Um, your thought of HOW to outpace them is not quite how I think to out pace them....Expand and use all your options, and all the game mechanics that you possibly can.

Well the way you control it is to....well simply not control it.  This fear of attacking someone with simply more Bots on the field is a bad thing.  You can win easily if you can, and know what single bots to target, what ones to jam, suppress, or destroy. 

A smaller force can and will always win, as they can react faster, move together more fluid.  The force with the follow bots can be out maneuvered, out paced, over extended.

We use follow bots to intimidate other forces, as well as, they WORK well for doing what they were intended for, following and RSA'ing.

This is not a problem, the problem were facing is that people are not willing to attack, they SEE a force and make a choice without thinking farther then what they see. 

Use the resources that you have, the tele's you have on your island, the land mass that your on, the speed of what your bots is verse the other force.

This requires strategy, but more so a high level of tactics.

When I lose I just throw money at the screen...it makes me feel better.

629

(24 replies, posted in Q & A)

Please when you say instance, please have a mechanic that allows us to attack players as well, alpha (more so grief on alpha) and beta.

I know this is jumping the gun and all.  Other then that I like what I hear, a step in the right direction.

630

(15 replies, posted in General discussion)

The ONLY good point that I really like in this, is the MPC's requiring ZERO inputs.   

They should require power of some sort to keep them running.

As for the character problem...this isn't a problem.

631

(19 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Honestly...other things should take a higher priority first....this is way down the list.

632

(11 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Heliaso wrote:

CAREBEAR SPOTTED :DDD

I like Pve but i like PVP too => http://www.perp-kill.net/?m=agent&name=Angelwing

I didn't forget you killed my mesmer MKII : http://www.perp-kill.net/?m=view&id=237940  sad


I miss you, please do come back...We miss you!


As for the topic I really don't see any foreseeable reason that they would do a reset...but that's just me...they do need to reintroduce the negative faction gain for doing other factions.

633

(11 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Heliaso wrote:

I don't want a standings reset, it's so long and boring to up the relations.

If acquiring standing and its consequences is changed fundamentally it would be unfair that those who got 7.0 the old way had all the new benefits without having to go down the new route.

=> lol

check my standings : http://i.imgur.com/jAntS.png
and i reached this level before the revamp of assignement when it existed 9 corporation instead of only 3 now by faction with negative standing ><


CAREBEAR SPOTTED :DDD

Khader Khan wrote:
Merkle wrote:

Aye, back to an Eve system I guess tongue
I know tried and tested never fails big_smile

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

THIS DO NOT RE-INVENT THE WHEEL HERE!

This was basically my point, yes we like new ideas but what Eve (the basics now) does is perfect in a mission sense.


However Eve uses a instance based approach.  (Warping into a point in space, yes you can probe down the site and grief them, this is a GOOD thing.)

If the DEV's can come up with a way to incorporate this mission strat. into Perp they will have a successful mission system.  Having a "safe" place to mission to call your mission is a good thing, and as well having a way to kill and grief the missioners is a good thing as well.  As the trade off is it requires effort on the griefer.


Argee that instances should be greifable.

Make the interzone beacon used to travel to instance hackable (a head or leg module?). Meaning mission runners will need to find a good place to hide their beacons used to travel to mission or have a second squad of PVP ready people guarding the beacon. Hacking a beacon will flag you on alpha side and once hacked (1 min?) you will be teleported to the instance unable to TP back while flagged.(similar to beta rules of engagement free fire but flag prevents your jumping out).
With those parameters the Squad in the instance will have the advantage as all bots coming through the beacon via hack will be flagged and will be -1 PVP module due to haveing a hacking module.

Just a thought to balance/ sandbox it if instances were used.


Well this is not the griefing that I had in mind...Alpha based shouldn't have the chance to kill or shoot actual players but rather just do the mission : )

Beta and Gamma have at it.

Can we back up just a bit....I do not really want "Raid Instances".  I want missions that are "safe" but CAN be found and grief'ed.

A Alliance feature still isn't a high priority.  However, another Upgrade of the squad system would be a good direction.  More options, ect ect.

Random Mission Generator isn't a bad idea.  I see this idea having a good potential. 

What I would suggest is to not make missions around a squad, but to make missions extreamly hard so players have the option of grouping if they want, or to solo them if possible (and trust me just because its hard on day one for one person, in a month it will be a breeze for that one person).

What I'm trying to say here is, on day one missions are hard, in 30 more days they are extreamly easy.

Make them hard!!!!  And then, step back and make them even harder!!!

(Scaled with the Lvl of missions of course.)

636

(11 replies, posted in Bugs)

Either stop posting while your drunk, or well...No idea.

I don't see a problem with this particular issue that you speak of. In my experience they switch targets just fine.

This is basically a non issue, if people wish to bring up 50 arkhe's and siege a base more power to them.

637

(19 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Um....I really shouldn't even have to respond to this, but I will.

No effort Income is bad,  Saps require effort, get the times, and to get the loot.


No effort No Deal.

I'm sorry for getting this topic, well, off topic.

Aye, back to an Eve system I guess tongue
I know tried and tested never fails big_smile

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

THIS DO NOT RE-INVENT THE WHEEL HERE!

This was basically my point, yes we like new ideas but what Eve (the basics now) does is perfect in a mission sense.


However Eve uses a instance based approach.  (Warping into a point in space, yes you can probe down the site and grief them, this is a GOOD thing.)

If the DEV's can come up with a way to incorporate this mission strat. into Perp they will have a successful mission system.  Having a "safe" place to mission to call your mission is a good thing, and as well having a way to kill and grief the missioners is a good thing as well.  As the trade off is it requires effort on the griefer.

Simplest Idea Possible >

First a agent goes and gets a assignment.  They go and complete assignment and get reward.
(Lvl 1 Mission easy for one person)

Now they decide they want to complete higher assignments (Lvl 8 Missions (on alpha))  now said assignment is hard, very hard.  They want more people so they make a squad (works just the same as all the rest of the squads no difference).  Now there are 5 people in squad he can choose to complete it as a squad or for himself.

Simple, easy, not complex at all.  Its your mission so you complete it, if others have the mission they can DO the mission but it will be at a separate location.  (EI: The higher level Missions SPAWN, as in Eve they have there mission system down pat.)

The goal here is not to force a squad upon people but rather make missions extreamly hard so that they are favored for faster completion.  As it stands now missions are crazy easy, and there rewards (based on a time of completion) are imbalanced.

Simple Simple Simple.  One Mission One Person,  One Mission One Squad = The Choice to complete as a agent or a squad.


The main reason this has really came up is that most of the power blocks in the game us "standing squads" for defense, if you want to work around this a bit, improve squads so they have wings, commanders, squads with-in squads ect.  So that people can pair up into mission Wings, or squads, without leaving the Main grouping.

641

(27 replies, posted in General discussion)

Well whats left to do?

We have done it all.

It would seem to me...the simplest idea is usually the best way of doing things.

643

(27 replies, posted in General discussion)

Funny thing is....I didn't even bother to log in during the "event".

644

(13 replies, posted in General discussion)

Khader Khan wrote:
Khader Khan wrote:

Please Discuss. Stay on topic. What type of bots would you like to bring and a point system to keep fairness.I will post up in EVENTs once I have access at my house where I would be hosting the tournament from. I'm not sitting in an internet cafe to host this.

Merkle can you mopp up your tears and stay on topic. If you have more then enough crap items sign them up and blow them up.

I will mopp up my tears and post in the right topic, once I have access to my house where I would be mopping my tears up from.

Thanks for not refuting that I'm correct.

645

(13 replies, posted in General discussion)

I'm sorry, I just cant support this idea of not having a DEV ran tourney.  We all wait for one year to have the chance to win one thing and one thing only.  The Vanguard Bots, we don't want some *** loot, or ICE, we want the Vanguards, Period.  (Most of all the players in the game now have more bots, more nic, more everything that we cant even use it all, WHY would we want MORE stuff from a useless pot?)

I see this as just a cop-out of basically "running out of resources".  I know that the DEV's are working extreamly hard to continue this game, to continue there labor of love as it maybe.  Personally, I would hope that they as a team would have a good time to reflect on what this game has really became.  In simple terms, its Stopped.  The wheels are not moving, bots are not dieing, the bases are not flowing up and down.

If all of these things are not a sign of something needs to be changed, I don't know what would be.

Something needs to change, either a outside investor needs to come in and buy the game, or The DEV's need to seek outside help and get others involved.

We have had two years to get things rolling, the first year I agree were good, we saw relatively good player base, good battles ect.  However, in the second things SLOWED, we have to keep the energy flowing, keep the game moving forward and this, is not happening now at all.

Eve had the same thing, but when they hit that point they got outside help and expanded when everything said to shut shop down.

STEAM is NOT the answer, its merely a MEANS to get from point A to B, NOT the driver.  The Driving force must be (in all truth) MONEY. WE need investors to take a interest in this game and to get things rolling again, to get the money back into the DEV's hands so they can do the work to improve the game, and to get others improving the game as well.


Now this, of course is all from the outside looking in, I have ZERO working knowledge of what goes on behind the closed doors.  This is just a posting of how most of the community feels, we all support you, were STILL here playing, subbing, but this support is starting to slip.  Even the hardest players are starting to feel like its time to move on.

646

(32 replies, posted in Balancing)

DEV Zoom wrote:

Let me chime in here by sharing some useful info:

Rank1 NPC: drops only damaged fragments
Rank2 NPC: drops functional and damaged fragments, with balance towards lower quality
Rank3 NPC: drops perfect, functional, and damaged fragments, with balance towards lower quality
Rank4 NPC: drops perfect, functional, and damaged fragments, with equal balance
Rank5 NPC: drops perfect, functional, and damaged fragments, with balance towards higher quality

Without knowing statistics, it seems quite possible that the shortage of damaged fragments comes from the fact that people keep farming high ranked NPCs only, because obviously that's where the fine loot is.

Hm, interesting.

So the problem really stems from the newer players not playing and farming. 

Is there a possibility that we could find some middle ground here?

(Ville - Understand now)

647

(24 replies, posted in General discussion)

Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:
Annihilator wrote:

Totally forgot:
1. Unban Styx, invite him to revive M2S.

The Devs would never unban Lord Styx not only that but i doubt he would come back lol.

Any way if he wanted to he could come back he still has many unbanned accounts i believe smile


Obi is styx, BAMMMMMM HIMMMMMMM!

648

(32 replies, posted in Balancing)

Ville wrote:

I think the fragment supply is fine, truth be told, I would like to see fragments be non recyclable to encourage people to sell them      on the market and have an infinite seed of buy orders @230 nic each for common and @330 for factional.

Your statement is contradictory, I think what your saying is that there is a problem and a solution is to have infinite seeds of the frags.  I don't think this is a bad thing, but also not a good thing.

Anni, go test it and actually run the math on beacons and or spawns.

I have seen you run really good sets of numbers before, now that your leaving the game all it seems is your resorting to trolling.  (I'm not going to hate on trolling as I have done it before as well, just usually in the appropriate channels.)

649

(32 replies, posted in Balancing)

Aside from just blatant trolling, if you would look at the perceived price of the market and compare that with the actual price and then compare those numbers with the other fragments within the same grouping.  You should come to the same rational conclusion.

650

(32 replies, posted in Balancing)

Hm, I have seemed to of touched a nerve with Anni.

Bump!