26

(89 replies, posted in General discussion)

btw, I like the change, that is not my issue....Just for the record.

27

(89 replies, posted in General discussion)

Well, quite a predicament we find ourselves in.
There has been a product advertised, supposedly tested, released to the market, purchased in mass, and now does not function as advertised.  These of course are the player placed wall incubators.

Looks like the company that supplied the item has a few choices:
1.    Grandfather (retain) performance of product already released, but hold new purchases of the product to new (decaying) standards.
2.    Do a mass recall; reimburse passed purchases, along with some compensation for time spent with the falsely advertised product.
3.    Offer other products in compensation for leading purchasers of product down a path that now requires not only their initial time, but additional time to maintain.
4.    Rethink a fix to the product that would not compromise the work and purchases that have already taken place.

We did not ask for the product that was released on the market.  We followed the instructions of use, even spending many, many game hours making the product work efficiently, only to be told that the product will now be changed to a performance level that makes the entire process a waste of time and resources.

To avoid a class action suit toward the manufacturer of the product, please let us know how you will be reimbursing those that put faith in your recent “wall” product, only to see it fall short of its advertised performance.

If you plan to offer a reimbursement for the product and the time spent using it, I typically make about 5 million/hr. while living on Beta and would expect the manufacturer of the product to remove any items that I may have purchased, and used while offering the appropriate compensation.

Please feel free to check your logs, send the money back for the product, pay 5 million per hour spent using the faulty items, and assure me that new products will be tested better before they are put on the market, and I will consider purchasing and using some of the products that your company may release in the future.  If we can’t come to an agreement on this issue, please note that time spent on the overall product that you offer is not worth the price you are asking, and I will have to spend my time not on using faulty items within your product, but spend time on forums and reviews warning others of the danger and defects that will occur with the overall product.  I look forward to your resolution.

you may not need to add player built structures (pre-designed kits) if you were to just add some new items with simular mechanics to wall pieces.  Some could be:  Half walls, double height walls, ramps to both heights (firing points) walls with the ability to walk across the tops, walls with port holes for firing, and some type of forcefield door or ramp.  Turret and towers for eyes and we could go build what we wanted and have some security.

Just saying we are close with the Legos that you have given us. wink

I see a few bugs but nothing game shattering.

One thing I would like to see is a feature where you select an item/incubator that you would like to deploy, and highlighted tiles within 20 or so show up to let you know where you can and cant plant the thing.  Running around getting error messages "not for this purpose" or other is lame and a waste of time.

This has always been a Noralgis issue for me but I have not brought it up as it was the only thing in the game to plant, but if there are "unfertalized" tiles that cant take the item, let me know before i go through all the time to try and organize these items.

Better yet, give me a "fertalize tile" charge for my harvester that I can zap into a tile, and 24 hrs later it will accept the incubator.  Could have fun planting in interesting places with this feature! wink

It has been quite funny to see hostiles come to other islands and do some building of their own! lol

As cool as this is, there should be some thought into construction on an island that you dont have residence of.

one easy fix and thought might be to allow walls and other deployables to any beta island but to limit them to no closer than one tile from any existing deployed structure by its residence. (you can drop walls, you just cant hook them to somone elses walls that are already placed.  This will still allow some creative strategy but will limit the "lock off this entire area while they are off line" stuff.

Just steamlining it. tongue

31

(41 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Atticus wrote:

OP ... although I understand exactly where you are coming from, and while in theory it could be a short term cash infusion for AC, please consider the following.

If this system was implemented, would any of the current player base bother with 1 year resubs?  All that do this currently are "gambling" that the game will survive, grow, or PBS or artillery or whatever particular feature that the resubbing player is hoping for will be implemented.  If the resubbing player doesnt like the current game state .. why resub again for a long period of time when he can simply wait, see and rate any improvement, and if he likes the game resub and buy back all the EP he has missed out on.  The player will now have no risk whatsoever.

AC would actually lose a ton of steady revenue, not because the product is bad, but simply because there would be no reason for long term resubbing.  Buying back potential lost EP, even at a premium or penalized rate, does go against the fundamentals of the game. It is completely different than a player who joins a game, buys a sub for a year, and doesnt play for the first 11 months.  The player's incentives and priorties completely change.


Takeo, I told you never to post on the forums again until you take your meds! Remember!?! Bad Takeo!

Found my meds!  great points from many against, and i am leaning that way too except; the ability to gain back SOME EP with a severe reduction in what you could have had if you subed straight through....ie. 50% of the EP back max 30 days payed for back sub and when you pay for at a 6 month new sub..or other may encourage some to come back and not feel like they are soooo far behind just because they thought there were greener pastures but realized Perp rocks!

run on sentences ftw! big_smile

Arga wrote:

Takeo

I agree with most of your assessment, and that pushing fights will push players out of the game.

Players that want battles, will drive as far as it takes to do it however, even if it takes all week to setup. So I'm not sure JUST more space will solve it. The new space is going to need a couple things to work.

The new space will need the focused attention of who ever is moving there and require it for an extended period. Meaning that the new space shouldnt be someplace to run to, but a place that the more powerful corp wants to take and hold, leaving the less dangerous existing space for other corps to gather strengh. Since there player base isn't there, it would have to be some type of NPC defense, something that would take time and effort to win. Something like NPC's drop items that you have to get 10,000 of to unlock the station, which will allow the corp to dock, but then another stage to open PBS, and then needing to defend that against NPC's. And of course, the whole time PVP can be happening on that space too, but the key is that players that want to fight are getting to, while corps or players that are on the fence (can't be pushed) are given time to rest up.

tl;dr - The game needs a challenge for established corps, if that challenge is new space, that will work.

Edit; Oh, and whatever is there, should be Fun not just a long grind; yeah, tricky smile

+1
Well summed up big_smile

33

(41 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Scyylla wrote:

To address your points:

1-- You should review my other posts. This was constructive CRITICISM. You are the one that is full of piss and vinegar because nobody has agreed with you. A bit lower in this post I will share with you what alot of people want to type but lack the testicular fortitude to actually do.

2-- EP accumulates because you have PAID to STAY subscribed. That's the way it works. AC has absolutely nothing to do with you CHOOSING to stop playing for whatever reason. Why should they reward you for being a "disloyal" customer by allowing you to buy EP?

3-- People can do whatever they want with the EP that has accumulated during their PAID subscription. That is the the way the skilling system is designed.

4-- Your idea rewards the flavor of the month gamer more then anyone else. Play a game for a month or 2 until the new shiney one comes out. Play it till it bores you and come back here, buy back 3 months of EP and be competitive with people who actually give a damn about the game then wander away the next minute something shiney distracts you.. I don't think so....


Now here is the fun part that I purposely avoided in my first post to provide you some CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM:

1-- Your idea is plain idiotic
2-- I don't care when you started playing or what pre-release pack you bought
3-- You stopped playing. Deal with it.
4-- There are no free cheese lines in Perpetuum. Accept the consequences of your actions.
5-- Whatever sob story you have doesn't matter. I don't care why you quit. Fact is that you QUIT!
6-- Quit pretending that your idea helps AC out. It doesn't you numpty. All it does is encourage an unstable player base which is the exact opposite of what a sandbox MMO needs.
7-- Sandbox MMO's are not for you or your kind. This genre of game is not for the flavor of the month gamer and your idiotic idea does nothing but reward them..

Last but not least:

There are plenty of free to play games out there for you. Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!

Sorry Scyylla, this has nothing to do with others being penalized for trying something else for a while then wanting to come back and not be so far behind.  Your points are clear but this is not an exclusive club where you must your part every month to earn your place.  It is a pay per month game that needs players.  If there is a penalty in EP amount and you still have to pay to get that limited amount back, I don't see where anyone is hurt.  We could use any motivation to have the hundreds that have left to return.  It is all about the money, even if you try to act like it isn't. 

If a guy buys a years sub and never plays for 11 months then come on and places all that EP, he has not effected any game play that whole time.  How is that different than letting a guy be penalized in some EP amount with a cap, to come back to the community.  Your arguments are a rage post and not in line with the medication your doctor has you on.  Please request a change in dosage.

I think Celebros comments echo the path that I would like to see available for guys that want to come back.  Give them a reason.  Lets build the player base, not look for ways to discourage people from rejoining the ranks.

Gharl Incognito wrote:

If this were to go ahead 'I' would cese to engage in Perpetuum  as a player and would as such request feeback, as biased as you like, from players and player groups.  The inate cynicism and skepticism of experienced game communities is one of the variables being evaluated.

EDIT: Also, do not take this as any kind of insult whomever you may be but I and my editors have read all of the Perpetuum fan fiction on offer; the is motivation and a smattering of content.  More is required to make readable stories. 

Another question for the forum warriors; would a character driven narrative or a graphic novel format be preferable; both are options at present.  What other languages would be needed to reach the player base; French is not a concern, if a language based in the cyrillic text were used then there would be only one.

OK (sigh) I will bite.  First, most of the Beta groups realize that we can't put undue pressure on any other Beta group.  CHAOS leaned on Squid for 1 week and 2/3 of their player base quite the game.  M2S begged us to NAP with them and not take their precious SAP cans and give them time to rebuild their player base.  MORTE, has run from skirt to skirt for protection as one group quits in mass and another group opens up to them. (no offense, I would do the same to live on Beta).

Here are the issues that underline all the great story lines that you want to see.  The game board is too small for groups to be at each others throat.  If one island is TRULY assaulted, where is that group going to go when over run?  If there really is bad blood, the advancing group will spend the 15 min required to go to the other end of the game board and hit them there again.  If they are forced to Alpha, well look for 50% to stop subbing.

We talk every day about putting enough pressure on a group to get epic fights but not leaning on them so hard that they stop playing.  Good luck making a story out of that!  We want the game to grow....the land mass to get so vast that a group can choose to go to a corner of the game board that is so far away that the bad blood motivation is not strong enough for an opposing group to take the time to follow.  Groups live on BETA because others let them, not because they have the group to earn it....sorry but that is the facts.  One month of trying to break any group on Beta would be 100% successful to the attackers, and 100% successful in lowering the payer base.  Then everyone looses.

There is no story.  We play a game with huge potential, but little room.  My advice is to wait for the potential to be realized before you look for an EPIC story that takes place in a game the size of one city block.

IMHO

35

(41 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

hmmm,
Guys are quick to say no, and that is how I felt as I was reading the initial post but then I considered this point.

Lets say a guy subbed 6 months ago, played 3 months then un-subbed for another 3.  What he is asking is can he back pay the 3 months he was un-subbed and get that EP back.  Again my first thought is NO FREEKING WAY...but hold up.

By him paying the back 3 months, he is not gaining any additional advantage as he will have payed the same as everyone else that has been subbed.

The game could use any additional income, so having him pay back subs would help the game more than just having him re-sub and continue.

I propose this....have the ability to "back sub" months that you have not payed....at full monthly price per month (not a package discount amount) and get 50% - 75% of that EP back to that player at the time the "back sub" is payed.  One more restriction that seems reasonable is limit it to 4 - 6 months cap.

This generates revenue for our Devs, encourages a guy with a little extra cash to come back, giving us a larger player base, and when all added up, he is still behind those that subbed every month.  I think this helps everyone.

36

(1 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Annihilator wrote:

For the Future upgrades of the NPC AI:

  • Support of their teammates (eg, using RR)

  • Looting their fallen teammates leftovers (npc hauler = vulcher)

  • fighting each other faction npcs if they somehow meet (eg. roams)

  • claim/defend territory (central AI)

  • collect resources (central AI)

just a few basic things a sandbox AI should actually do

-1
Love all the ideas as far as creativity, but I don't need to see any more advancements in NPC AI.  For those that want to play against a computer opponent, there are many other options out there.  The current top NPC entities already take a squad to engage with crap drops.  They are hardly worth the time to hunt anymore.  Please do not spend any other resources on the NPC element.  There are sooooo many other things that need attention.

I don't need smarter computer threats, I need more player threats and larger areas to engage them in.  IMHO

37

(45 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

*****\O/*******
           /\
\_[-------------]   <- me on the bandwagon!  SOLD!
      0         0

38

(27 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Inda wrote:

change to 3000m from outpost nobody can whine

+1
IMO this fixes any SAP issues I see.

Zoom, no whining here...Thank you, please add this and adjust as issues arise.  Scyyla makes a good point but don't delay this to figure out the perfect balance.

Cobalt wrote:

The idea of outpost owner corp only that can set probes looks good to me. You limit them to the outpost area. We got islands split in several areas, why not use them? I dont see any problem with this kind of fix ? With limited number too.  Since an outpost can only have one owner, there will be a fixed maximum number of probes per area/island/world...  Its interesting too for the devs with technical implementation and lag.  Reinforce the alliance interest of owning all the OP of an island, so they can "lock it" scouting wise..  Can create funny "one island" war too.  Is a good beginning for PBS bigger than probes.

For example: a beta 1 island has the 3 outposts owned by corps in the same alliance= island scouted and safe. You should even add probe detection sharing for future alliance features...

Example 2:  A beta 2 island has 2 OP owned by ennemies. In that case TP scouting is useless since each corp can only scout its TP.  Then the corps will decide to put their probes in tactical places for disrupting ennemy= more pvp.

You guys need to remember that PBS will add an incentive to own the TERRITORY. Not just defend OP and scout for safety. Cause when there will be bigger/more expensive PBS, one corps if big roam on its island will think twice before "everyone dockup/log out"  It will be more "defend our stuff guys!" 

Probes themselves are fine like they are. You want to balance the item itself.  Its the availability/number/geographical disposition that needs tweaking imo.

great ideas from everyone on how to put a band-aid on the probes but my issue is (as noted in my other response in this thread) that intel on who COMES IN is all that should be available.  Once they are on the island, that is where classic PVP should ensue.  I don't think anyone, owner or not should be able to track an enemy once they get past the initial perimeter defenses.  If you give Beta living guys too much intel, you will just kill PVP.  Let intel be gathered at teleports and perhaps at outposts, and NOWHERE else.  Let PVP live or Perp will die. hmm

Played with probes for most of today and I must say I think you missed the target 180 degrees.

These sensors should be just the opposite of what you introduced.  They should be large towers with crazy hitpoints.
They should not be able to be set MORE than 1000 from a teleport or station.

Here is why:
Sensor probes should just alert you that someone has ENTERED your island.  If you have them set as you do now, and can track enemies while on the island, you take roaming PVP away from the game.

The sensor towers should cost about 50 mill, and have enough hitpoints to withstand a medium fleet pounding on it (and flagged while doing it) for a good 5 min.  The tower then stops transmitting until it is repaired, a task that also takes a bit of time and flags the repair bots for the task.

You need to be encouraging small gang PVP as you set up for a replacement for the silly arkhe alts on the gates.  What you have done is made roaming Intel too available and completely killed the reward of roaming a Beta island.

Before you scrap the whole failed masked sensors that you currently have, give this a thought.  Let every player have control of 1 current sensor that only he can see.  This would allow a fleet to tell one guy "drop one here and see if we are being cut off" or, run by that station and drop one to see who undocks.  Make the life of the "personal sensor beacon" either a timed 15 min life or make it as visable as a mech and just as easy to kill as you currently have them.  They would be a very nice "temporary" set of eyes, but ones that can be removed from hunting hostiles.

You borked this one too sad

Gremrod wrote:

Intrusion==

* '''Change:''' Active intrusions will now only be broadcasted in a 1000m radius of a SAP instead of the whole zone.

Okay I am not complaining, since I have not been involved with intrusions since the new system.

But someone mentioned this idea and I can't take credit for it. But I thought it would be better than the 1000m range change.

The game has islands broken down into sectors. Why not use them for this broadcast feature? Make the active SAP broadcasts over the entire sector it is in and any player in that sector will see it.

Edit: Also an outpost owner should always know when THEIR SAPs are active.

entire thread was already underway, and that thought was discussed here: http://forums.perpetuum-online.com/post/58516/#p58516

43

(27 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Well everyone that wanted to have a stable outpost and never get a gang coming around to take away their precious can got what they wanted.

The SAP to 1000 killed the PVP that the devs put into the game to create PVP.  Nobody really wants anyone's outpost atm, so you have only killed small skirmishes over a 50 mill can.  You over nerfed it.

Now if we want PVP we will have to come assault an outpost to get a fight then be called the evil guys that are trying to push others from the game.  What do you want, small skirmishes over a loot can, or someone camping you in to get a fight.  i think all the posters about "new adjustment is great" don't really want PVP and want pick up their 50 mill paycheck in a can that nobody else knew about.  BROKEN!

44

(27 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Mark Zima wrote:

Like there was no PVP before I2.0. If you want a SAP, take care to scan. Gate arkhes won't cut it anymore.

Don't want the SAP tbh, just want a fight that doesn't have to be scheduled 12 hrs in advanced because I spent 2 hrs scanning 8 outposts and the only one that fits is 12 hrs out.....

SAP to PVP is borked, look at your news/intrusion events.  Facts are clear by all the little green up arrows!

45

(27 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

You are spot on with taking out island wide visibility of SAP timers as it was too easy to just hop on and off islands and ninja saps.

However you took it too far.  I waited to post this to see if my suspicions were accurate and now I think it is a good time to present the facts.

At the time of this post the last 37 SAPS have come and gone without one aggressor being successful and all but one are at 100% stability.  Or we could say that nobody cares anymore.  This is sad because when the visibility was high, it created PVP on multiple scales.  Someone would jump on an island and say " hey station x has an x SAP up!"  guys would form and go see if they could get a fight or at least pick off some can that had a bit of value.

Now nobody goes out to even see what is up.  Suggestion/adjustment:  You have all islands broken into sectors or "counties", perhaps the SAP timer becomes visible when you enter a sector of an island where an outpost has an active SAP.  This will allow more opportunity for engagements and bring back a measure of action from the SAP mechanic.  On the few stations where you can enter an island and be in the sector of the outpost, make it 1000 km off the teleport before any information can be seen.

TL/DR: you borked the PVP by over adjusting SAP visibility.

46

(37 replies, posted in General discussion)

Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

as i said in my first post i think i like most of the things in the blog... bar the new mobile TPs. they are the last thing this game needs right now.... maybe when we have 40+ islands. but not when we only have 12. as it is its way to easy to move around the map.

DEVS learn a lesson from eve. the days b4 capitals & titan bridges were around was great. stEVE felt massive. going to war & invading an enemy on the other side of the map took a crap load of skill & planning.
Now look at that game now.

Dotn repeat the same mistakes. Perpetuums game world ISNT BIG ENOUGH at this time.

^^ just my humble opinion. smile

+1
Love the teleport idea but +1 on the timing problem.  I can scan this entire map in under 30 min with 3 clients.  You are making your game board way too small, way too early.  Postpone it until you have more land mass, either more small islands (they are too small now) and or continents that have been discussed.

Kaldenines wrote:

1) Please give individual bot pilots reasons to risk their pvp capable mechs out on beta.
    e.g. rare roaming npcs that take a while to find but don't require 5 people to kill (use your imagination).

Before all the carebears start crying about this remember two things:
a) nobody will be forced to do it
b) if people start losing their bots there will actually be a market for gear

2) Introduce diminishing returns / stacking penalties for fitting multiple modules of the same type.  Then balance the module bonuses so that fits with both single and multiple modules of the same type are viable without making unbreakable tanks / instakill alpha striking. (lightweight frames and erp should stay unique items though)

Wow, way to go WAY off topic.  The point of this was to take a pre-determined list and see what highlights people would like to see and in what order.  All these points have lengthy forum threads for discussion.  Please start one for your ideas, but this one is to see what people are considering priorities.

mine would be:

Large land masses - new island to island teleporters will make the map even smaller
Contracts - need ability to trade without having to have all parties in one area
PBS - any building will be an improvement
Basic terraforming - again more player base changes
Advertise - if above is done, players will stay
All ore on Beta - seems obvious
ewar to kill mails - wont have to slow my intact down with the one gun
Terminal features - owners should see all that is going on with their outpost
Undock fixes - hate undocking and realizing that i forgot stuffs.

49

(17 replies, posted in General discussion)

Arga wrote:

Sure, lore wise that makes sense.

But getting kited by an NPC does point to a very good AI smile

Maybe the SO's are actually being controlled by Devs/GMs and not AI's at all! big_smile *put on tinfoil hat*

hmm hmm neutral neutral sad sad also places tinfoil hat on...

Wanted to see what you guys are thinking.  There are some great posts about what pilots would want to add.  There are some past “promises” about what was coming.  There is great feedback about what needs to be adjusted (balance).  If you had to prioritize the Devs time on what to focus on and list them in priority of implementation, how would you rank your wants? 1 being first thing to take care of, 10 being toward the end of the list.

Items (not exhaustive list but major issues from forums)
Basic terraforming (ability to move terrain up and down as a player desires)
Artillery (new bot that focuses on area affect dps)
PBS (player built settlements that allow you some defense away from stations)
New islands (addition of more islands like the ones we have)
Continents (introduction of new large land masses)
Revision of NPC static spawns (reduction and or addition for more island balancing)
Titan ore on Beta (return Titan ore mining areas to Beta islands)
Ore fields balanced (look at Beta islands and re-arrange ore fields to be more balanced)
Alliance features (not sure what is wanted here but it is brought up a lot)
New terrain (introduce new terrain to existing islands that would manipulate current features)
Contracts (introduce a trading, buy/sell option for others to exchange items/NIC at a later time)
Undock adjustment (add a “cancel undock” option as you move from terminal to terrain)
Squad interface (adjust how the squad is managed and add features to smooth it out)
Terminal features (add management features to outpost owners, SAP visibility and others)
Item ID (add tier visibility to scroll over items while deployed)
Add ewar to kill mails (add any type of aggression from a pilot to the killmail of a destroyed bot)
Advertise (use their resourses to advertise and grow community over resources tword changes in current game)
Industrial balancing (revisit recycling, outpost bonuses, other)

20 items listed. I know there are more but this might help ones to speak up about what is a priority for them. Pick 10 and list them from 1 to 10 on importance.  Remember they have limited time (small DEV group) and limited resources, consider this as you choose.