26

(4 replies, posted in Balancing)

Annihilator wrote:

thanks for PvP "station games" bandaidfixes.

Inda, you has PvPer should know best that "stationgames" don't happen because of those mechanics, and mobile teleporters need to be restricted from use as "escape route" fuuu

QQ

27

(9 replies, posted in Balancing)

-1 OP should have to suffer just like everyone else.  Sincerely every green pilot on the server.  Suck it up butter cakes.

28

(51 replies, posted in General discussion)

Least it's got *** to do in it.

29

(50 replies, posted in Bugs)

DEV Zoom wrote:

We did of course notice extra lag that could be connected to the trees.

So when will this be fixed?

30

(21 replies, posted in General discussion)

http://imgur.com/gallery/AQmbxNv

31

(12 replies, posted in Q & A)

Gooma wrote:

P.S.  Celebro..  At this point its a submarine.

This made me cry laughing.

32

(71 replies, posted in General discussion)

Annihilator wrote:

something is still wrong...
i can't get the DPS of my MK1 mesmer on my MK1 seth with gauss... that "one more tuner" just doesn't want to fit in to get close to it, and then i still don't have that one slot to get the repair tuning in.

neither can i reproduce that "one tuning" as difference. Robots have 10% damage bonus and -9.09% cycletime, while a tuning does 7.5% damage and -7.5% cycletime
theres still some % damage difference that - according to pro-elite-PvPers - do matter.

The Butt Hurt is strong in this one.

33

(51 replies, posted in General discussion)

Wassup Celebro!  I'll be joining you as well.

34

(12 replies, posted in Q & A)

Yay small tweeks, look forward to a major nerf next week.

35

(18 replies, posted in Bugs)

Bump, please fix

36

(51 replies, posted in General discussion)

You two sound pretty eager to see your fellow man kicked to the curb.

37

(51 replies, posted in General discussion)

Silkdawn wrote:
Crusader wrote:
Silkdawn wrote:

I might be new and yes I dont understand the "bitter vets", mostly because of two reasons:

* Reason one

All older people Ive been talking to have told me stories that sending in bug reports etc hasnt been in vain, its been fixed. Sooner or later. Often sooner. Its not being ignored like in so many other games.


* Reason two

This game might not have been rock solid to begin with, but it is now. It has all the foundation it need, sure it could use more fluff, but it has what it needs. More importantly theres no important bugs around the foundation.

All we can hope for now is a future, but that last part is up to us, because they are burnt out on idiots like you (and me?), if you love this game, do something to help it out instead of complaining on an already overworked small staff company.

No and no.

1.  In an asset wealth management game it is dire that critical bugs that allow for currency to be printed at a whim destroy a game like this.  And it has.  Think of it this way: Corp A can supply all its members with bots and t4 to fight in a battle but corp b requires its members to mine/harvest/rat and artifact to participate in the battle.  Which corp you thinksgoing to spend more time pvping?

-So one way the developer can curb this is,by adding another tier of modules and adding new robots.  This forces blood thirsty pvpers back in to the industrial sector.  Providing you targets and forcing breathing room.

2.  There isno foundation until spark teleports are fixed

Maybe Im just a little bit drunk, but youre saying a young corp like mine (or NSE) dont have a chance out there? Well I beg to differ. If it is because our "evul empire" is stagnating or whatever I dunno, but despite being rookies weve shown our worth. Dont you dare talk smack about our sacrificies big_smile

Second part about spark teleports... well once again, we are still playing on the same field, right? Seriously WTF? Are you just stupid or what, do you think we guys dont know about this, of course we do. We just dont whine about it.

Is this guy even on your side?

I see Maidden has a counterpart.

Pissing me off has serious rammifications.  I'd advice you to hold your tongue or your really not going to like the consequenses to your actions.

38

(51 replies, posted in General discussion)

Syndic wrote:

You're rebounding into fanboydom like a crack ho Ville.

you apparently have not looked on Steam.

39

(51 replies, posted in General discussion)

Silkdawn wrote:

I might be new and yes I dont understand the "bitter vets", mostly because of two reasons:

* Reason one

All older people Ive been talking to have told me stories that sending in bug reports etc hasnt been in vain, its been fixed. Sooner or later. Often sooner. Its not being ignored like in so many other games.


* Reason two

This game might not have been rock solid to begin with, but it is now. It has all the foundation it need, sure it could use more fluff, but it has what it needs. More importantly theres no important bugs around the foundation.

All we can hope for now is a future, but that last part is up to us, because they are burnt out on idiots like you (and me?), if you love this game, do something to help it out instead of complaining on an already overworked small staff company.

No and no.

1.  In an asset wealth management game it is dire that critical bugs that allow for currency to be printed at a whim destroy a game like this.  And it has.  Think of it this way: Corp A can supply all its members with bots and t4 to fight in a battle but corp b requires its members to mine/harvest/rat and artifact to participate in the battle.  Which corp you thinksgoing to spend more time pvping?

-So one way the developer can curb this is,by adding another tier of modules and adding new robots.  This forces blood thirsty pvpers back in to the industrial sector.  Providing you targets and forcing breathing room.

2.  There isno foundation until spark teleports are fixed

40

(641 replies, posted in Testing server)

Did the test server just go down?

41

(641 replies, posted in Testing server)

Oh?  You could use it for that, I was referring in general to base defense seems too large.

Also the gates were 3 shot by a heavy mech, is this intended?

42

(641 replies, posted in Testing server)

I do not like the fact that Forcefield gate are 250 U.  Could we get that dropped to like 80 or 100?

What do you want us to test?  What is the first thing you want us to do on the test server?

http://forums.perpetuum-online.com/post/106651/#p106651

That's not harsh.  I respect that statement.  But as I've already pointed out two months ago, we need cover during seiges.  Buildable walls, energy shields, something.  We as players aren't going to risk billions of assets for a half *** payout that nets less than 10% of the total utilized cost of the siege.

I'm being harsh and I'm sorry for that CRM.  But how do you as a developer envision players to attack a base?

Terraforming is terrible in its current form.  Not the interface but the lack of ability to make walls.  Which is what drew 90% of the people to gamma.

There's only a tiny incentive to go to gamma. 

Standard T1 buildings are easily killable.  Simply by out ranging turrets.  T2 & T3 bases aren't.  So the only people who have a chance at survival are the people with stockpiles. 

So these people who venture out to gamma will have to farm their *** off to get T2/T3 mpc units built to hold territory.  Meanwhile the enemy is camping tps and ghanking people.  LOL.  No entity will be able to survive that .  Look at the map/ intrusion events on the live server and you, the developer, are telling me everything's fine?

No you didn't, you recycled old content.  And you took out the best feature, terraforming.

And tbh, why test it?  Not like your going to listen to feedback.

48

(201 replies, posted in Testing server)

So.  If Orange npcs target follow bots, does this mean its wide open season on dropping beacons on players again?  smile

It's a dead end, no it's not.  Yes it.  No...  Oh.... What a bunch of ***.

50

(28 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

T3xasp3t3 wrote:

i'd be willing to round up a group of my corp if the other bigger corps agree to pitch in

PHM's stance is no.