that basis.
Also Syndic is correct, multiple accounts are a problem, so can we please get rid of one of the worst things that was done, allowing the selli.. GIFTING of accounts, there is no benefit to it from a game perspective, and allowing people to be given accounts just sidesteps the whole forward planning / time based skilling of the game, obviously whats done is done with existing accounts, but please change it back now.
Or you could make an agreement and then not shoot them? Seems simpler
Syndic wrote:There is a misconception here that should be corrected.
1. CIR and 77 with our recruiting/industrial sub-corps (PHM/133) are just two corps full of people that like to PVP a lot.
2. CIR hasn't played this game for 2 years barring 2-3 of our people who stuck around/poked their head in from time to time.
3. ST doesn't project our "power" nearly as much as the fact that nearly all of us have 2-3 combat accounts spread across the world.
4. Any point in-game is reachable in 5-10 minutes.
5. The other veteran corps could easily take islands from us if they were prepared to commit and risk their resources - evidently they are not.
6. We just want PVP. If the other vets are happy to sit on Alpha and try to "outlast" us until we get bored, that's their choice. Game is free now, no skin off our nose while we wait.
7. We neither need nor want all these islands, but since nobody is contesting us for them we will naturally take advantage of the economic benefits they bring.
Carry on.
Have you considered that this is not a thread about CIR, but about a game mechanic?
Spark TP and the massive use of mobile tps are features which try to hide the fact that the default method of moving around sucks, whilst causing problems and balancing issues of their own.
DEV Zoom wrote:Annihilator wrote:how the hell does spark teleport HELP the game equally to how destructive it is?
Every time players complain about walking hours for no reason?
Walking around is the default method of getting around the game surely? It is unnecessarily hard to get around, particularly on alpha, but that could be fixed by better tp and highway placement, without causing the problems sparks do. I don't understand the need to create new mechanics to fix problems, instead of just adjusting the existing mechanics, which is less likely to have undesirable side effects.
More space would mitigate the spark effect for sure, and it something I've been in favour of for a long time, although I get there may be issues with adding tonnes of new space. But fundamentally I don't like the mechanic, you're supposed to get around by walking, remote access of some kind is a very useful feature, but that doesn't need to be an instant tp to a location imo.
DEV Zoom wrote:Sorry but we refuse to see spark teleport as an issue. Or if it is, it's at least equally helping the game.
As an individual player Spark TP is useful for all kinds of things sure, in terms of PvP and power projection its all kinds of broken.
It would be as bad as selli... I mean gifting accounts.
Posts found: 1 to 25 of 444
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 3 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
Generated in 0.102 seconds (80% PHP - 20% DB) with 6 queries
