26

(12 replies, posted in Bugs)

DEV Zoom wrote:

The only solution we could come up for this so far is to let the server reset all artifact locations daily at a specific time. Not sure yet whether this is technically possible at all, but it's on the todo.

Seriously!? That's "the only solution we could come up [with] so far".

This issue has raised its head numerous times over the last couple of years and there have been at least a couple of much better workable solutions suggested. Try searching the forums.

27

(20 replies, posted in General discussion)

Annihilator wrote:

your request for more specialised robots contradicts with someone elses complaint about the inablilty to shoot down walls with any weapon he wants to (which is a kind of specialisation).

please look at the bigger picture.

What!? Anni, has a small piece of your brain fallen out this morning?

Lobo's suggestion of greater specialisation contradicts someone else's suggestion and therefore he's not seeing the big picture? wtf are you babbling about.

28

(20 replies, posted in General discussion)

Lobo wrote:

Im still waiting on a big patch that makes me really happy. Like more bots or even splitting the classes a bit like a masker bonus version a dps bonus version.

I think this is an good way to go for starters.
Same models, different colours, different mod slots, narrower specialisations through bonuses.

Extend the concept through all classes and sizes of bot. Indy bots could be specialised to provide real Logi bots or liquid/ore miners for example.

It strikes me that there is a lot of content that can be created by just adding a few tens of rows to the database and tweaking a few formulae.

29

(141 replies, posted in General discussion)

BeastmodeGuNs wrote:

I've legit been intending to upload this for over 2 years but never got to it, this is a good example of what an oldschoolish pre-steam fleet fight in late 2012/early 2013 was like.

CHAOS/AIC/PHM vs STC/DREAM/NeBs/< 12 > @ Karapyth outpost - 1/3/2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQBjgX8 … e=youtu.be

I remember that one. Instead of using the mobile teleport to jump to the other side of the island I stupidly jumped to the fixed teleport 500m behind me. Managed to get Beastmode and one other before the inevitable. First MKII heavy I ever lost. All good fun.

30

(21 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

We do enjoy visiting old ground on this forum lately.

http://forums.perpetuum-online.com/topi … structure/

Pretty much covers it.

Been here before, quite recently.

Zoom outlined Devs thoughts in this post

Personally, I think that if you want to make owning more than one outpost more difficult you just add a SAP point multiplier based on outposts owned and a couple of extensions to help prevent alt-corp expolits. recent post on the matter ,

32

(11 replies, posted in Open discussion)

Good to see it can run on Linux without Wine too. Seems to be happening with more and more games these days. Anticipating Steam OS maybe?

33

(4 replies, posted in Bugs)

Line wrote:

If noone completes the sap, it doesn't count as, well, "completed" and thus doesn't goes into history

What do you mean by "completed" mean? I'm pretty sure SAPs always appeared irrespective of whether anyone bothered to show up or not.

34

(4 replies, posted in Bugs)

I'm not sure this is reporting correctly unless something has changed in SAP times that has passed me by.

SAPs every 8 to 16 hours you would expect between 9 and 22 SAPs per outpost in a 168 hour period which is how the intrusion list is grouped (bloody odd way of doing it if you ask me but that's another thread). But instead the list reports:

Nauwy - 1 event
Darmahol - 1 event
South Iseitsu - 2 events
Brightstone - 3 events
New Crimea - 4 events
Fort Douglas - 5 events
Abbuthilia - 5 events
Karapyth - 7 events

If you look back at previous weeks you find similar reporting patterns.

All I can think is that a SAP only makes the list when the loot is collected or it's a bug.

35

(93 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Islands don't have to be all or nothing when it comes to Syndicate protection.

Alpha IIIs could have pockets of Syndicate protection and areas without it.* As such, no more campable choke points such as teleports or outposts and carrying flag mechanics between syndicate protected and non-protected zones  work exactly as they do now - except no teleport necessary of course.

* painted tile by tile according to terrain and strategic considerations rather than some arbitary X metres from things

logicalNegation wrote:

Why not provide a market API and let us do all the work?

How cool would a perp-market site be?  You could make all the graphs and perform all your analysis and visualizations all day big_smile

Yes please. Couple with some properly thought out remote order management extensions and Perp traders could log in from mobile devices to manage market orders without needing the full client every time.

Definitely. Improvements required and these are a good start. Ability to overlay various chart types would be nice. Mid, bid, offer and LTP price options would be nice too.

38

(32 replies, posted in News and information)

Annihilator wrote:

3. you gave ville the option to filter anomalies from the landmark list ...

What an extraordinary claim. Ville wasn't the first to ask for it, nor the only one.

39

(148 replies, posted in News and information)

I had no idea (despite doing assignments in a small squad) that assignment rewards scaled according to squad numbers the way they do and I think they're way off balanced as a result.

What's more worrying is that it seems that the DEVs didn't know either, also think rewards are way off balance and are now trying to retrospectively fix the issue.

It's not the first time either, is it.

For the first time I am seriously considering whether to bother playing the game any more* because ... (A) I think it is beyond the point of rescuing from past unintended imbalances that were allowed to persist for too long and B) I don't believe the DEVs have the necessary skills to avoid it happening again - and then again after that.

Your business has one product to sell, you need to be more careful with its development.


* and, before you ask, yes, you can have my stuff, I've got a fun idea of how to give it away.

When doing assignments on Shin earlier this month, I accidentally shot a Mech from another players' assignment. I wasn't in his squad or corp but was rather confused when the  two members of my squad got reward - one of which was just sat in terminal.

Haven't had opportunity to check whether this still happens but from what I've read in the last couple of days it's a bug.

41

(148 replies, posted in News and information)

Lobo wrote:

Yeah but I don't like the Idea that the cream-de-la-cream of bots can be got by doing lvl 5 missions from Alpha 2 terminal and then just buying it there.

Agreed

Lobo wrote:

It would also make Beta control more critical ...

Beta "control" has a place in this game, definitely. But currently, no island has more than one public terminal. This is not just about station locking.
'

42

(148 replies, posted in News and information)

Lobo wrote:

... but can a prerequisite or necessary item for a black bot be that you deliver a Mk2 of said variant to a Beta 1 station in exchange for this black bot?

Very sensible suggestion for very sensible reasons.

Lobo wrote:

The Beta station only infers a slight bit of danger in getting your newly minted bot. Also other game most blueprints and faction point trade hubs are in lowsec.

Like this idea for many things in principle but I don't think the number of Beta terminals/islands and the way you have to access them makes this possible in Perp as it currently stands.

43

(32 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Not within 500m of a teleport, terminal or outpost would be nice.

44

(30 replies, posted in Q & A)

Celebro wrote:

... limitations of the current engine. No bigger bots due to tile issues , no larger islands, the list goes on ...

Natural or terraformed bridges or overhangs.
Gravity.
Collisions - no robots merging with other robots.
The ability to shoot any part of a bot to which you have LoS not just one point.

to name a few more.

45

(30 replies, posted in Q & A)

Using Unity or Source2 or Unreal or whatever is not about the graphics. It's mainly about development time, the ability to outsource and costs.

46

(30 replies, posted in Q & A)

May 2014 status report blog wrote:

We’re quite aware that the graphics of the game are starting to look dated. Unfortunately the current engine architecture has also become dated, so this is not simply a question of putting in higher resolution textures and models. The engine requires a major rewrite for any significant upgrades.

Why waste time re-writing the engine? I would drop the current engine in favour of an "out of the box" engine - Cry, Unreal, Source, Unity - you all know the ones.

A lot of work but re-writing the existing engine is probably more. In the long run it makes sense on many levels. Personally I'd go Source2.

Infinite free storage space needs to go.

48

(43 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Ville wrote:

Because realistically allowing new players to maximize their mining experience afk mining liquid is not a bad thing.

Bollocks.

49

(43 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Ville wrote:

...also a negative mining bonus or harvesting bonus.

Don't allow the Scarab to fit an industrial module at all. In fact, it's a hauler, why have any chassis slots?

50

(94 replies, posted in General discussion)

Devs, be more imaginative with your maths.

Risk compensation multiplier, Extension multiplier, Difficulty bonus multiplier, In-a-row multiplier.

Rewards get MASSIVELY out of proportion pretty quickly between low and high levels when you use only the first power and constants. Powers and/or logs and/or exponentials are needed in so many parts of this game to allow for more flexible balancing.