76 Reply by Phantomburn

(59 replies, posted in General discussion)

Jita wrote:
Phantomburn wrote:
Jita wrote:

Give some to noodlez so he can quit spurting tears out of his eyes about how he cant do anything but the ictus.

I am glad you pointed this out.  Theres only TWO options to spend credits, I boost!  Or I Respec, which is a nice pay to win option for FoTM.

Besides that theres nothing.

*edit: Inappropriate. - DEV Zoom

What do you think you should be able to spend credits on?

Paint jobs, collector items, vanity decals and backgrounds.  Etc...

Go to forum: General discussion

77 Reply by Phantomburn

(4 replies, posted in General discussion)

Are we talking Spanish or Mexicans?  I can have a house roughed in with five Mexicans.  In under a week.

Go to forum: General discussion

78 Reply by Phantomburn

(59 replies, posted in General discussion)

Oh and since your fixing the missions.

Dev Zoom do you plan on adding to the token shop with the mission change?  Since they are kind of the reason why we do missions?

Go to forum: General discussion

79 Reply by Phantomburn

(59 replies, posted in General discussion)

Jita wrote:
Phantomburn wrote:

And not to derail your little love taps but I'd love to buy credits but I have nothing to spend them on.  Can you make something for me to Spend Credits on?

Give some to noodlez so he can quit spurting tears out of his eyes about how he cant do anything but the ictus.

I am glad you pointed this out.  Theres only TWO options to spend credits, I boost!  Or I Respec, which is a nice pay to win option for FoTM.

Besides that theres nothing.

Go to forum: General discussion

80 Reply by Phantomburn

(59 replies, posted in General discussion)

And not to derail your little love taps but I'd love to buy credits but I have nothing to spend them on.  Can you make something for me to Spend Credits on?

Go to forum: General discussion

81 Reply by Phantomburn

(24 replies, posted in General discussion)

Lol.

Go to forum: General discussion

82 Reply by Phantomburn

(27 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Altera wrote:
Phantomburn wrote:

We've always said there's not enough content on alpha.  I propose this idea.

Add all type of sap mechanics to alpha terminals.  These saps control the island auras.  Each sap is weighted to their respective counterpart.

The island stability is maxed out at 1000.

At 1000 there could be an engineering bonus and an industrial bonus upto 20-50%. Then in increments that scale with stability.  The saps can drop a can with a 1/10th of the loot as beta.

You can make a level 1 mission to participate in island stability.  It's not a random mission it's static.! Then you have an interactive landmark become active once a sap is active on alpha.  This mission could grant a lot of tokens.

This helps alpha players get accustomed to beta outpost control.  It creates content.

Would the stability decay or would other factions/players be able to lower the stability?  If not, then this is just a one time get it to 1000 effort?
How would I get 1/10 of a cortex or beacon? Maybe it just drops PLs, pvp ammo and epi.
I agree with Syndic that this will just reward afk miners and botters.  Jita is correct return red mobs to alpha 2 and make this an alpha 2 mechanic only (solves both problems somewhat).


This could backfire and make it so only 1 island gets used (the one moving toward 1000).

- Random Thoughts by Altera

Excellent point!  I'd suggest that the stability declines after every sap that is not completed. 

1/10 equals: 
Active hacking: 1 cortex OR 1 decoder
Passive drops: 2.5 U of epi
Destro drops: 60 rounds of faction ammo
Specimen drops:  normal amount of epriton PL90s
+ specimen on beta has reward tripled.
I think auras could be lowered to 10% and it could be done in stages
At 100 you get 1%, at 500 you get 5%.

10% is nothing.  Npc farmers got a straight 20% nerf in the last patch.  ASSUMING they had enough EP to cover combat specialist and hi tech specialist and let's not forget about follow bot aggressive nerf.  I think 10% is nothing.  Moreover 20% probably wouldn't hurt. 

The sap spacing could be spaced 4 to 8 hours apart.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

83 Reply by Phantomburn

(27 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Jita wrote:
Syndic wrote:

Anything that buffs Alpha mining/farming botters is an incredibly bad idea.

Remove all liquid ores and static NPC spawns from Alpha then this becomes a good idea. smile

Remember who's fault it was we don't have red mobs?

Bring back red mobs on Alpha including roaming ones and you stop botters and afk miners. If people abuse the mechanics to be an idiot again just ban them like you should have done numerous times before.

The fault lies on broken npc mechanics. But that's another discussion for another day.  Let's focus on "smaller" content building for alpha and beta. 

Small QoL change too:  beta auras apply to all blue+ standing.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

84 Topic by Phantomburn

(27 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

We've always said there's not enough content on alpha.  I propose this idea.

Add all type of sap mechanics to alpha terminals.  These saps control the island auras.  Each sap is weighted to their respective counterpart.

The island stability is maxed out at 1000.

At 1000 there could be an engineering bonus and an industrial bonus upto 20-50%. Then in increments that scale with stability.  The saps can drop a can with a 1/10th of the loot as beta.

You can make a level 1 mission to participate in island stability.  It's not a random mission it's static.! Then you have an interactive landmark become active once a sap is active on alpha.  This mission could grant a lot of tokens.

This helps alpha players get accustomed to beta outpost control.  It creates content.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

85 Reply by Phantomburn

(131 replies, posted in Balancing)

Annihilator wrote:
Phantomburn wrote:

Let me ask this question,  should an Ictus cap itself out before it can neutralize the energy of another robot?

If you cap out first, you did something wrong.
Thats like trying to demob a demob immune seth and then getting killed by a gropho

Bait drake is tasty.

Go to forum: Balancing

86 Reply by Phantomburn

(131 replies, posted in Balancing)

Let me ask this question,  should an Ictus cap itself out before it can neutralize the energy of another robot?

Go to forum: Balancing

87 Reply by Phantomburn

(131 replies, posted in Balancing)

Khetar wrote:
Phantomburn wrote:

They are??  News to me last night when we were forming fleets we had this stuff rolling.

According to SunnyJester himself they are, we had a chat about it in general chat on the weekend. Can't quote right now since I'm at work.


On Ictus': I never understood why they nerfed the ictus this hard. Yes, I remember it being enourmously annoying (Lemon during golden newbie-STC times in his ictus mk2 especially); yet as far as I know there is a counter-module to energy warfare ingame. If we want to shield ourselves from ECM/sensor suppressor we use ECCM and sensor amplifiers, yet I've never seen a single fit with the reactor sealer (I think that's what it is named?) in use.
For me personally it was due to the lack of use compared to other low slot modules (lwf+shield+accu stuff with ewar / plates and hardeners in dps), yet if people complained that much, why didn't they counterfit against an ictus like they do against a vagabond?
I would have debated an additional lowslot to some mechs to give them the option to fit against ictus ewar as they have the possibility to fit against a vagabond with the significantly larger number of headslots.

As for Tyrannos and Gropho I can not comment since I don't have a clue on green dps bots big_smile

They are suffering the same thing everyone else is.  No content.  So people are going to play other games and they suffered casualties from the patches.  One day someone can pilot a ml2 heavy.  The next day they get 2 brand new extensions and they do less dps because they don't have the EP.  Then green pilots get boned.

Go to forum: Balancing

88 Reply by Phantomburn

(131 replies, posted in Balancing)

BeastmodeGuNs wrote:
Phantomburn wrote:

. I guess some of the fights included Joke, Chaos,Remedy and Beastmode, but those are the only people we keep chained like pets to Alpha.

I'm just sitting here amused that this is what you think you've been doing, yet your allies are on the verge of failscade. in the same manner as CONS too.

They are??  News to me last night when we were forming fleets we had this stuff rolling.

Go to forum: Balancing

89 Reply by Phantomburn

(131 replies, posted in Balancing)

Annihilator wrote:

who cares?

so bitter about your loss yesterday?

*edit: on topic*

how much of that statistics makes up CIR+pets ?
all runs i participated recently have been just to robots everyone was trained into for years. Only Jita switched to a seth because he believes you big_smile

haha good one Anni!  I look forward with having lots of more fights with you in the future as I have returned in the US timezone.

To answer your Second Question:
CIR was very inactive during February and March. I guess some of the fights included Joke, Chaos,Remedy and Beastmode, but those are the only people we keep chained like pets to Alpha.

I am not referring to you guys directly, I predicted this in November.  Prior to everyone stop playing.  And only 20 die hards staying in claiming lands after everyone leaves.

@Celebro:  Thanks smile

Go to forum: Balancing

90 Reply by Phantomburn

(131 replies, posted in Balancing)

DEV Zoom wrote:

Ictus:

The Ictus was very overpowered before the patch and needed a straight nerf, we're not denying that. But we don't think it's obsolete, even with the Seth coming very close to it in its own role. You need to understand that it's bad gameplay to shut down someone's accumulator in a few seconds without being able to do anything. We're trying to move away from these extremities, and this also applies for ECM (we have a few incoming changes there too).

The Ictus is still more agile and more efficient in neutralizing than the Seth, but if you really think they're too close then the solution isn't to boost the Ictus back, but perhaps to remove a misc slot from heavies.

For Reference.

Go to forum: Balancing

91 Topic by Phantomburn

(131 replies, posted in Balancing)

You've asked us to give us some time to work on the new Mechanics and I want to give you some Facts.  Listed below is information pulled from http://Sequer.nl .

Facts:

March 2015 (Top 6):
Seth Mk2  56 Kills
Mesmer Mk2 55 Kills
Vagabond Mk2 43 Kills
Artemis  40 Kills
Seth  39 Kills
Artemis Mk2  37 Kills

Interesting Facts:  Sequers have more kills than an Ictus and Arkhes have more kills than a Waspish

Feb 2015 (Top 6):

Seth 95
Artemis 69
Artemis Mk2 57
Arbalest Mk2 47
Seth Mk2 46
Kain Mk2 40

Scarabs's had more kills this month than an Ictus mk1.

Jan 2015(Top 6):

Artemis Mk2 143
Arbalest Mk2 121
Seth Mk2 119
Baphomet Mk2 113
Seth 86
Artemis 76

No Ictus were used in the killing of robots this month.

December 2014(Top 6):

Arbalest Mk2 262
Artemis Mk2 128
Artemis 101
Kain Mk2 94
Castel Mk2 85
Baphomet Mk2 70

Only month were a green combat topped the 6, and its a tackle bot.

November 2014(Top 6):

Gropho Mk2 124
Arbalest Mk2 121
Mesmer Mk2 118
Kain Mk2 102
Cameleon Mk2 99
Castel Mk2 69

Hey look pre patch players actually used green robots in PVP!

Interesting take aways:  Clear imbalance between the races.  Green combat pilots are not being utilized in pvp.  Enwar is not being utilized in pvp.

Possible reasons: 
http://forums.perpetuum-online.com/topi … the-patch/

I told you in November that the Ictus would be deemed obsolete.  It infact in the past three months has become obsolete. 

Why don't players use Ictus?  Theres no need in them, the Flavor of the month is a Seth MK2.  The Seth has such a massive buffer to compensate for energy cells(Lazers) AND has the most amount of leg and head slots.  So you can create a platform that has Great tank AND AND with autocannons can have GREAT DPS!  So now you have a platform that can laugh at Ewar and Enwar with 1 ECCM and 1 Enwar.  Add an Injector + autocannons BAM!  You got an ultimate powerhouse platform that negates ALL forms of Ewar/Enwar and you have plenty of DPS Slap some plates, ERP, repper, 2 sensor amps and GG ***!  So basically you have walking death platform marching at you with zero *** given.

I want the developers to understand something.  The Ictus role in PVP was to create space.  The Ictus were usually the ones control the distance of the fight.  They created buffer zones.  This buffer zone is the limited engagement Zone.  The limited engagement zones were created to allow for pushing and allow for retreat.  The Zenith Long range demobilization did the same thing.  It allows you to fight out number and become tactical.  You don't have tactical pvp in this game anymore.  Let me repeat this, You, the developers, have removed the greatest part of pvp in this game.  The ability to move over terrain and fight and move through zones is fun, amazing, pulse gripping and some of the most heart pounding fun in any game.  You removed that.  You did this in a number of steps un knowingly attempting to balance other aspects of the game.

1.  You rebalanced the game around to create a better more forgiving environment.  But you didn't.  You turned the game into a solid numbers game.  Who has the most online at the time wins the war, and don't ANYONE tell me that it's always been that way because it hasn't.  I personally was involved in small pvp environments with Eharmony and the rebuilding of CIR. 
2.  You added more LOS obstacles, you have halfed the trees, but its still an issue.
3.  You increased the speed of the game, this pains me to say this but this makes it too easy for everyone and their mother to just throw on as many plates as possible and cruise around an island.  There is a difference when you had to walk at 43 KPH with plates and resistance with heavys and now at 75 KPH...  Flipping the script on this the logistics are too easy now to move massively plated fleets.  Well Ville!  Aren't huge fleets what you wanted in pvp?? Yes, but the first time someone goes boom in the middle of the fleet it can be the death to the entire group and it turns into who has the most people.
4.  Sparks, The game is too small for it.  Please for the love of god remove this feature.
5.  Removing tactical roles from robots.  I get it you don't want people to be held down and rolled in a pvp fight, we get it.  I agree.  But they are purely negated with 1 anti tuning(Enwar/ECCM).

I'll Suggest it again to bring balance to the force:

Ictus Roles need to go from 3% to 5% on neutralized and Drained amount.
Vagabond Needs a better masking bonus:  Or a Small Shield bonus 3%
Zenith Needs Demob bonus back. And better masking bonus/Shield bonus
Gropho/Tyr need help in some area:  DPS or Tank.  both need help. 

In Closing:  I feel like this game was better in 2011.  Thanks

TL:DR

There was 15 in general chat when I logged off last night, 3 of them where Miss Chivas, 4 Alts of an NSE guy and 4 Alts of an Uncorped guy, Grave Digger, Inda and like 2 other dudes. ...

Go to forum: Balancing

92 Reply by Phantomburn

(13 replies, posted in Q & A)

Day 6.

Go to forum: Q & A

93 Reply by Phantomburn

(52 replies, posted in Q & A)

Syndic wrote:

That depends on the size of a base yeah. Small enough base, you can easily suck a field every 10 days. Problem is the damn fields dont get sucked all the way then you gotta decon and recon and decon and recon the tower to suck the last damn 10 tiles.

^

Go to forum: Q & A

94 Reply by Phantomburn

(52 replies, posted in Q & A)

Guys its not a bad system!  I really like the system, honestly I do.  I think its smart!  But there's just a few QoL improvements that can make this less tedious and still require investment into gamma base management.

Go to forum: Q & A

95 Reply by Phantomburn

(52 replies, posted in Q & A)

Now, the question really is do I want to spend additional time terraforming flat spots to put a well over a mineral field that spawned in the middle of a hill, only to move it again in a day.  The answer is no.

Go to forum: Q & A

96 Topic by Phantomburn

(13 replies, posted in Q & A)

End of March?  End of April?

Go to forum: Q & A

97 Reply by Phantomburn

(52 replies, posted in Q & A)

5 different tiles.

Go to forum: Q & A

98 Reply by Phantomburn

(7 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

The Villebot2000...

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

99 Reply by Phantomburn

(52 replies, posted in Q & A)

You know doing a tedious task can be less tedious with more people.  But it still doesn't change the fact that it's tedious.

Go to forum: Q & A

100 Reply by Phantomburn

(52 replies, posted in Q & A)

Jita wrote:

The point of energy wells was to make owning a single base easy for an active corporation, owning multiple bases harder work and for low numbers of people owning multiple bases it made it a pita. It seems like it's working as intended.

The other point of them was to generate PvP content on gamma by making them able to be destroyed by roaming gangs forcing a defender to come away from their turrets. I think that's partial there but they need to remove the reinforce cycle and triple the hit points.

Harder yes.  Tedious enough so two or three people get annoyed no.  Moving 1 energy well  3 times for one field is not realistic.  What is realistic is moving the well every 3 days to a brand new field. 

Also it would actually not create pvp it would create pve.  We all know how probes are handled and we all know that everyone is afraid so they only risk assets long enough as long as people won't lose it.

Go to forum: Q & A