Arga wrote:

Removing the internal market isn't going to fix the open market, its only going to penalize corporations using the internal market as it was intended.

Where exactly do you read the removal of the internal market here?

Arga wrote:

When PIE finished a run of Termis MK II's we put them up on the internal market at cost. Any member wanting to purchse one for personal use, or to resell, could do so.

I am sure most corporations will not permit reselling subsidized items, for obvious enough reasons.

Arga wrote:

There's absolutely no chance that we would have put those bots up on the public market at cost.

You do not have to, nor is it wise! And do you realize that build materials and/or ores you acquire will get cheaper if there is competition on an open market to get them from? Would you not rather lower the build cost to begin with instead of selling at zero profit?

Arga wrote:

In other words, removing internal markets isn't going to have the effect of moving items to the open market, its just going to make players get more creative in how they bypass it, while penalizing corps actually using it for internal use.

Again this is not what I wrote!

Arga wrote:

More population will fix the market, nothing else.[

More population won't fix anything if they do not participate in the market and all hide in their own corp. You would need a very serious population boom in every corp for things to work smoother and with good timezone coverage. This optimum is much easier to reach with interactions on one market then on one market for every moderately sized corporation.

Two things:

* Do not exclude internal corporation markets from incurring a market trade TAX!
* Half the base TAX!

Trading volumes on the open market are too low for good price forming and the player base is too small a.t.m. to get it going with current mechanics. The internal corporation trades for the most common and for every corp available items just draws trade away from the open market for no other reason then the evasion of the market TAX.

Some will argue that corporations like to provide cheap PVP modules to their members, without benefiting their competition too. I would rebuff that it is still possible trough corp storage access and an internal market with subsidized prices levels. My view is that this subsidizing has to be funded from somewhere else then just evading the market TAX by using internal orders.

Personally I see no good reason not to create an equal playing field between public and internal orders, taxation wise. It is my hope that many low end modules and ores will end up being traded publicly instead of internally. There really is not much reason not to do so as not doing it will financially always hurt some part of the corporation population and the hurt corp as a whole.

Another benefit is that starting players, not in a corporation will not be forced to train the tax reduction extension just to participate in the market and it will speed up their development and involvement somewhat. Also buying in one oversupplied place and reselling where there is a shortage will also become a bit more attractive activity too.

Thus for common items that are on internal market for no other reason then TAX evasion, I think it is a shame those do not end up on open market where they compete with others. Prices for those items on the open market would be much lower if increased participation and competition happens, removing one more reason why internal trade is done today. The changes make arguments to provide cheap PVP gear to members a mood point for the most part.

And remember, subsidizing PVP modules internally can only happen if you penalize the miners and/or producers of the same corp by underpaying them OR trough increased corp taxes on mission activities and controlled outpost income. It is every corps free choice! The first option is kind of lame, but the second option seems more reasonable too me and will actually give corporations a good reason to try and hold an outpost.

In short these are easy changes with more upsides then downsides and when embraced by participants (that is a condition) will make this game a bit more immerse and fun to participate in, especially for new players (which is good).


Also read these quotes/replies in full before responding:

http://forums.perpetuum-online.com/post/55623/#p55623
http://forums.perpetuum-online.com/post/55624/#p55624

Yeah, weapon grouping would be a great solution, most will be using the space bar to fire every weapon at once anyhow!

I checked it, and when i get drained, i see no messages at all reporting how much accumulator I lost while playing. BUT when I later checked I did see the messaged in the LOG (as you did given the timestamp).

It still is possible I just cant see it fast enough before is scrolls away, or maybe it just needs to have a different color to stand out more among the regular damage messages. Either way, I'd like to see it improved smile

Annihilator wrote:

well, you can activate "freeze landmarklist when mouse curser is placed above it"...

but yes, seperating "friendlies" and "targets" would be nice

That is complementary, switching does not however create more overview but rather makes it easier to switch between different uses.

+1 for the DEV smile

+1 for the DEV smile

Must be lost on my side then in the ton of messages passing by smile
I will check next time i get energy drained to see if it jumps out on me!

Group warfare and tactics relies a lot on battlefield information. I would like to see two new modules that help to complete a commanders picture of the battlefield. The two modules are working together and are only in effect for scouts and commanders.

The concept is this:

A commander has a fitting wise expensive module that can processes radar information gathered from any scouts that is able to transmit their radar data. Maybe as a restriction (if fittings aren't hit hard enough) only one can be activated per squad! So coordination must be present to determine which of the possible commanders on the field activates the module. The other fall-back commanders just get the fitting penalty and no benefit while the module is inactive (until they replace a fallen commander in battle).

Scouts can fit a likewise module that automatically transmits radar data to the active commander module in the squad. There is a limitation and that is bandwidth. A new rank 7+ extension would be needed to add additional bandwidth to a scouts ability to send a wider range of scout radar information to the commander.

Both need to be active modules and maybe (i haven't decided yet) a scout must have some sort of script ammo to be able to "direct" the radar view (fore/after, or quadrants) in order to use the available bandwidth more effectively in one specific direction (like a searchlight).

The balancing and such I rather leave to the DEVs, but the idea is sound and cool i think. An additional functionality for scout modules and passive commander modules would be to see what area is covered on their radar, but not see anything detected there as that must be restricted to the active commander module only.

Shoot smile

Currently damage messages are scrolling so fast when hit my multiple enemies, it is hard to spot your own delivered pain. And that is a loss that is so totally not needed.

I like to see one window for damage dealt, the other for damage received. Just a "Split" option would do really, so the window size can remain as is, and it just convert it into two horizontal sub-windows.

Likewise, turning of incoming damage  or outgoing damage individually would be nice as well. No need to change server side code, this is purely a client side representation!

If i am not mistaken we do see these when we are such modules on something else, but the other end gets no message of this (at least not from NPC drainers/neutralizers to my knowledge). It makes sense to have these values appear in the log just like any other form of damage done!

We do see gain in accumulator when an ERP takes effect, next to the damage values being done. I would like to see the same logic applied to hits on shield, which always show 0.0 damage (not very informative). Showing the amount of capacitor lost behind it like with ERP would make the log informative again.

I see no reason why we should be denied coordinate functionality once some silly plant decides to grow on it, can you?

Currently we need to open a second window (the map) just to get this functionality and when we find a coordinate, we have to approximate the location on the radar in order to navigate towards it. It is inefficient, annoying and quite easy to fix even on just the client side!

I want to see a second fully functional and settings wise independent landmarks window. The reason is simple, you always want things sorted on both name and distance. Other useful filtering spread across multiple overviews are possible, like NPC separated from players to name one!

It is kind of silly as EVERY game with an overview/landmarks sort of functionality needs this and none I know of have implemented it yet. Be the first and please your players, it can't be very hard to implement and if someone does not like it, they don't have to open landmarks II.

This is really the only sensible way to maintain overview and control. Have you ever tried to lock something that is jumping on the overview because you have it sorted on distance? Trying to lock something without getting overrun is half the win and the interface is currently helping no1 but the blobs!

91

(102 replies, posted in General discussion)

Jack Jombardo wrote:

Haha, it's what I expected *g*.
The server isn't even online again and the first one start to whine like pink girlys yarr.

And it's not the DEVs who don't know, what is important. Most of you don't understand what this game need!

First of all it's: population

Not more content (there is enough), not new icelands (hell, betas are nearly empty, go there before you ask for more), not POS or whatever you want to call it. It's flat population.

And I know many of you don't want to hear it or even can't except it, but games like Perpetuum live from their PvE-player base!
If miners can't sell their stuff, they will leave.
If trading isn't posible as noone sells or buys trader will leave.
If noone buys their stuff, producer will leave.

I know many of you just want to pewpew and kick *** ... but it's unimportant, when most new players don't stay as there is NO MARKET! As long as new player don't stay becouse of no market .. you will NEVER be happy about Beta-Population!
And no golden eggs will change this!


Quoted For Truth!

The easiest thing the DEVs can do is to forcing every trade to happen on the open market and lower the tax rate by 50%. Sure direct deals will still happen between trusted parties to save that 1% (at max skills), but using the market will be a lot more feasible all of a sudden. We will see more open competition, which will reduce prices and give everyone an realistic frame of reference of what that price level really is.

DEV Gargaj wrote:

ARGH $#!()*$_!$#! sad

Fixing now sad

Somehow I expected this response wink

I see that in the trade window they did use spaces as a thousand separator and that is very easy to read!

One thing I was able to confirm, and is what might have happened!

If you delete the "Daoden" folder, you also delete all user created folders that conists entierly of scan results located on Daoden.

Thus it seems like the delete ore type is indeed fixed (no more deletes everything of said ore type), but the delete island folder still affects all scan results, regardless where you put them!

I don't think I made a mistake here, given the circumstances that impossible unless I had an identity switch and lost an hour of my consciousness.

I suddenly lost about a days worth of scan results (again).  I had like 10 folders created with many bookmarks inside them. Today, at the end of my scan session, I found out I missed nearly ALL scan result I put in my own folders that were located on Daoden. If memory serves me well, a few unprocessed scans not in a user created folder survived.

This is must be a bug of some sort, just when I started to trust the delete folder option again (before it wiped out all results of said ore type...period).

To prevent such mayhem in the future and honest mistakes too. I propose that we must be able to protect our user created folders from any delete action. Direct or indirect...e.g. no bookmark inside a protected folder should be deletable,..... ever.

Also, a backup to local disk feature would be nice too, the map tends to be awful slow at opening if you have gathered some bookmarkts, even when they are not selected to be displayed.

96

(20 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

I would very much like this!

Found it, thanks a ton!

I keep running into the issue that when sending a message with the intention to send a follow up message, that suddenly I am moving my robot, turn windows on or off etc.

I am just too used to windows that keeping focus when you interact with them, and can't seem to adapt to this kind of interface behavior where after each message, I have to use the mouse to regain focus on the chat.

Spaces would work well too, and might conflict less with what people are used to!

It currently is neigh impossible to read the amounts on the market properly. Are that 6 or 7 zero's, is that 1.7xxx million or 17 million units that is requested? I just can't tell without covering the last three digits with a piece op paper and I am no doubt not alone in this.

It seems too straightforward, not to include this in a near future patch.


Thanks in advance!