101 Reply by Tux

(179 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Now Ville is supporting this but Aye Pod wont challenge Ville on his position ... wheres my popcorn lol

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

102 Reply by Tux

(179 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Devs...

I would like to see loadouts of the killed player (maybe also the player that got the killing blow or most damage)... Would be nice to get some more data on lost values (and other attacker statistics ) .. that way it is now its just estimates but knowing the exact gear that was equipped by the killed / killing player, these totals could be immensely useful.

Thx !

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

103 Reply by Tux

(33 replies, posted in Q & A)

Dev's !!! Watch this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXA559KNopI

Then watch it again .. and then 10 more times ... then launch your cash shop !

Go to forum: Q & A

104 Reply by Tux

(102 replies, posted in Recruitment forum)

Member Owned & Independently Operated wink

Join STC !!!

Go to forum: Recruitment forum

105 Reply by Tux

(179 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

The more information we can get form the game the better.

Keep the data mines going !!!!

This information is and can be freely used by everyone so why try to hide it ? If your scared of people seeing you pvp then dont its easy

@ Doek the heat maps are F|_|CKing  sweet

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

106 Reply by Tux

(12 replies, posted in General discussion)

Congratulations are in order awesome work Devs !!!!

Go to forum: General discussion

107 Reply by Tux

(53 replies, posted in News and information)

you guys got like 7 minutes before the launch fails / delays sad

Kick your ISP in the Arse !!!

Go to forum: News and information

108 Reply by Tux

(26 replies, posted in Testing server)

updated Op with mineral field addition

Go to forum: Testing server

109 Reply by Tux

(26 replies, posted in Testing server)

Also the Alarms should ring when turrets are attacked with EWar just like when the structures are attacked and take damage.

Go to forum: Testing server

110 Reply by Tux

(55 replies, posted in Testing server)

i would agree only if we get better AI for turrets .... we need to be able to control in real time who the turrets are targeting and shooting ... if not by player name at least by bot type.

Turrets could have settings ... Auto ( AI controlled , Manual Player Controlled ) would be nice to jump into the seat of a turret in first person mode or something and start shooting attackers ...

Celebro wrote:

Turrets needs ammo loading. It's still is PVP when a player places a turret which helps in defence, it's only fair that ammo is consumed. There is also a need for turret to shoot PVP flagged players if the terminal owner wants to set it, obviously being set blue/green should over ride this.

Go to forum: Testing server

111 Reply by Tux

(18 replies, posted in Testing server)

True, but i think having this complexity is has more beneficial than detrimental. It allows for very customizable base designs. Also when you understand how these systems work assaulting bases becomes a lot more tactical.

Turrets are the main structure that are "spammed" because you need so many for a proper defense. If turrets were Buffed then you would need less of them. If the base Missile turret optimal range was boosted 500 meters I would argue for less structures on terrain because you would only need like 16 of these not 60.

With the new changes you will find designs that can use many less turrets and energy grid structures because of slope limitations.

Annihilator wrote:

to lower the number of buildings, they could have reduced the number of NECESSARY buildings first. This starts at the overcomplicated Energy grid system. thats 50% of the Buildings that are there just for the sake of providing enought power connections.

Go to forum: Testing server

112 Reply by Tux

(18 replies, posted in Testing server)

lowering the number of structures on an island does more than just reduce server load it makes gamma playable. for more than just mining colix all day.

Having 2K+ structures on an island just for defense should not be the standard any more

If gamma is to survive long term there needs to be some big changes made to the mechanics.

Annihilator wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

... there is no strategy in that.

There doesn't seem to be a strategy in this revamp attempt either.

as far as i get it, all you want to achieve is reducing the number of buildings per island to lower the stress on your server/bandwidth.

Go to forum: Testing server

113 Reply by Tux

(13 replies, posted in Guides and Resources)

Awesome work man !!!

Go to forum: Guides and Resources

114 Reply by Tux

(55 replies, posted in Testing server)

i was running around some turrets in a light Ew last night and i was shocked to see how many times it missed

I had only nexus and frame .. no evasive ... so why dont you test to see what you can do with evasive + nexus with lights and turrets ... the Remedy and STC base has some up for testing .. Feel free to shoot ours for testing purposes. ( just share the results wink )

Go to forum: Testing server

115 Reply by Tux

(18 replies, posted in Testing server)

I am not going to argue for an UBER base that can do it all ... BUT i want to be able to do 1 Terminal that can do all of my production ...

A fully T3 production base should be just that ... with no defense or make a " death Star" with no production capability ... its the designers choice.

Please reduce the bandwidth of facility upgrades, the bandwidth should be around 150 to 300 (T3) not 1500


DEV Zoom wrote:

But the general idea is that you should not be able to build an uber base with everything, there is no strategy in that.

Go to forum: Testing server

116 Reply by Tux

(79 replies, posted in General discussion)

I'm getting the feeling the devs care less now about making sure the server is running smooth b/c the game is free than when it was monthly subs

... just saying

this tin can is no where near ready for steam ... should rethink launch roll

Go to forum: General discussion

117 Reply by Tux

(18 replies, posted in Testing server)

Yes!  theirs no reason in hell a t3 facility upgrade should be 1500 Bandwidth fuuu

^^ this alone makes it impossible to construct a full t3 production only gamma base

Jita wrote:

Just so we are on the same page, you mean down right?

Also reactor 500, battery 30. Lol .

Go to forum: Testing server

118 Topic by Tux

(18 replies, posted in Testing server)

Zoom : First I want to ask where did the Bandwidth Values come from ???

I think their needs to be serious adjustments to the values, but seriously can you answer the question I dont want to go all ballistic / EMO !! before I understand your reasoning.

Go to forum: Testing server

119 Reply by Tux

(55 replies, posted in Testing server)

its a terminal i dropped last week before you took the test server down and now the terminal isnt there but the ground where is was stills shows the terminal

Go to forum: Testing server

120 Reply by Tux

(55 replies, posted in Testing server)

http://clip2net.com/s/7gu1hR

Can you fix this Zoom

Go to forum: Testing server

121 Reply by Tux

(6 replies, posted in General discussion)

Its been mentioned before .. the test server lags the Live server ... need new hardware !!!

I think a restart wont help anything sadly..

Go to forum: General discussion

122 Reply by Tux

(2 replies, posted in Testing server)

i have been just crashing the client .. you will start back in the last terminal you were in which should have been TMA if you dont have a terminal on the gamma already

I should add that i crash it by trying to jump to bluemon or one of the other gammas that arnt on the test server ... this was crashing the live server lastweek ... good thing they got it fixed ( or it fixed its self wink )

Go to forum: Testing server

123 Topic by Tux

(26 replies, posted in Testing server)

Zoom: Can you please spell out in detail what the Developers Goals & Intents are for gamma. Here is just an example list:

1. All gammas islands  need to be accessible to all players looking to roam them for industry or pvp needs.

2. Gamma colonies are designed to be about 2 x 2 KM in size, they are not ment to spider across the island and control all entry to the island.

3. Gamma Colonies are designed to be classified as (defensive, logistical, Industry Hub)

4. we want players to build gamma islands in a way that it will support a single corp of about 50 players

^^^ Just some examples ... but we need to know what you guys want (guidance) in order to test it properly. I can break things all day long. But if you are intending it to be that way its a waste of time. 

Some core mechanics need to be addressed.

Colony Size ( physical distance from the main terminal at witch structures can be placed)

Gamma Island Terminal Limit ( this needs to go from 12 to 1 if you allow more than 1 islands will always be able to be walled off)

Command Relay Removal ( Only adds to the issue of being able to spider networks across the island and secure gates )

Mining Tower ( change mechanic so aura effects while island just like other auras)

Disable deploy able wall units from being able to be used on Gamma (this will become very exploitable with new TF limitations)

Masking Aura ( change to be island wide )

Mineral Fields ( will need to spawn in only passable terrain) with current mechanics players will not be able to Tf into areas that are "naturally" impassable to gain access to mineral fields that spawn in impassable terrain.

With the limitation of 1 Terminal on an island the Owning corporation should be able to have many different bonuses through out the whole island like masking and colix mining to enable them to avoid needing to  secure the whole island (with turrets and walls at the gates) to do basic activities like mining and artifact hunting. Currently walling gates is needed because of the lack of benefits players get when "away from terminal"

I think by Extending these benefits island wide just like other Auras and players will have a little more reward for the new found risk of not being able to full lock down the gamma island.

Go to forum: Testing server

124 Reply by Tux

(55 replies, posted in Testing server)

exactly ..


Jita wrote:
Ville wrote:
Tux wrote:

This still allows me to lock down an island .... it will just take a little time and be more expensive than now

Agreed.  I'm still at work whats the deal with the CPU/Reactor limits on the MPCs are they *** huge?


they are *** huge if you have twelve bases running


the values are just fine if your limited to 1 base [total] on an island so 1 island 1 terminal

Go to forum: Testing server

125 Reply by Tux

(55 replies, posted in Testing server)

This still allows me to lock down an island .... it will just take a little time and be more expensive than now


Jita wrote:

the old terraforming was fine provided that:

1) you only have three bases per island

2) you cant put a base within 3km of the teleport

4) you cant terraform more than 2km from the base

Go to forum: Testing server