BandwagonX9000 wrote:
Tux wrote:

Ictus energy warfare is limited by line of sight   
Long range demobs are limited by line of sight / short range demobs have a base range of ~ 200m with good skills.


You are comparing two forms of EW that directly affect survibability, with two that can be safely cancelled by easily walking away and breaking lock? Not to mention the ictus bonus?

This has gone full Zortag. I'm done with this thread until people recover their senses and stop proposing stupid stuff after stupid stuff because this is going nowhere.

with a properly fitted EW mech your walk would be over 1k to " be safely cancelled by easily walking away and breaking lock"

Their are NO drawbacks with the current way ECM and Suppression works and nothing like Armor plates / counter to demob or  reactor sealing counter to neutralization. ECCM is a joke and doesnt do enough to even start to counter  ECM .. sensor amps would need a tuner to come close to being a counter to suppression. 

for balance their needs counters to everything ... if there is no viable (effective) counter then the balance is gone .. simple as that.

a lot of this could be balanced by adding line of sight to these modules and they wouldn't be so "overpowered" I will say theirs a lot a viable solutions posted here to balance the modules but for the sake of argument. ...

Ictus energy warfare is limited by line of sight   
Long range demobs are limited by line of sight / short range demobs have a base range of ~ 200m with good skills.

bandwagonX9000 wrote:

4. Not being able to shoot due to EW Bad? Not being able to shoot due to accu raping good? Lol.
5. Accu based mechs being able to mostly ignore accu drain instead? Lol.
6. Not being able to shoot bad. Not being able to move good? Lol.

^ is short sighted and does not represent actual application of the modules mentioned.

IF ECM / Suppression was separated in to  4 types (green, blue, yellow, white) and were designed to work against their designated race yellow = theolodica and so on (white wold be indy) there would be more balance in the system.

ECM / Suppression needs to be brought into the 3 way racial balance.

Syndic wrote:

said stuff ...

people can downgrade now so no reimbursements are needed.

Rage Blackout wrote:

We use Ewar effectively and opponents do not.

That doesnt make it imbalanced

EW should not create an invisible shield for an attacker or defender. Like everything there should be draw backs for using EW currently there are not drawbacks and only incentives to put as much EW on the field of battle as possible.

We used mobile teleports just as every one could but because of their "OPness" the system was brought back into balance.

Just because you like using something doesn't mean it doesn't need to be balanced. Currently this is a game of who brings the most EW to the field of battle and that person / side wins.

There needs to be more balance than that.


(113 replies, posted in Testing server)

Burial wrote:
Jita wrote:

The problem with detectors and maskers is you can put them on something very cheap and very fast and be very hard to catch. That's not risk vs reward.

That's exactly the problem. Make them harder to fit, heavier and require more accumulator.

This is the way to go


(133 replies, posted in Balancing)

Rage Blackout wrote:

++  Works well in EVE, should be good here.

Merkle wrote:

Also adding in Racial ECMs would help out greatly on the balancing front.  You have to choose your Jams that you want, its not just a blanket ECM's

Perfect solution .. not to heavy handed and will make current mechanics more balanced between attacker / defender. would also add racial suppression to this and a slight buff to ECCM as mentioned 2% per skill level  or 5% per module Tier.

EW should complement damage dealers not provide an invisible shield for them.


(133 replies, posted in Balancing)

On detectors why not just increase the CPU and Reactor needed to equip the detector module so much so that the only thing a Castle can use with it is a LWF?

DEV Zoom wrote:

I'm not saying we don't listen to reason, but how exactly is this different compared to ICE?

In the past you bought ICE for real money, then you sold it on the market for hundreds of millions of NIC, then you bought robots etc. from other players.

With this system you would do the same thing, only without the ICE and NIC intermediaries.

ICE drastically inflated prices in game. It wasn't good for the game IMO it only made people buy ice to sell for NIC to become overnight Billionaires. How is this good>? 

Syndic wrote:

I could buy ICE and either sell it for NIC or apply it to my own subscription. I couldn't turn around and sell the ICE or the stuff I buy with NIC for more $$$.
Putting player-manufactured items on the Steam market creates NOTHING for the game or put real money into your pocket, you merely create a legitimate reason for people to farm NIC/produce XZY and sell it for $$$. In completely destroys the in-game economy (why would I sell for NIC when I can sell for $$$?) and demolishes any incentive to PVP (hey I could have sold this for $$$ and bought Tropico 5).
Put this in and you legitimize gold-farmers, destroy the in-game economy, and generally screw everything up for everyone who wants to have fun in this game.
What puts real money into your pocket is doing what everyone and their mother has been telling you for 4 years on these forums;
- add cosmetic stuff,
- more features,
- more PVE,
- more content,
- more bots,
- more stuff that gives a critical mass of people reasons to spend 10$ for the convenience of having boosters for their accounts and buy more and more and more stuff

^^ Agreed ^^

Devs DO NOT allow people to buy in game manufactured items with $$$ or Steam cash, its not good for the game economy.

We need cosmetic only items bought through these channels.

I will gladly pay $$$ for NEW CONTENT in the game!

I think gamma release needs to come with:

30+ New Colixum based Robots to pilot ...
MK3 Robots (Colixium based)
T5 Colixum based modules

Give people something to use gamma for something new .... Re releasing gamma with nothing new is just relaunching OLD content ... how is that exciting hmm


(39 replies, posted in General discussion)

@ Rex, I agree with a lot of what your advocating for ... we just need to get zoom to change his mind about the asinine slope limitations he wants .. With the painted zones TF from gamma 1.0 can work just limit the height.


(58 replies, posted in Balancing)

Give use more bot choices ... no need to keep re balancing the same stuff over and over ...

bring in new content so the current content is not so " " over powered


(39 replies, posted in General discussion)

Syndic wrote:

In the current iteration on the test server, I would build a base simply for the benefits to prototyping/production/recycling.

Why wouldn't you?

Why would I ?

I do production at the moment because theirs no new content in the game not because I need to. All the Devs are thinking about right now is how many restrictions they can put on gamma before no one will use it ...

while they should be thinking about how they can rebuild a system in a way that  everyone can enjoy it. One in which everyone doesn't have walled off gamma islands.

The only thing they need to fix is the ability to wall off the gamma islands completely, but in stead they are trying to make cookie cutter islands that are the equivalent to beta ...

why then spend the resources and time to TF and inhabit that version of gamma after you have been playing it for the past 2+ years? (oh that's right you haven't been playing it for the past 2 years) So then it may appealing to you but it sure as hell isn't to me.

#1 best thing about gamma is the creativity we have with terraforming.

Rage Rex wrote:
Tux wrote:
Ville wrote:

If you intend on leaving epi on Beta only, than we need more Betas and we need more separation.  Way too small atm.

What makes the world to small ? Sparks Maybe ? lol

Um, well yes.

Sparks do make it small. Is that not the point we tried to make in 50 pages of the SpT thread while your little minions bickered away against it?

So what you lol about?

Stark Teleportation is a relic of the Gamma expansion ... and works well only with the expanded number of islands.

I agree that it is unbalanced at the moment because the bases for it being implemented into the game is not present (gamma).

Im not saying the world should be the size it is ...  or we need to remove spark teleport.

I agree with the OP and we should have way more islands ... add in something like

12 more Alpha II's One terminal on each island (maybe some with no faction affiliation) 
Add 24 Beta 3 (pvp islands with no terminals but has colix and epriton)
36 Gamma

And keep spark teleport in the game with the expanded island numbers .. but under the current island network its not sustainable. This is why I lol because i have been saying since before Gamma that we needed 60 + islands for corps to be able to thrive long term.

Battles were fought in regions of the game before sparks and people knew a corp was on a campaign when they brought 20 + mechs and heavies to someones beta to knock it down (basically having to put planning and effort into pvp). Now i can not say that is the case ... Being limited to such a small play space is going to eventually put us back where we were years ago before gamma people slowly leaving the game and corps dying.

The gamma islands can be released and more added with out the ability to use PBS of TF which is needed. I think for this game to go long term there needs to be islands where nothing can be built or captured, but you can still mine high end resources and hunt high end NPC's ..... even when gamma is reintroduced we still need this ... free roaming beta 3.0 islands.

Ville wrote:

If you intend on leaving epi on Beta only, than we need more Betas and we need more separation.  Way too small atm.

What makes the world to small ? Sparks Maybe ? lol


(39 replies, posted in General discussion)

Ville wrote:
Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:
Merkle wrote:

No reason to do anything BUT ninja mining when you dont need it in mass qualities anyway.
So A semi +1 to what your driving at on the "no need for much of it anyway".

Not every one will want to do that. If you wish to not commit to Gamma then so be it.

It's not like he is going to be living there regardless..

No one will be living on gamma with the current BS that is on the TEST SERVER ...

I understand your anger with us ... I really do but if you want even a glimpse of a chance at revenge you should be advocating for gamma to be worth something that is sustainable, rewarding and worth the time. other wise you will just toil away in rage. The only Group of people taking that away from you is the devs because as the ONLY Corp that Survived Gamma from start to finish STC is a Gamma Corporation we have been from Gammas inception.

But as I will keep saying no one will take the time and effort to live on a gamma that is not worth living on.

Think about it.


(641 replies, posted in Testing server)

Rage Rex wrote:

If Devs think it would be 'easy' to manually paint terraformable zones, then the 'easiest' thing to do would be try that with the Old Mechanics and lets discuss from there. On test server, start with old Gamma Mechanics only on painted portions of some Gamma map ...then adjust from there.

I guess I'm like the only one who thinks this is a fair idea sad

This is not a bad Idea ( I kinda like it ) but with this change in addition to (terminal distance restrictions) It would basically be the equivalent of 1 terminal per gamma island on most islands with a 3 to 5 K build / TF radius around them. I am assuming that the devs will "paint" an area in the center of the island small enough so you can not TF off 75% or more of the island.

The old mechanics are i think the best way to do terraforming ... sadly because of the bad taste left in the devs mouth from the walls of Imidero they are hell bent on not allowing vertical walls. This is sad that adjustments can not be made to the system, but the system as a whole must be thrown out, instituting sever height limitations was all that was needed to begin with but that was never even tested.  sad


(10 replies, posted in Q & A)

Martha Stuart wrote:

isn't there a way to convert strings to ints within excel?

If you find a way let me know ... ill be working on this more tonight

Syndic wrote: … l_id=43292

Seems pretty balanced, or was overpowered ECM/supression suddenly not overpowered enough?

How about in this instance … l_id=43070

Can we identify which cameleon mk2s had the faulty ECM Tuning installed?

You have just proven my point you brought more EW and won by being able to  lock down the opposing fleet. Look at the kills and look how much ECM is on the field. roll

#2 You have 8 Light EW robots on the field to our 6 ... but even though we were out numbered we still engaged and got kills before all of your EW bots were able to engage. This is no shocker to anyone who pvp's

@ Ville should I post statements to support your point of view or mine?

I use Ewar knowing its overpowered and something needs to be done about it. Other use ewar blindly and think its perfectly balanced that's the difference. In the case i posted we were able to put more EW on the field at the time of the engagement so we got kills ... later we were able to kill 2 mechs 1 with a pretty good rep build(Jones) because we had enough jams to not allow him a kill .

If you guys were not so dependent on EW we might be able to have a constructive conversation on how it should be balanced... But obviously this is a waste of time.

Syndic wrote:

Why aren't - by your logic again - the overpowered ewars winning the fights for you? … l_id=43287

You can keep saying "nothings wrong with ECM/Supperssion" "Nothing to see here" but the fact is that its not balanced.. I needs to be fixed. but by all means keep posting about how well you abuse it.


(10 replies, posted in Q & A)

DEV Gargaj wrote:

The issue here is that the export function doesn't really process what's in the grids, it just dumps the data out straight as it is.

I understand this ... is there a better way to format it in game for easy "usable" export ...

Ill try to run the suggested script, Im not too familiar with with python.

I may have write a Perl script to do it .. i was looking for a better way but thx Elendil ill try after work today.

Flawed Logic and tailored match ups are why we got the tunings we currently have in game.

If you think its as simple as  Mesmer rep vs dps build I am thankful you are NOT advising the DEVS on anything.

Its not simple tick for tack ... Im  not going to go over what others have already explained in great detail in many other threads. If Ewar was balanced you would not see players  for all different corps calling for something to be done about it.


(10 replies, posted in Q & A)

CSVmarketexport wrote:

"145 876","9.00 NIC","Asintec Beta Terminal","2215-08-13 00:53:00"
"1 000 000","9.50 NIC","ICS Alpha Terminal","2215-08-17 05:21:00"
"3 245 643","9.70 NIC","Hershfield Main Terminal","2215-05-29 06:47:00"
"29 051","10.00 NIC","Truhold-Markson Alpha Terminal","2215-05-19 20:55:00"

Above is an example of a market export.

The first column quantity returns what looks like numerical value that can be used in a spreadsheet or program to represent the value intended, but because of the formatting its considered to be a non numerical value and cant be used as a numerical value when exported.

The second column "Price" it returns a "name" non numerical value that can not be used as its intended value.

Has anyone come up with a solution to convert this easily I dont want to manually re enter all of this data. Im hoping for a better way.

DEVS: Can you fix this ...

I see a fix by moving the NIC from value and putting it in the column header

and formatting the values as true values like 1253456 not 1 253 456

Jita wrote:

Your maths don't make sense. With four head slots I can shoot 50% of the time vs four head slots of ewar that can't shoot at all. Even under four ECM and four supressors I can shoot 25% of the time and your using two ewar mechs that can't shoot back.

if you are getting ECMed but 4 ecm's and suppressed by 4 suppressors that are equal to or more than your bots sensor strength you will never shoot ... get out and test it.

Tux wrote:

Yes when taking into consideration "FLEET" composition you can compensate for this with more EW vs EW. Balance is not bringing more ECM's to ECM the ECMers. Balance is employing a viable counter (Electronic counter counter measure) that is as effective as its pair.

Syndic, Lobo and others: there are viable counters when taking into account fleets this is already understood by many. This is not a nerf Ewar thread as i have already stated ... it about bringing more balance and options to players that choose not to put a suppressor and ECM on every bot they want to roam around with.

Their is more than one type of game play that does not revolve around group pvp. the current state or ECM and Suppression just needs to be looked at and balanced through other modules.

Syndic wrote:

EW Tunings have an obvious and very serious drawback.

yes thers a problem ... solution ??????

try being constructive for a change . ...

where was the counters for ECM tuner and suppressor tuner?

we got a counter for the ENwar tuner with the reactor sealing.

weapon stabs / evasive mods
damage tunings / resistance plates / HP plates

read and think about the future of the game and stop knee jerking your responses

I am asking and suggesting that the Terraforming reimbursements be completed, Why you ask?

Because there is no way I would spend the amount of NIC I spent on terraforming in the old system on the new system you guys are purposing. Its not going to work long term so you should give me my NIC back now. Terraforming IF kept in game will be so limited that i do not see any corp using it in any viable way. 

I recommend that you Remove all of the structures form the game and replace them with their equivalent in minerals to the owners.

I recommend that you guys scrap the current version of Gamma PBS and go back to the drawing board, why? Because the current PBS networks hinge on being able to terraform the island to make them useable. If you cannot terraform the island you cannot use the structures.

I recommend you bring back the gamma islands with:
No Terraforming
No Structures
No NPC Terminals
No mining tower requirement for colix mining
Bring back Epriton to gamma.

Basically gamma should be a no~mans land that people can mine epriton and colixum on but not build bases on and WHEN you can release Gamma PBS in a viable sustainable way then add it back in.

Something needs to be done sooner rather than later because you have a mineral hole in production for new players coming to the game. Right now there is a fixed amount of Colixum in the game and no more can be mined because we do not have gamma. This needs to be resolved. 


(641 replies, posted in Testing server)

Jita wrote:

Once you have a good understanding on how gamma is working you can release terraforming again on massive islands.

^^ roll ^^

The DEVS never played on their gamma islands, how do you imagine they will all of a sudden gain years of experience overnight and be able to understand what players want out of gamma and turn that into a balanced system that allows creativity and longevity?