first

nice post zoom


"As a result of this change, intrusion events should be more fast-paced and straightforward as defenders won’t have to stand around for two hours waiting for someone to come, but it will also require more effort to keep an outpost stable."




^^    nice change, been looking forward to






Zoom - rough target date to 2.5.3?     ("soon")    got it




10% discount  ...

I would like the ability to raise or lower terribleness.

remove burials

Burial wrote:

I'm all for removing them but Gamma doesn't have the content to keep players there 24/7. Ville, would you enjoy living on Gamma without sparks? big_smile

154

(49 replies, posted in General discussion)

dont defend, we take the base and play more other games

defend, we kill you and take the base and play more games

there is no downside



Sparks allows us to easily do this


i can say it a billion times

remove sparks

terrible

fit a masker or dont fit a masker, that is the way

157

(10 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

sorry that is Joke

get it correct




Annihilator wrote:
Supremacy wrote:

you wouldnt know as you dont leave Alpha


Annihilator wrote:

working as intended.
how much time do you have between seeing another player and getting away?

how would you know, you never leave your teleporter. and what does it matter anyway?

158

(10 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

stop being a ***

Ville wrote:

I barely have enough time between seeing a red mob spawn and changing course before getting demobbed and losing any industrials.

159

(62 replies, posted in Balancing)

I like waiting.

160

(10 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

you wouldnt know as you dont leave Alpha


Annihilator wrote:

working as intended.
how much time do you have between seeing another player and getting away?

161

(10 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

-1

162

(62 replies, posted in Balancing)

MEH

163

(64 replies, posted in General discussion)

remove sparks

we dont need them

164

(62 replies, posted in Balancing)

I like how people who dont put lots of time in attacking or defending saps and taking timers 24/7 think they have the experience to decide what is a lot of work or effort .....



....

165

(39 replies, posted in Q & A)

no we did that just to piss you off, specifically


Tonnik wrote:
Supremacy wrote:

if you would have built a station instead of sitting on your hands. you wouldnt have to ask



we arent telling you so you can exploit it and then have Zoom *** us over in the usual fashion





Inda wrote:

So waht is the bug ?

Didn't you put stations on every island in the first day to prevent people from doing just that?

166

(39 replies, posted in Q & A)

\o/


DEV Zoom wrote:

Bug has been fixed, and the 4 terminals that have been affected by this had their emergency phase counters set to where they should be.

167

(62 replies, posted in Balancing)

The check is opponents hitting it .....



Gwyndor wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

If we want to have a proper island presence requirement (as it was the initial concept), then 1 click that 1 guy does in a blink of an eye doesn't cut it. That doesn't require any effort.

And yes, the defenders will have the opportunity to do the SAPs fast and forget about it, but that just means that anyone who wants to take the base needs to be there on time and duke it out with the defenders. Fast and simple, isn't that what we want?

I think what is being asked for is some sort of check in by the defenders to say they actively use it. They would still need to defend it for the whole hour to get the defense.points and loot but if no one shows up at all th3n there shouldn't be any loot or change in stability.

168

(62 replies, posted in Balancing)

we've been suggesting this 1000x for three years and now you finally decide its not a bad idea ...

......


DEV Zoom wrote:

I'm starting to think this is a good idea actually.

Although I wouldn't go as far as losing stability when the owner doesn't do the SAP, since that would be as bad as not being able to defend it (ie. losing it to another corp), and I think we need to make a distinction there.

So I'd say stability simply should stay as it is when the owner doesn't do the SAP, but shouldn't increase on its own.

169

(64 replies, posted in General discussion)

terrible idea


Jita wrote:

I'm for removing all sparks too but I can see why a gamma holder might not be happy with that so I'll stick by what I said to zoom.

One gamma spark, one alpha spark.

170

(62 replies, posted in Balancing)

You were playing alone ...

we are not ..


Burial wrote:
Supremacy wrote:

What do you personally know about the effort needed to take and hold stations?

Yeah, us and you had a really hard time holding all the stations. lol

The default stability increase a station gets without any interaction has to go.


ArcheAge Pic - http://i.gyazo.com/89f937da73190c908fc1137226bfea6d.png

171

(39 replies, posted in Q & A)

if you would have built a station instead of sitting on your hands. you wouldnt have to ask



we arent telling you so you can exploit it and then have Zoom *** us over in the usual fashion





Inda wrote:

So waht is the bug ?

172

(39 replies, posted in Q & A)

FIX THE EMERGENCY PHASE BUG PLEASE

173

(62 replies, posted in Balancing)

....


welcome to the 14,364 thread about this


What do you personally know about the effort needed to take and hold stations?


nothing...

174

(39 replies, posted in Q & A)

it is bugged how is it even possible to think otherwise

175

(5 replies, posted in Q & A)

play it for the tears of my opponents


and there is a lot of tears