Given the time already required for transport from point A to point B in many bots, a much larger map would rapidly become too much of a PITA for most people to deal with. There is also the infamous You Can't Get There From Here terrain problem.  In way too many instances you have to take the LONG way around mountains, valleys, etc. That adds to the travel time.  Couple that with a much larger map...<face palm>

52

(19 replies, posted in General discussion)

Yarren Rakarth wrote:
Wraithbane wrote:
Crepitus wrote:

weeks  ...  if they had Hulu ads there would be thousands of newbs in day .. just look at what it did for Rift and that game isn't half as good as this one.

Well... That depends on the person. I've played Rift since launch. Level 50 warrior and level 43 rogue at this point. Its a good PvE game from my perspective.  No idea about the PvP, since I have never taken part. 

But I'm betting that the Dev's here would LOVE to have even 10% of the players that Trions Rift has... ^^ Perhaps then they'd be able to move the servers to some country with a developed telcom infrastructure... ^^

Rift imo is a children's game, focuses on 13 year olds the same as World of Warcraft, if 10% were adults 18 + players so it would have been successful. but to see Perpetuum climb down too low in ages, they must develop the game in a different way. I stopped playing wow because it was too focused on the brats. the game became too easy.

Perpetuum need more players but not at the cost of the current gaming standards.
Focus on players with a little common sense and this game will go far.
Dont destroy it with PVE instances, and other stupid fantasy MMORPG standards.
Perpetuum is a Sandbox MMO.


"Children's game"?... I hope you've learned to breathe through your ears, with your nose that far up in the air, you might drown, other wise, in a flash rain storm...<grin>  Games are meant for entertainment and enjoyment. Different games appeal to different people, at different points of their lives.

I enjoyed EVE for almost six years. I've played WoW since late beta. I've also played most of the major and many of the minor MMORPG's that have launched since UO. Its a hobby for me, not an obession or second job.  So far I've enjoyed Rift. Its an entertaining, well polished game. Once I cease enjoying it, I'll find something else.

53

(19 replies, posted in General discussion)

Arga wrote:

I decline your invitation to get sucked into a debate about wow, nice try though.


You're no fun any more Arga <grin>  Since I have four 85's and an 82(started in late beta), I can totally agree with you. WoW does have many different levels of difficulty.  I'm always amused by those who claim its all "easy mode".  Some of it is. But some of it is a SERIOUS PITA for anyone but totally fanatical players who have made the game a second job(or Koreans, but I repeat myself...) ^^ Any way, Haters gotta hate, so this doesn't merit going any further.

54

(26 replies, posted in Q & A)

Arga wrote:

Trace from home

  7    15 ms    18 ms    18 ms  ae-1-0.pr0.lax00.tbone.rr.com [66.109.6.129]
  8    17 ms    18 ms    18 ms  66.109.9.206
  9   194 ms   193 ms   197 ms  204.245.36.142
10   193 ms   193 ms   191 ms  81.183.0.78
11   192 ms   194 ms   195 ms  81.183.0.37
12   194 ms   194 ms   194 ms  81.183.2.225
13   194 ms   194 ms   190 ms  84.2.225.113
14   195 ms   194 ms   195 ms  perpetuum-online.com [195.228.152.150]

Trace complete.

Arga, have you tried something like this? It might be more useful than a typical troute.

http://www.dslreports.com/smokeping

55

(26 replies, posted in Q & A)

DEV Calvin wrote:
Wraithbane wrote:

What makes you think they haven't? Keep in mind that much of that is still State controlled, and as such is largely unaccountable to the users. It also tends to attract the least skilled personnel(other wise they'd be making more in the private sector...) ^^ That's a NASTY combination that one finds in many of the People's Utopias over there. Its slowly changing, but they are having to fight generations worth of damage done by governments of the past.

If you look at one of the recent maps of the connections, there are several single(or at most dual) connection bottlenecks.

Look at Hungry on a map, and then examine the countries that border it on all sides.  Thats exactly what I was speaking of.

While it is this quite amusing, there is not truth to this. The biggest ISPs in Hungary are the likes of T-Com, GTS Group or UPC. Obvioulsly all are huge multinational companies. There is also no difference in technology and infrastructure. We do not have a state owned telecom company.

Ok... But can that also be said about the countries that surround Hungry?... I clearly stated that it is slowly changing. I'm making do with what information is available in english and on the internet. Given the regions past history, what else am I to do?  Cal, this was in no way directed at you or the other Dev's. You have to deal with the situation as it exists. My concern is with the technical issues involved in attempting to host a game of this type in Hungry.

56

(26 replies, posted in Q & A)

CrepitusGoldenGoose wrote:
Arga wrote:

from my analysis, it really doesn't look like a 'eastern' EU infrastructure issue, it looks like the problem is in Germany; but there could be some government packet inspection (firewalling) and not a hardware issue for all in/out to eastern EU if fraNAP is government ownd *tinfoil hat in place*


You would think that if it's the only link out as you said before (I have no reason to doubt you I just have looked myself) that there would be enough people *** that they would do something about it.  I don't just mean for Perpetuum but for all the businesses and whoever else using that link.

What makes you think they haven't? Keep in mind that much of that is still State controlled, and as such is largely unaccountable to the users. It also tends to attract the least skilled personnel(other wise they'd be making more in the private sector...) ^^ That's a NASTY combination that one finds in many of the People's Utopias over there. Its slowly changing, but they are having to fight generations worth of damage done by governments of the past.

If you look at one of the recent maps of the connections, there are several single(or at most dual) connection bottlenecks.

Look at Hungry on a map, and then examine the countries that border it on all sides.  Thats exactly what I was speaking of.

57

(26 replies, posted in Q & A)

Arga wrote:

Looking into hosting is OK, but they all use the same NAP, since there's only one out of Hungary, and if your going to move going across the road or across the continent is probably the same level of logistics; you just can't fluff the server's pillow and kiss it good night anymore smile

Monitoring is great, I think you'll find that the issue is more widespread than what is being reported here on the forums.

Be sure to do a TCO on a new hosting site, there's more than just bw and rack space to look at, I'd rather you stay where you are then over-extend and have to shutdown sad


Well... If they stay where they are, and matters get worse, I suspect they will lose enough players to make the game even more unprofitable than it is now.

Lets face it, this isn't almost seven years ago, when CCP started EVE. There are any number of games that players can spend their time and money on these days.  I like Perpetuum(or I wouldn't still be here). But as it stands its becoming unplayable.

I may let that go on for a few months(just to build up EP), but if it continues beyond that, I'll have to cut my losses and regretfully move on. I suspect many others have a similar perspective.  Hosting a game like this in Hungry, would be much like CCP attempting to host EVE out of Iceland.

The telcom infrastructure in eastern Europe just isn't ready for prime time.  Its improved a bit over the years, but its no where near what it needs to be for this type of large scale, precise application.

58

(26 replies, posted in Q & A)

Noticed that. Its been growing worse. After the third discon I said to hell with it. Its not worth losing my gear over. If this keeps up, I can see lots of people just leaving.

Arga wrote:

Last night I downloaded (2) patches concurrently in about 20 minutes starting at 8PM PST time; so the issue is not systemic.

That can depend on the route. I've noticed that those in certain parts of the world(Eastern Europe and some others) seem to have less problems. I suspect its because the telcom infrastructure in Hungry is just not ready for prime time yet. That would mean that at least some of the problems are load based. The older systems they use just can't handle the load they are seeing at certain times of the day/night. That coupled with a less well developed infrastructure, would explain much of this.

60

(19 replies, posted in General discussion)

Crepitus wrote:
Uncle Mo wrote:

I saw a Perpetuum banner on MMORPG.com today:D  Not sure how long they have been advertising with them but I do visit there like daily.  Money well spent IMO!

Youtube next perhaps?  TV spots seem too expensive at this time.


weeks  ...  if they had Hulu ads there would be thousands of newbs in day .. just look at what it did for Rift and that game isn't half as good as this one.

Well... That depends on the person. I've played Rift since launch. Level 50 warrior and level 43 rogue at this point. Its a good PvE game from my perspective.  No idea about the PvP, since I have never taken part. 

But I'm betting that the Dev's here would LOVE to have even 10% of the players that Trions Rift has... ^^ Perhaps then they'd be able to move the servers to some country with a developed telcom infrastructure... ^^

Alexander wrote:
bladvin wrote:

**Snip** Lack of content **Snip**

I agree that new players are thrown into the world which is pretty much a sink of swim moment and there lacks a storyline, even a short one. It would be nice to see the fluff and tutorial linked together to get people up to speed on what to expect and not expect.
I do like the complete openness of later play but at the start I think joining and instantly being told "You can't do anything alone." is off putting to new players. (Which isn't necessarily true in all cases but most)

No, its not true. I've never been in any corps, and I'm doing just fine. I'm up to mech level(missile, EM, and industrial), and I'll eventually have enough to afford a heavy. Though what I'll do with it remains to be seen. ^^  There is a lot to do solo/PvE if one is interested in such things. PvP?... Not so much.  The PvP in this game is what would really require a good corp. Other wise, replacing gear would be nasty.

Toku wrote:

No, its just Perps server atm. I can connect and dl from UK/Russia/China/Japan/Australia at 1-1.5MBs right now. Clean network and fast connects. There are 22 hops between me and Perp servers currently. The slow part is the last 2 at their end.

Noticed that myself. The last two or three hops are the worst of the lot. Its especially bad over the wekends.  This type of game simply can't afford unreliable connections.  Thats why EVE's data center is out side of London, rather than being in Iceland.

63

(16 replies, posted in General discussion)

Playing Rift, and Dragon Age2 mainly.  Wander in once in a while to assign EP and thats about it. Hoping things get better.

64

(30 replies, posted in General discussion)

Its dead, Jim... ^^ Player markets need many more industrial types than currently exist.  It remains to be seen if thats going to improve any time soon.

65

(30 replies, posted in General discussion)

Andrew Redburn wrote:

Actually the main problem is you can't make NIC that easy. Without NIC no requests for goods. Without requests for goods no offers on market. Easy.

It is also much easier to get NIC on alpha than on beta. With level 3 kill missions or even level 1 transports, you can make NIC relative fast and very easy. On beta the risk is way higher while the reward is not. At least overall.

I know exactly what you mean. I'm holding off on major purchases myself. NIC is much more difficult to make now.  I suspect thats why much of the market has tanked lately.

66

(26 replies, posted in General discussion)

Redline wrote:

A game where player interaction is devided in either no pvp or full pvp but without political consequences as in a personal standing that is being reflected on yourself and your corp by your actions - has 2 finite states - but no dynamic.

Things to fight over wont change that.


True as far as it goes Red. Thats why I supported your third zone idea. But what is really needed is an on going focus. The game Rift is a very dynamic world, in the midst of a multi sided extra planar war. The rift system is very flexible, and can be used for many different purposes. Of course Rifts main focus is CareBear ^^, but something like that could be adapted for PO.

http://www.riftgame.com/en/

As it stands, the majority of the real action is confined to the largest player alliances, who have the resources to replace their losses. They also have a strangle hold on the choke points. Everyone else is just trying not to lose what they have managed to gain at this point.  Unless some changes are made, thats how things will likely remain.  Its going to be a very delicate balancing act. Tilting too much one way or the other could lose many of the few remaining players.

Syndic wrote:
Balsover wrote:
Syndic wrote:

Join non-noob corp. big_smile

But ye, PVE could be bit better on Alpha to entertain new guys. They need something to keep them in-game, and not many have brain-cell to find non-noob alpha corp.


Most players want to figure out the game for a few weeks first, before joining a corp. If they get bored after a few weeks, probably wont happen.

Doesn't it make more sense that you learn the game a lot quicker from corp-mates?

In some regards. In others one has to factor in the role drama and other personal interactions play in player corps. Experience helps in that regard, but it also means one gets to the point that its just not worth it any more. Which is one of the reasons I'm still in SWA in EVE after more than five years.  Perpetuum is an interesting game. But its only a shadow, or shell of what it may some day become.

It all depends on the Dev's resources/talent and drive.  It also depends on having enough of a player base stick with one through the low points in order to reach the later stages. For that, they need to be able to show people what they plan for and give them reason to *believe* that it can be achieved. 

They obviously have some MAJOR technical talent on hand, as this was one of the most stable client/server launches I've seen in years. But thats only one piece of the puzzle.  Putting it all together will determine how far the game eventually goes.  Most people would never have dreamed that EVE would turn out the way that it did, when looking at it at its launch more than 6 years ago.  Who knows how far Perpetuum will eventually go?

Annihilator wrote:
AnxietyAttack wrote:

This game should be free to play with microtransactions.

player should be banned or charged for saying that.


Bannings too good for them! I say we send them down to Davy Jones locker! ^^

69

(189 replies, posted in Balancing)

Redline wrote:

Better do so or Siddy will start danish!

Oh the horror! The HORROR!!... tongue

Well... This has all been rather "interesting"... Take a indy company on their first game, mix in people with a LONG history of "evading" the rules, and exploiting what ever they can to their advantage, and one gets a nasty mess such as we have just experienced.  Not to mention that many of those involved are long known prima donna's from a certain other game... ^^

Could the Dev's have handled this better? Of course, but lack of experience and I suspect lack of internal consenus, makes things take more time and also lack the focus that they should have had.  But unlike many game companies, they didn't just perma ban those involved, but took a more measured, even handed approach. Though given some of the hysterics we've seen, I'm betting that they wish they'd have just started laying about with their mighty ban hammer of doom. ^^

In any event, I'm hoping they have learned some useful lessons from this, and can use them for when future situations require that they take action.  Given how these things work, and the people involved, I doubt this will be the last such situation... wink

71

(19 replies, posted in General discussion)

Many thanks. It looks like some interesting additions are coming this year.

72

(268 replies, posted in General discussion)

Alexander wrote:

Zoom.
The developers were made aware of the situation before the feature was even fully implemented. I was assured by Dev CRM that price inflation was impossible with the checks he had in place. (In general chat and private chat in-game on one of those rare occasions he logged in).

Forum posts were made and buried. Devs were told that exploiting was possible and no warnings, suggestions or even acceptance of the matter were given.
Whoever designed the mechanic should have seen the flaw but apparently they saw nothing.
Days before the insurance was stopped we talked to Devs and yet again still no warnings, no one telling us it was a "cheat" of the system. Granted it did seem like a stupid mechanic but we were even told to keep it under wraps and not tell anyone.

Special treatment is wrong. I don't want to be treated special for finding an exploit. I want the broken mechanic to be fixed the MOMENT it's reported. You said yourself that you were too late to in halting the issue but the issue's been in the game since July 2010. (Yup.. That long ago)..

"The moment"? Lets be realistic, shall we?  AC is a small indy company on their first game. From what I've seen they are doing the best they can. I've seen major exploits go for MUCH longer in CCP's EVE, and they have a much larger number of personnel.  Not to mention when dealing with complex client/server systems, fixing things "the moment" they are reported is not wise. It takes time to determine what the problem is, and then devise a correction that will fix the problem, and not break other things in the process.

73

(268 replies, posted in General discussion)

Saha wrote:
Wraithbane wrote:

Laughter!... Oh, I'm quite aware of whats going on here. Bottom line, those involved EXPLOITED an in game system in a fashion it was not intended to be used for, to their own benefit, and now they are howling like banshees because the fruits of their exploits have been taken from them. All of the rest of the smoke and mirrors some are attempting to use are just obfuscation, meant to distract from that fundamental point.

I have to give AC credit. Even with a small team and limited resources, they much more quickly addressed a serious exploit, in a more timely fashion than I've seen CCP do in some cases in EVE. That speaks well for their concern about the games economy. The fact that they also didn't perma ban those involved, speaks well of their even handed approach.

Are you trying to look ***? Since you are succeeding quite admirably.

I'm one of the most posting persons on the issue. I haven't lost a single NIC. Nor do I mind that my corp did. For last 2 months I don't think I've had more than 3 million NIC myself, yet I'm able to fit t4s and to actually afford losing them. From the talks with the guys, they don't give a *** about lost NIC either. It just doesn't matter enough to make a fuss about it. And no, it doesn't matter not because we frauded enough NIC. No, it's because we know how to make stuff properly.

Yet you together with bunch of other clowns are jumping in joy thinking EXPLOITERS GOT PWNED LOL. We didn't. Devs, in your lingo, got PWNED LOL by their poor handling of the issue and that is concern we are raising. You are applauding them for technically letting poor system go live, then ignoring the warnings given by loads of people and then removing in game stuff which was generated by their ignorance.
Do you want to sit there and fap while under your nose a precedent of Devs covering their mistakes by blaming players is happening? If this goes untouched once, it'll happen again. And again. Do YOU want to play a game where one day you might wake up and let's say an extension in which you invested 40k EP is missing because Devs considered it to be overpowered or whatever?


Classic example... Open up with personal attacks, and then continue with smoke and mirrors.  Have you thought of running for political office? ^^  Of course the mistake was made by the Dev's. They are the only ones doing the coding around here... But the *choice* to EXPLOIT that mistake was made by the players involved.  Who got off easy, compared to some other game companies I've had experience with. I don't see them blaming the players for their mistake. But they are (rightly) taking action against those who exploited that mistake.

AC is a small indy company(10 people last I heard) who are working on their first game.  Given the complex nature of the software and hardware involved, I'm amazed that the client/server is as stable as it is, and that there are as few major issues as I've seen so far.   Bottom line, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

74

(21 replies, posted in General discussion)

Vortigon wrote:
Syndic wrote:

If its in-game its a feature. big_smile


When a game mechanic is used to gain an advantage in a way not intended - it is an exploit not a feature.

wink


Exactly. With the Dev's being the final judge, jury and executioner.

75

(21 replies, posted in General discussion)

Glorion wrote:

It was an exploit? When did that ever get said?

Doesn't need to be said. Anyone who has spent any real time in these games knows the score.  When one finds an exploit, report it and move on. DON'T use it. In many games, such actions are perma ban offenses.  Especially, when its a major exploit of this type.