1 Reply by Raavi Arda

(5 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

+1 for daily mission chains but -1 for everything else

My idea:
1. You select which types of missions you want: indy or combat. Both will contain transport but indy will have significantly larger load to haul (ie. to fill a Sequer halfway so you can still carry a mining bot with you for next mission)
2. Select mission difficulty: easy (alpha-only, period, for combat light bot opponents only and easy timers on indy stuff), medium - safe (alpha only, light/assault opponents for combat, manageable timers for indy stuff), medium - dangerous (alpha + beta, 50% of each, same as medium otherwise), hard - safe (alpha only, mechs/heavy mech opponents for combat, challenging timers for level-5 skills industrial), hard - dangerous (75% beta, 25% alpha, otherwise same as safe).
3. Payout depends on how many missions from the chain you have completed and difficulty
4. Each individual mission provides ammo/charges for itself (might be tricky with ammo since there's a choice of 4 different types, might need a selector in there) designed to get through it with skills according to difficulty (easy gives you ammo for completing mission assuming base skills, medium assumes level 3-4 relevant skills, hard assumes level 5-6+ skills)

Result:
- No crying "this game forces me to PvP!" - just pick safe mission and earn less. Income vs safety
- Randomly generated missions are more fun - constant grinding of same thing over and over again is... ugh... soul-crushingly boring
- Better income that actually depends on your skills and time waste... I mean invested

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

2 Reply by Raavi Arda

(3 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)

The reason for NV being lagged more than others is because entire NeX is sitting here :-)
Yes, we came from EVE and brought you the gifts of lags and crashes. Complaints are accepted in writing every Monday from 00:01 till 00:02 GMT.

Go to forum: Resolved bugs and features

3 Reply by Raavi Arda

(24 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)

Pak wrote:
Norrdec wrote:

It's not really a bug, more like a mechanic to decrease the traffic between the server and the client. Working as intended.

All is needed is a few small packet exchanges when the client starts. Hardly a traffic issue.

Not really...
Your client is subject to lagging, therefore the time counted by your client can be quite off from the server time after playing for 2 hours for example. I encountered that while coding my own game back in early 90's (computers weren't as fast back then as they are now :-)) but seeing as Perp client lags to Hell and back even on my machine I suspect the internal timer lags just as well.
Solution:
1. On client start sync client time with server time using NTP
2. Upon syncing the client sets a constant "offset" variable which is the result of the equation of [Server Time - Client PC BIOS Time]
3. Every 15/30/60 minutes the internal time in client syncs with server again by setting client time to [Client PC BIOS Time + offset]
No network traffic and the client stays more-or-less synced. Please note that BIOS time is hardware-controlled and therefore not subject to lag (however, it's subject to hardware issues that can make it go +/- but only by miliseconds really)

Go to forum: Resolved bugs and features

4 Reply by Raavi Arda

(14 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)

Totally agreed.
The map opening and closing issue is a major pain. I get the feeling the reason behind this is the huge size of the map and very high resolution. When opening the map you can actually see the JPEG being loaded as progressive and it's bad... very bad.
Perhaps the simplest solution at this point would be to reduce the quality of the map, therefore making the picture faster to load and unload (free up memory)? Just a thought...

Go to forum: Resolved bugs and features

5 Reply by Raavi Arda

(10 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Arga wrote:
Raavi Arda wrote:

Now, to be a bit more constructive - here's a few possible solutions:
1. Increase spawn rate of low-level (and low-level only!) bots like T1L depending on the number of players on-site. Why low-level only? Because we're talking about low-EP players who can't handle high-level ones anyway while the high-EP players should compete.
Result: increase in profit for low-EP players, reduction of newbie harassment.
Downsides: might be prone to abuse - like high-EP players farming such spots for easy NIC with multiple assault bots (might want to limit which bots will trigger additional spawns), opens up a new griefing tool: 5 griefers come into a site, force additional spawns, then retreat, leaving the newbie swarmed and probably dead.

As you point out above, they are already camping these spots. They are farming Kernels which can sell for 5-20K + goo making it very profitable and not just griefing. Increasing the spawn rate will just make them more profitable and more likely to be farmed.

Solution #2 isn't so bad, but its an additional mechanic that's not in the game. If you notice the data caches drop for everyone, the NPC doesn't 'know' if your on the assignment or not, so that would somehow have to be added to the base coding.

The best solution is to acutally dilute the spawns and the spawn rate. Sitting on a site with 3 npcs that spawn only every 5 mins would be highly discouraging.

The tag strength idea is too complex, and suffers from the same additional coding issues.

I have to disagree with you my friend:
1. T2 spawns are equally easy to kill for a semi-skilled player and they drop more profitable stuff, therefore bringing in more money per hour - that alone should encourage non-griefers to leave T1s alone
2. My idea stated explicitly to boost T1 spawns and only if there's more than 1 bot killing them, therefore farming alone will be same as it was. The balancing of how many extra spawns per additional bot on site is another issue.
3. Griefers will keep griefing and that is a fact. Let's not make things easy for them thou.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

6 Reply by Raavi Arda

(10 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Tagging system in it's current state heavily favors griefers and high-EP players while making it hard for new players to get pretty much anything.
Why? Because:
1. Low-EP player is farming a T1L spawn slowly, trying to make some NIC. He's in a basic light bot with 1 head slot and has a damage module in it (or even sensor booster)
2. High-EP griefer with an assault bot/mech comes in, kills everything with one shot. He has 2 sensor boosters + 2 weapon tunings so he pretty much one-shots everything and locks in half the time the other player needs
3. The low-EP player can't do anything since he can't call in his corp to suicide-gank even (Alpha I island). Just leave.
Results:
Low-EP player doesn't get anything, is frustrated. Might leave the game.
Griefer gets stuff he doesn't even need, he's already super-rich compared to the other guy and could make 3x more money doing T2 spawns. He just wants to be a jerk and the current tagging system makes it very easy for him to be one.

Heck, I saw a mech camping a L1 mission bot spawn. If he has a mech those bots are worthless to him, they are worthless to me even. And he was not grinding standings. I did the math, counted his kills. He got WAY more than the mission requirement is and never went back to pick another mission.
So - he wasn't getting anything valuable, he could make 5-10x more NIC per hour doing T2/3 spawns. But he prevented me from finishing my mission, let alone grind standings. And don't tell me "install a sebo". I have two. He still locked faster. L10 targetting speed extension + head full of sebos (since he doesn't need weapon tunings in a mech vs T1 light bots)?

Now, to be a bit more constructive - here's a few possible solutions:
1. Increase spawn rate of low-level (and low-level only!) bots like T1L depending on the number of players on-site. Why low-level only? Because we're talking about low-EP players who can't handle high-level ones anyway while the high-EP players should compete.
Result: increase in profit for low-EP players, reduction of newbie harassment.
Downsides: might be prone to abuse - like high-EP players farming such spots for easy NIC with multiple assault bots (might want to limit which bots will trigger additional spawns), opens up a new griefing tool: 5 griefers come into a site, force additional spawns, then retreat, leaving the newbie swarmed and probably dead.
2. (Assignment-only fix) Make the assignment-specific bots attackable only if you have the assignment in your log and it's not complete (for kill-and-loot - if you killed 5/5 target bots you can't attack anymore - so you are forced to loot them and run back). You could also make the assignment-specific bots ignore players who don't have the assignment to prevent a situation where I killed my 5/5 bots, new ones spawned and swarm me while I can't fire back.
Since the area of the islands is limited I guess it's impossible to create separate hidden spawns only for the player who got the assignment when he gets it (yup, shamelessly copying EVE here). But solution #2 would fix the issue of griefing assignment-runners.

Edit:
Idea 3 that just occurred to me:
Tag "strength" system dependent on attacker/target bot size:
Light/assault bot attacking any bot/mech produces a strength 100 tag
Mech attacking a light/assault bot produces a strength 75 tag
Mech attacking a mech/heavy mech produces a strength 100 tag
Heavy mech attacking a light/assault bot produces a strength 50 tag
Heavy mech attacking a mech produces a strength 75 tag
Heavy mech attacking a heavy mech produces a strength 100 tag
Higher strength tag overwrites lower strength tag. This will encourage farming bots/mechs of same size as your own bot/mech. Should eliminate jerks camping T1L spawns with mechs.
Of course this is just a draft and should take tech level into account as well...
This won't eliminate the problem but would help it a bit.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

7 Reply by Raavi Arda

(4 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Totally agree with each and every point above. However, some prioritization would be necessary IMHO...
Point 6 - Must-have ASAP. The blinking is annoying and distracting but I don't want to leave and re-join the channel every 20 minutes
Point 5 - Very important feature for anyone farming/running missions. We need to know if we're cap-stable... I mean accu-stable
Point 2 - Yup. Definetly necessary at earliest opportunity
Point 3 - Now this is the most debatable feature. I advise caution when changing those mechanics because people are accustomed already to what we have and might be upset if they'd have to re-learn, possibly leading to a lot of wrong targets being attacked.
Points 1 and 4 are nice to have but can wait IMHO

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

8 Reply by Raavi Arda

(3 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Shameless bump... and:
1. Update 05.07.2011 11:11 - added points 6, 7 and 8 to minor stuff
2.

Arga wrote:

There are aleady threads open for many of those items

Yes, I saw some of them but I figured I'll compile them all into one list so later we can check/strike out stuff that has been done or refused.

Arga wrote:

And OMG, what is it with not being able to chose font sizes - had the same complaint in Eve and from the research many other players did too but it was never addressed. If Perp is going to do anything to set itself apart, this would be the key item.

I'm afraid that most MMOs out there have that feature so it wouldn't set Perp apart but rather have it catch up with the competition. Examples: WoW, BGO (thou that's the ONLY good thing to be said about their chat interface)

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

9 Reply by Raavi Arda

(29 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

1. "Use a chassis scanner" - Ummm... how can I use a scanner on a robot I just destroyed? The original post clearly states "KILL/LOSS reports" - therefore the bot in question is already dead. Newsflash: you can't use a scanner on something that ain't there!

2. Why would you want such intel posted on killboard?
- For the laugh (chassis scanner on a PvP bot? LOLWHUT?)
- This guy died, his fit didn't work. Try something else
- What did I have fitted on that mech I just lost? It worked quite well and if it wasn't for 10-to-1 advantage I'd survive. Crap... no saved fittings feature... No info on lossmail either. Back to the drawing board and re-create the fit.
- Since there is no loot logging - after battle the SC has to rely on people's honesty about the loot they grabbed. Perp is 90% former EVE players. 99.9999% of EVE players will try to scam/steal/profit at every opportunity. Get the connection? Details on killmail = just implement feature of a killboard that will take battle results and create a list of stuff dropped. Problem partially solved.
- NIC war: OK, so the guy lost a mech - but did it have T4 gear or T1/flawed/Syn crap? How much was it worth? Was it more expensive than the T4-fitted Assault we lost or not?

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

10 Topic by Raavi Arda

(3 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Hi guys

After playing this game for a few days I noticed a few things that could really use fixing. Now that the Devs got the situation under control (good job!) I guess I can post a short list of stuff quite a few people I spoke with would like.
I broke it down into 3 categories: minor stuff, mid-term plans and long-term plans. Minor stuff should take minutes up to hours to implement - please consider them at the earliest opportunity.
I will keep editing this post as things pop up.

I) Minor stuff
1. UI improvement: View of inventory/cargo as list rather than icons
Minor UI issue that would make our lives a LOT easier - just give us an OPTION (yes, option, don't scrap what we have) to show cargohold/inventory in station/can contents as a list. In my opinion it would suffice to have three columns there: name, type (miner charge, laser ammo, laser weapon etc) and tech level (where applicable). Important thing: allow us to sort by either column.
Nice to have: additional columns - chasis slot, size, volume etc.
Nice to have: ability to set ALL displays as list or icons by default so when I open a can it will pop up as either one of those by default

2. UI improvement: Allow us to increase/decrease font size in chat
Just that, nothing more. A drop-down list of sizes with like 4 sizes to chose from would be nice.

3. UI improvement: Allow us to make robot info (HP/accumulator) and modules windows larger/smaller
Simple thing - just allow us to resize those two windows to match our preferences. Drop down (0.5x, 0.75x, 1.0x, 1.25x, 1.5x, 2x) or fine-tuned are both nice. Personally I'd just go for drop down list.

4. UI improvement: Warning sound/screen flash when armor drops to 50% and another at 25%
Yup, lost my Waspish because I didn't notice my repper was off. Please... give us some notification about armor status being bad and critical.

5. UI improvement: Ability to view bot fitting while deployed
As simple as that - allow us to view (and view only of course) fit while deployed. Mechanics/window are already there, just turn them into read-only and allow us to view it.

6. UI improvement: Make flagged players easier to recognize on landmarks display
Easiest way: make the PvP flagged players' icons yellow for example? The little dot now is hard to spot.

7. UI improvement: Pinning of windows
Simple icon that would let us "pin" each window so it cannot be dragged/resized accidentally until it's un-pinned.
Nice to have: pinned windows would have separate opacity and/or color setting

8. UI improvement: Allow us to change opacity and/or BG color of various windows
Ideally - every window should have a button that would allow us to change the BG color, opacity and font size/color. Minimalist version: button that would pop up a simple interface/dropdown to change opacity of the given window.
Nice to have: individually set opacity/color for pinned/not pinned windows

II) Mid-term plans
1. Player-to-player interactions: Contracts
Someone mentioned this before so I won't go into details. Just saying here that I (and many other people) support this idea.

2. UI/mechanics improvements: Saving of fittings and re-fitting from saved
Additional window would pop up where you can save your current bot fit and then re-fit using that saved info.

3. UI improvement: Linking items (fits?) in chat
Drag the item (fit?) into chatbox and the name gets put in with auto-link to info (view fit?). Not sure how hard that will be so I'm putting it in mid-term.

III) Long-term plans
1. General improvement: More content for solo play
Yeah, I bet you hear that a lot but we really need more stuff to do, especially while alone...

2. UI improvement: Detachable camera
OK, so we have our camera focused on our bot which is nice... but could we get the ability to focus on something else? Would be very nice for some of us machinima guys.
Not sure how hard would that be to implement so I'm putting it here.


At this point that's all. But I'll bump and update whenever I'll find something that's bugging me and/or others.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests