76

(392 replies, posted in Bugs)

asap

77

(392 replies, posted in Bugs)

Phantomburn wrote:

When I used to get the invalid data error, it was on my end.   Good Luck Zortarg!

for whatever reason.. it works again...

78

(392 replies, posted in Bugs)

Jita wrote:
Zortarg wrote:

the bug that you cant log in anymore now also effects me since yesterday evening.

client error message: "Invald data! Please try again later!"

also applies to test server.

a new installation of the clienet changes nothing.
also it affects my personal and my working computer.
they are in the same town, but are at different locations.

Have you tried logging in with someone else's account? I wonder if it's account based.

yea i had that idea myself.
since i have 5 accounts and its all the same problem with all of them.

79

(392 replies, posted in Bugs)

the bug that you cant log in anymore now also effects me since yesterday evening.

client error message: "Invald data! Please try again later!"

also applies to test server.

a new installation of the clienet changes nothing.
also it affects my personal and my working computer.
they are in the same town, but are at different locations.

80

(49 replies, posted in Balancing)

V

Inda wrote:

I think it is really clear why I suggested that, that has 150 HP. So too easy to kill with an Arkhe even.

Make a 2nd probe who has more HP to not able to kill with Arkhe in NO second!

At least assault with 30-45 sec shooting! Aka 2 000 -3 000 HP. And cost 5 millio or something.

For an arhke a probe is like another player. Meaning you have full interference. Resulting in around 70 sec lock time. Also you get the detection debuff wirh the arhke when near a probe. Means you vave a hard time finding it because you literaly have to stand on top of it to see it. So the arhke argument is invalid.
I only see one reason for more hps. Some ppl dont want to replace their probes aml the time since they easy get shot down by a light.
The probes are a easy way to scout and alert you. It should not be made any more easy by giving the owner more time to respond because it takes a while to kill it.

So no to more hps.

81

(141 replies, posted in General discussion)

some gamma videos from the good old times...

no sound... just moving pictures. always wanted to edit them before uploading. but i guess im too lazy for that. so no propaganda.

REMEDY Emperth BASE: http://youtu.be/1CpJAE6_xpU
Beacon Pit on Emperth: http://youtu.be/9hDszsjs_gQ
REMEDY Yuraion Ro Fortress: http://youtu.be/XbesTdvGAeg

82

(149 replies, posted in Balancing)

since frame is %based while
plates are absolute values
and because both should not be changed for different reasons...

not allowing plates and frames simultaniously seams the most logic way to go for me. either or. or non of both.

i also agree that racial bots shoud be more specialized.
but i dont want to go back to the old ways. there should be a reasonable possibility to fit missile launches on the slots that are there. on the arbalest, baphomet, kain, artemis. just if you want and have both weapon skill sets. besides they are not misc slots like on the tyrannos where they can be used for other good stuff...

83

(149 replies, posted in Balancing)

Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:
Burial wrote:

Why shouldn't a bot be demob immune/close to demob immune?

demob immunity is fine but it must come at a cost. You cant have tank AND be immune to a demob, its just to stupidly powerful.

if you remove the demob frome plates and make it a seperate module then you loose the tank for demob resists.
on the other hand this will also effect tanked fits in general. a full plates heavy will just be as vunrable to demob. so it will be slow like hell and will not have much of a chance to get close.


as for the arbalest problem. i see more of a chance in here to get the reactor back where it was before and add a bonus for reactor anc cpu usage of medium weapons (not only the factonal ones).
that way the plate problem might be solved because of insufficient reactor for them.

84

(149 replies, posted in Balancing)

well im not that active since the patch, and i havent used the forums much either, but this seams a more or less civilized topic so maybe its worth a try.

not sure about the arbalest but i think its about a combination of plates with a frame that makes it fast and demob immune.
so maybe a change in the formula would be of intrest that one plate and one frame will cancel each other out so that its no benefit to have both.
or even that you cant have both at the same time.
since the two modules are basicly the oposite of each other, but current mechanics still provide options to use them effectivly in combination.
just an idea...

for tuners: (i think i said it before)
MAKE THEM LINEAR. no dimishing returns.
at the moment they stack exponential. that was a stupid idea from the start (sry)...
reduce the tuner to ONE benefit. for weapon tunings that would be dmg. then rewrite your formula that all boni simple add %. additive. if your gun is 100% then a bonus of 20% + a bonus of 5% + a bonus of 12% is simple 137% and not something way higher just because of a way more complex formula.

then you basicly just have to figure how much bonus you want to have. that includes extentions ... ...
set a min and a max, and look where you numbers get you. from there you can easy tweak. and just for example for pve it might stll make sense to add more tuners because its worth some. but not one tuner more is a too big difference. thats just because the boni are given exponential.... math my friends, math...

85

(15 replies, posted in General discussion)

for all the ppl that think that this is all sooo terrible and think that this game is crap ...:

well why dont you just move on with your life?
why dont you just quit the game.
the rest is not intrested in your spam how bad you think the game is.
there are thousands of other games out there. we are sure you find something to your liking there.
this place will be a better place without you.

simple solution.
you save a lot of time for yourself complaining.
or do you just want attention?

only takes you one teleport to get across a beta island. thats roughly 4 mins...

87

(5 replies, posted in Balancing)

push.
think this is a positive game change.

88

(56 replies, posted in General discussion)

we are also supporting 77 and friends not playing.

i also like the option of stacking tuners. it is not a viable fit for everything anyway. but sure gives options...

how perp handles it is another thing.

i dont see a big problem for miners. yes it increses the yield a lot, but hey, what else do you want to do with your head slots in a miner. its there to mine as much as possible.
how the boni play out here (for mining) is irrelevant. all that matters is who much yield you want to have at the end. and taking the crys into consideration after the last patch whith the mining nerv it seams to me that the yield should not be lowerd.

for combat tuners its a different thing.
first you could make the % add to the base dmg. so if you have 100% base and each dmg adds up then there is no problem.
lets just give the example. say each tuner would give 10% then 5 tuners would bring dmg to 150%.

atm its a total different thing. first we do not just increse dmg. we inrease dmg, rof and crit. that means 3 stats that benefit from each other. that way the actual dps does not increase linear, it increases exponential with each tuner.

so if needed things could be changed here. but things will greatly decrease dps for tuner based fittings trasticly.

in general im greatly against stacking penalties.
atm we have exponential growth. this could be flatened out to a more linear way. if its nessessary is another question.

then in the end the question comes: whats the maximum and whats the minimum that you want to have. and how should the curve look in between.

90

(31 replies, posted in Bugs)

Supremacy wrote:

I may have been over dramatic in this matter

oh... what a surprise ...

ever tried this one?
http://forums.perpetuum-online.com/topi … perpetuum/

92

(31 replies, posted in Bugs)

i roughly rememebr a change where it was not possible to disconnect buildings when at least one building in the network was in reinforcement.
i dont think it was about deconstruction.

since you only need to offline a buliding to decon it it whould not be affected by this.

but its been a while...

93

(3 replies, posted in Q & A)

because we hate green bots lol

Nooodlzs wrote:
Dazamin wrote:

I disagree, its just different now, of course your playstyle might have been affected, that doesn't by definition make it more unbalanced. You may notice that all EWar bots were essentially nerfed, I wonder why??? :iiam: The Ictus was hit hard because of its non standard bonus setup, if required an adjustment to the base level, as with mining can be used I would think, but its not gonna be what it was (I hope).

When a Rivler/Symbiont Mk1 can neut 354*4 V Ictus Mk2 443*3 with a better accumalator and recharge time, far better resists AND more armour, 10kph faster, also taking less EP, there is something seriously wrong with the nerf.

Use a Symbiont/Rivler Mk2 and it shows that all my EP into Ictus was wasted.

fuuu

you are comparing a heavy mech class with a mech class robot. not realy a good one. if you want to compare to industrial then you have to compare to termis/gargoyle.

using your logic i could complain that a kain does less dmg then a mesmer...

95

(5 replies, posted in Balancing)

as we all know ERP was nerved multible times and it still has a very limited use. now even less with the 20% repair bonus reduction on blue bots.
so since i like the erp in general i was thinking a bit how we could improve it.

since a buff in normal terms seams not to be intended by the devs, so i took a look at the other possibilities.

the idea came in the end from the shield mechanics that is basicly independent from incomming dmg type.

why not make the same with ERP. the incoming dmg still is a thing of the armor resists but the ERP could only work on dmg.

remove all existing factinal ERPs and replace them with one general one. giving it its highest value in general for all dmg types. or tweak it a bit if nessesary.
that way we will be able to play around a bit more with ERPs and they will be much more usefull when they dont only give you a usefull amount of energy when getting one type of dmg.

96

(34 replies, posted in Balancing)

Shadowmine wrote:

If someone wants to mine everyday for 2 years with 5 accounts and not sell any of his ore. Seems very difficult to stop him from doing so. With mechancis or otherwise.

and why should you. its a sandbox. if thats what he wants to do.

its like: "omg that person is accually playing the game. spending his free time on it, doing things, earning money, getting rich."

i have the feeling its more about: "we want to have all the stuff. so when we are done, and we will be faster and better, then the others should not have anything anymore."

getting resources is no much different from killing npcs. its your personal invested time. for some resources its also about risk (epriton/colixum). if you think its too much then maybe we should talk about the yield. oh but wait. everbody just cried when the mining bonus was nerved a bit...

Dazamin wrote:

No

Since nothing was well balanced in the first place, it doesn't really matter that its still not balanced.

good one

98

(26 replies, posted in General discussion)

not happening

well we dont know how the "randomness" in this case works.
if you want to know you have to make your own statistics about it. will take a couple million nic and a lot work wit a spreadsheet to see how it goes. personally not worth my time... 100% scans seam to be pretty accurate still...

well its simple.
when you scan a outpost it gives you a time.

if you dont have 100% then it will deviate from the exact time (or like zoom said, even with 100% it will deviate a bit. but thats minor)

the deviation is in a range of your accuracy. lets say you have 95%. then the scan can deviate up to 5% in both directions.
of cource you have no way to know how much it accually deviated, and you also dont know if its early or if its late. so it can be anything from +5% to -5% or anything inbetween. in some cases it even might be quite accurate. thats the beauty of randomness.

also the deviation is a percenatge. so if the sap is only 4h out at your last scan then the deviation is +/- 12mins (5% of 4h). but if the scan is still 12h out then the deviation is +/- 36mins (5% of 12h). still the same 5% deviation.

thats why scanning outposts with 100% is always a good thing. of cource its now harder with the bonus changes on the argano...

i hope i have confused you.