1

(75 replies, posted in General discussion)

Nidhogg wrote:
Dune Runner wrote:
Predator Nova wrote:

Yeah something like fuel is definitely good for the economy, as is any other money(nic)-sink. It keeps inflation in check and I fully expect the Energy System to be basically a big money sink. If you look at Eve, one of the most succesful virtual economies, it has tons of these, ranging from ammo to POS Fuel.

Nevertheless the Devs have to be careful about the implementation as it cannot be too tediuos. I'd rather have the big corps carry most of the sinks than the little guy having to grind half hour every day to keep his bot fueled.

This is in no way shape or form a Nic-sink. It will not curb inflation, and anyone who thinks like you is a complete ***.

Can you please explain that a bit further? Im just as stupid as Predator Nova and do not understand you.

Is that concept really so hard to understand?
A NIC sink is a mechanic that removes NIC from the economy. Sales tax, factory fees paid to NPC etc are NIC sinks.
Consumables are no NIC sinks in any shape beyond the taxes and production fees, which can and will be minimized to remain competitive. They are, looking at current rates, not a factor.

2

(126 replies, posted in General discussion)

Syndic wrote:

Because Corp A will fit their light bots in T4, you'll still be fitted in T1, and you'll still be in the same position where you are kited & killed, or chased down & killed. There is nothing wrong balance-wise with mech speeds, the T1 vs T4 balance is a good incentive to grind kernels.

What would really happen with T1 light bots being faster then mechs:

1. Whole server would swap to T4 lights as new FOTM, cameleons intakts and troiars would replace the current EW mechs being used because speed > all.
2. T1 lightbots would become the old EW gangs, engage and disengage at will and run away with superior speed.
3. Every mech pilot would see his bot become completely useless for roaming outside of intrusions which never happen anymore.

That does not make sense. You're doing so many leaps in logic you're downright bunnyhopping.
Preserving speed scaling over all types of bots so that a t1 lwf equipped lighter bot is always faster than a t4 lwf bot of higher tier is not going to upset balance at all. It won't lead to light bot roaming gangs either. I can't even follow how you come to that conclusion.
Lighter bots still lack firepower and range. You are conveniently ignoring that and I find that rather disturbing.

Heavy hitters always should be at a disadvantage when it comes to mobility. No exceptions, not even with better gear. Otherwise everything below will immediately become obsolete and entirely redundant.

3

(15 replies, posted in General discussion)

Jasdemi wrote:

Prove me wrong.

You're terrible and a disgrace for trolls.
Prove me wrong.

4

(30 replies, posted in General discussion)

India51A wrote:

I would guess it's FPS as my ping stays at 90ms, it's just that when both accounts are loaded the movement is jerky, like rubber banding but in small steps.  That's the best way I can explain it.

Ping is meaningless here.
The question is: Is this a graphics problem with your fps dropping, which would be very noticeable as the framerate goes down, or is it a problem with packets from the server being delayed? It would be noticeable because the fps would stay high and smooth, but module activations would be delayed, bots would walk in one direction only to suddenly jump to a completely different position etc.

The approach to solving fps is completely different to solving lag.

If it's fps, reducing graphics settings should do a lot, especially reducing shadows.
If it's lag, you're in for some trouble, as just about anything could interfere with it.

5

(15 replies, posted in General discussion)

It's me, I'm the proof in the op

6

(30 replies, posted in General discussion)

Could you clarify whether you mean fps or your bots jumping around thanks to lag?

7

(126 replies, posted in General discussion)

Pak wrote:

I do not think players are feeding cache to the game companies (unless they are also investors, company owners/founders or they actually sent a donation to the company). I think we are paying for an entertaining way to spend our spare time.
But what you write is true: a lot of players think they are in fact donating money and the recipients may or may not be morally worth getting their money.

Eve and other mmos are fundamentally services. There is an understanding that if you subscribe to Eve or Perpetuum, you pay the devs, you pay for the infrastructure, and you pay for continued development which is crucial to the continued appeal of the game.
When I'm paying for services in other parts of real life, and the guy I hired is an impolite ***, chances are I'm not going to hire him a second time for his service.

This is something many mmo devs are completely unaware of. They're not selling a can of soup, they're selling something that has a much more personal connection to people. That's why the public image of an mmo company is such a huge deal.

The recent server problems are a great example of this. The devs thought they'd get burned at the stake, but because they could establish a personal connection to their community and therefore customers, they came out of this with a positive image despite having a nonexistent service for days. Imagine how this would play out in Eve where the community actively distrusts them.

Which is, by the way, the reason why I put up with Perpetuum's broken mechanics. I have faith that this game is going to improve. Slowly perhaps, but definitely.
I definitely agree with the OP that the npcs need some changes in behaviour and spawns. I'd rather see small roaming groups actively trying to kill people outside of a specific radius of outposts, and scout groups within that radius for new players to kill. Mining operations would need to be protected if they were farther out. Stuff like this, more dynamic than the static spawns.

One great thing about Perpetuum is that the game isn't locked in place with a huge pile of game design debt and technical debt. The devs can still go wild without breaking everything, so I'm rather optimistic for the future.

Btw., regarding more highways..I disagree. Player built outposts or camps or whichever would be much better.

I don't think you get how the plex system works. It's just a token, and every plex represents money that already went to CCP. Essentially, the value of a plex exists only as a token representing time, but the plex market itself can not spawn resources. It is also governed by rules of supply and demand, which a CCP controlled rmt store wouldn't.

The problem with MT is and has always been that, as CCP explicitly stated, it tries to sell convenience. So to optimize profits, game design is encouraged to be deliberately inconvenient. GW, for example, is selling extra inventory space that was free previously. CCP will be selling space for stored fittings that was practically infinite before but has been limited to 50 now. (As an example of what could happen. The possibilities for making people pay for ccp's terrible design are endless)

Essentially, MT in mmos is always, without exception, an excuse to cut content from the existing game and sell it extra. (Literally. I can't think of an exception. No, not even perpetuum.)

The MT capital you mention would be pay2win. The method of replacing an army of those ships wouldn't involve the industry of eve, wouldn't require an alliance to make an investment, protect and supply their industry and make them immune to disruption during a war. Just spend a few thousand bucks and a new fleet magically appears out of nowhere, breaking the entire game.


That's not to say you couldn't already do it. Most of 0.0 space is controlled by rmt alliances which exist solely to extract and sell ingame items and money, which ccp has been turning a blind eye on. You can just shell out 700 bucks and get a mothership plus pilot, but at least with those deals it's not ccp dropping the pretense of a pvp mmo about using your skills and wits.

You people are giving me a sugar high with your happiness. >.>

I did not leave Eve because of MT.
I left Eve because CCP's intent is to sell convenience. Wich means both pay2win and even worse, charging extra for fixes to deliberately inconvenient and crappy design.

As long as the perpetuum devs don't go pants on heads and want to deliberately break their game so they can sell fixes extra, i'm completely indifferent.

HP Lovecraft wrote:

One thing I don't particularly like is the 'flocking' of the Eve refugees into one corp - I know there were a lot of ppl in Eve that didn't share my point of view, and I don't necessarily want to be in the same corp as ppl who son't have my outlook.

I wouldn't worry too much about that.
For now, we're enjoying getting all these bits sorted out and learning together. We can freely use Eve terms since everyone knows them, and, from my perspective, getting to know people I never interacted with beyond shooting each other is nice.

I expect NeX will splinter eventually, once people have learned how the game works and know what they want to do here.

12

(133 replies, posted in Open discussion)

'06 bittervet checking in.
I was there in the perpetuum beta, so buying some gametime was a rather easy choice.
So here I am....mining. *blush*