^^^^ b***s*** spin pointing fingers to spin wrongdoing that never occured.

BTW, rage quit from perp forevermore is apparently only 6 months

Account share much lately...

^^^ This.

Also:

Exactly.  Which is why it is critical that there is sufficient balance to allow small entities a reasonable chance to be able to defend their investment.  Dispite the fact that this thread was created for the purpose of giving the devs an overview of release readiness from the community (see op) and not as a debate thread, some valid points have been made.  Too hard to defend, and only multitime zone power blocks will be able to defend their assets, and absolute chaos every time the majority of ppl in a corp or alliance have logged for the day.  To hard to assault and it becomes a static environment of "fortress of solitudes" spattered across the landscapes.

The fact that unsubstantiated opinion and theory crafting ( plus rather poorly disguised ad hominem attacks and references to unrelated issues long in the past) is driving much of the debates is the very issue the devs need to be aware of.  Blackomen has correctly pointed out, that a mass scale test for several days needs to be performed.  However, with the "pvp by permission" only stance on the test server limits any factual and objective testing, due to individuals with a vested interest in driving the mechanics for their own benefit or their enemy's detriment, will skew the results to try to manipulate the devs to their favor.  Alot of claims have been made, lets see it tested for a few days aggressively by anyone and everyone on the test server, and see if they play out as stated.

The objective is balanced game play, and the only way that can be done is with objective data, and not rhetoric.  It's not about what is or is not personally beneficial to individuals or groups, nor about epeen or winning an arguement.  It's about providing comprehensive, objective, and factual data, and combining it with experience and knowledge, to forge effective and balanced gameplay.

Just my own thoughts at this time:

-Extent of industry changes:  Whereas we know that the DEVs have been working on this patch for a significant time, the extent of the changes, which radically change the entire production tree, from raw materials up to finished product, as well as the introduction of not just gamma island materials, but new racially specific materials, and the redistribution of currently universally available material to faction specific islands, requires more time to evaluate and give feedback on.  Two more weeks of "testing" may not be sufficient time to really evaluate long term impacts and formulate sufficient feedback for the DEVs, especially with the current population.

-Gamma Islands and PBS: Several issues still exist with PBS, terraforming, and resources. One that immediately comes to mind is the whole issue of where terraforming can be done, ranging from no restrictions to a variety of proposed controls or limitations.  Also, the functionality of PBS, and issues revolving around their resists and hitpoints, and what happens when a part of the chain gets wiped out.  Apparently there are still multiple issues, and even more questions and debate concerning these.  In addition, there is also needs to be something to drive all that time and investment.  With the distribution of raw material changes, being able to utilize all those wonderful PBS refining and manufacturing tools is going to be difficult at best, due to the enormous amounts of materials, or commodities, that will be required to sustain production,  Other than building more PBS, and Scarab MK2, there has to be something more, and that leads us to the following:

-Additional Mechs, the destroyers, and artillery:  A year ago, we were already told this was in the works.  Now consider, going back to the terraforming control around PBS issue, this could or would be moot if artillery and destroyers were in the game.  Historically, artillery has a further reach than mobile weapon platforms, and if functioning in game as it does in real life, it's trajectory is an arc, eliminating alot of LOS issues, and would be the idea counter to the "turtling in" effect that people are concerned about.  Also, it provides additional incentive to invest in PBS and gamma, instead of just PBS and Scarab MK2s, in addition we would now have also artillery and mechs, which also would require the new gamma materials. The ablity to field the highest potential firepower capable in the game is a huge incentive to be on gamma, and to maintain a gamma presence.

-Too much in one bite:  There is alot going on here, I've been on the test server a week, and maybe have covered about 10% of the new material in depth.  Huge world changing revisions done globally in one fell swoop have the potential for massive issues that could bog down everyone for weeks if not longer.  A more gradual introduction of changes, along specific items like mining changes, then industry changes, etc, would be easier to evaluate and revise, or correct undetected issues from the test server.

-Revised schedule:  At this time, it may be more appropriate to break these changes up a bit, in a group of stages, than to implement this all at once.  What immediately comes to mind is the following, in a 3 month implementation plan:

***First Month - Implement gamma islands, PBS, and the gamma materials, and add in the destroyers and artillery, with those mechs and modules being dependent on gamma island materials
***Second Month - Implement redistribution of materials
***Third Month - Implement the material changes in modules and bots/mechs

I think the May 30th release may be over ambitious. We all want to see this game grow and be successful, and from past experience, trying to do too much all at one time has rarely created an enjoyable and rewarding experience, rather chaos and frustration, which in playing a game we are in theory trying to get away from. We are looking for an enjoyable game experience which relieves our stresses from RL, working with others to achieve common goals and have fun.

I see what you did there - obvious troll is obvious

The reason I brought up the fact of no one other than the corp that owned a pbs structure could terraform within 1000m of that structure was due to the ablity to create unassailable fortifications around the teleports on the gamma islands.  This would have allowed an alliance to completely seal off an island from access from any of the inter-island teleports, with no possible counter.  This would created a rather static, and dull, gamma island environment.

However, there is another way to do this:
- within 1000m of a terminal, no other corp other than the terminal owner can terraform.
- terminals must be deployed 3000m minimum from any teleport
- no one can terraform within 1000m of a teleport

This would result in:
- no one being permanently able to seal the island off.
- the immediate area of the pbs base being terraform controlled by the controlling corp
- a minimum of 1000 meters between the 2 zones that anyone can do anything.
- since it would be measured from the terminal only, and all the pbs that have to be deployed taking up space, and turrets mostly being on the edges of a base, then offensive seigeworks, like ditches and embankments, are still viable for use. Or for that matter, terraforming a ramp that ends up higher than the defender's base an fireing down with snipers...

Anyhow, i'm sure everyone and their dog is going to find all sorts of things wrong with the above, but at least it may be a possible way to balance terraforming, pbs control, and island access.  If you have a better solution, give it, if all you have is whining and criticism, just don't bother.

?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

You have got to be s***ing us...

yes, landscape shows passable, but still get stuck, especially with gaps that are diagonal.

Incorrect.
- arty gets a laser bonus, not a turret bonus
- kain gets a magnetic bonus, not a turret bonus
- post recommends making the missile slots on arty and kain also utility slots, not also turret slots, in other words, no firearms in those slots ( firearms are turret slots, not utility )

Note, I am currently underwhelmed by the current industry changes....

But your above statement makes no sense.  If you are using an Asintec op to do your processing, and you have higher standings with Asintc, why shouldn't you get better efficiency?  It's a preferred customer status you have earned with that megacorp, and is a reward for doing assignments for that mega corp.  You don't have to do them, but those that do should get a reward for doing assignments, ie standings.  And a few weekends, once they are done, are done, and viola, you never have to do them again. Those who do the work reap the rewards.