Ville wrote:

Wrong.  Even with 4 neuts and All tuners the Ictus mk2 was stronger.

Well, with 4 tuners the Seth needs 1 cycle to zap the Ictus MK2 dry, if it fires its neuts too. We did it with combat fits for both bots tho. Not sure whether stuff changes significantly when you use all tuners on the ictus, but it's not like it really matters. Back then, the main disadvantage of the neut seth was its more limited range, and that's still the case. At least if you want a Seth that can take similar levels of damage as the Ictus.

Ville wrote:
Annihilator wrote:

oh hey, you could do that pre-patch too, to outneut an ictus with a seth.
why didn't you field those full neut tuner fit seth's instead of ictus?

Wrong.  Prepatch you could not out neut an ictus that way.

Wrong. We ran tests 2+ years ago and found that a properly fitted Seth would always outneut a maxed Ictus Mk2. In fact, especially Seth MK2s were always quite interesting for enwar due to their alpha and the potential tank you could have. The main issue was and still is the effective range/tank tradeoff in which the Ictus comes out on top.

P.S. I think I used a fit like that once to instakill Beastmode when he played station games in a tanky ictus. That was fun.

P.P.S: Which heretical bastard kicked ozy from corp?

Sparks do seem like the main issue. So, what if stations weren't lockable, but only owners could actually spark into them. This would mitigate many of the potential griefing tactics that have been brought up here while finding a middle-ground in the currently existing system.

I think that the reviews that are currently at the top of the list are pretty damn misleading and that this thread is kinda distasteful. People should not be doing vote-manipulation to get bad info to the top, but that really goes for both ends of the spectrum.

Personally, I couldn't recommend anyone to buy into Perpetuum in good conscience, mostly because the current state of the game is pretty bad. And by bad i don't mean the political situation, but everything else.

Was gone for a bit and just checked killboards. Looks like everything is in splendid order. CIR & Co. is doing well and everyone else is still bad at the game for because they neither have pvp skills nor a sufficient number of heavy mk2 pilots.

Glad to see that this is still resulting in very vibrant PVP across all islands. I am curious though, as there seems to be a distinct lack of pvp on gamma. Did they turn it off on these new and fancy islands, or are people just not allowed to go there (lol).


People play to have fun. For some, the fun comes from denying other players fun, and that's ok. Personally, I've stopped having any hopes for the game based on both population and mechanics development and I've uninstalled for the last time months ago.

Cheers, folks.

P.S. Talking about content is kinda amusing. CIR creates its own content and doesn't need anything new, no? Those that think new bots and mods are going to bring people back into the game are pretty foolish, imo., and I kinda hope that the devs don't waste time and money on that kinda naivete.

Ville wrote:

You fit two eccms and you want to be immune to ecm.  Still got 4 head slots left in Seth mk2s and grofo mk2.

and then you get messed up by a single suppressor. the crux is that double amps + double eccms are what's required to have a somewhat functioning ewar defense. for mechs, this means sacrificing all (but one, in the case of some mk2s) headslots and in the case of heavies you get 1-2 headslots to do other stuff with. Sure, RSAs could mitigate this, but dedicated logi hasn't been around since the nerf, at least according to the killboards.

Ville: Ya, I remember those fleets and i'm glad that they've fallen out of popularity. That kinda stuff wasn't really fun. That being said, longer range stuff has also been nerfed a bit because your follows now have to be people that are great at multi-tasking or actual follow-pilots.

Overall, we're seeing a lot more self-amping and a lot less logi. I'm not really expecting this to change anytime soon because there aren't enough spare pilots around.

Anyway, I don't think that range-fit heavies deserve any more dps than they currently have, or even any improved ewar defense. This is a specialisation that kind of works and has proper downsides and tangible benfits. I think it's a bit different when you're going with double amps and double eccms because you're basically giving up almost as much as you do for a range-fit, but if you're a bit outnumbered and the enemy relies on ewar (let's not go crazy here--let's say 20 v 30), you're still going to get jammed out very frequently because ecms can be stacked, which translates into superior numbers getting guaranteed jams vs hardened bots. The obvious solution to this would be limiting the amount of ECMs you can apply to a bot to two. I've brought this up a number of times already, but it's never really been discussed. I think it's a potentially good step that could be taken to help re-balance/re-design ecms.

Improving SS for mechs could be interesting as well. The problem is that this could mess light-ewars up pretty well. Thoughts on how to avoid making em useless?

Edit: Before the wrong stuff gets focused on, the point of the above example is not that superior numbers win, but that countering ewar with ECCMs is currently not working well enough. If RSAs were common for all bots, this wouldn't be an issue, really, because those two additional headslots make all the difference--but RSAs aren't really common anymore.


Range of heavies with double amps and double eccms (+REs):

Mesmer/MK2: 403/463
Seth/MK2: 561/645
Gropho/MK2: 628/722

To actually get to 900m with a seth mk 2, you'll need four range extenders, which means that you're going to do crap damage (because zero tuners) and are super vulnerable to getting ewared (because zero ECCMs). It’s easier to get viable range-fits with gropho MK2s, but I sincerely do hope that these things are going to stay as dead as they have been for the last year(s).

Vagas get a range of ~850+ with a single RE and the nexus, which allows for either fitting 5 ecms, 4 ecms and a tuner, or 4 ecms and a masker. So, against anything but long range grophos, ewar mechs are quite flexible in terms of what they want to bring. Also, maskers are a pretty great passive defense in the right situation.

@Alf Have you considered the entropy thing/found a feasible way to implement it yet? I think transitioning to pseudo-random would help a ton with some of the frustration that ECMs can cause. That being said, I do think that the risk-reward equation of ECCMs kinda needs to be re-evaluated too, it's just tricky to find the right tool/balance there.

Tund Bungler wrote:

And now you guys resort to blatant lies while ignoring the pertinent parts. This is why we don't get any discussion done.

You know what prevents discussions?

CIR: "hey, that kain got some shots off, ewar is totally fine"
CIR: "hey, that kain managed to kill that vagabond after its injector charges ran out, it's totally doing decent damage!"

Also, your initial scenario with the arti was completely ridiculous, and when you get called out on it you deflect to the above.

P.S. injectors are perfectly valid for ewar mechs tongue

lol @ the claims of injectors being not used on ewars. also, feel free to repeat that test as per your scenario, tund. I sure hope you can get the artemis to lock faster than 2.5 secs tongue

Nooodlzs wrote:

How many rechargers did you have fitted to get that extremely biased result?

0. It was a standard vaga fit: inj, shield, lwf ... and an evasive, i think. the kain kept getting jammed semi-regularly and just couldn't put down enough DPS to get through the shield (both pilots were maxed) because of the double amps + double eccms.

Rage Rex wrote:

Fit a neut on your kain

Or nerf shields or injectors.

Not an ewar issue

That test was done to debunk the kind of BS Tund wrote above and to see how well a dedicated anti-ewar mech setup could actually resist getting jammed and do damage.

Tund Bungler wrote:

The only reason Ewar shuts everyone down currently is because all of your members are out riding bikes and we outnumber you 2:1-3:1 every fight. Thats hardly a game balance problem. As we've demonstrated time and time again, even a Vagabond running 4 ECMs with a 100% jam chance on a Artemis WILL NOT shut the Artemis down 100%, and the Artemis can break through the Vagas shield and kill him. I still don't get how you guys think this situation is imbalanced in favor of the Vaga. (Vaga w/ 3 ECMs vs a Kain MK2 w/ 2 amps and 2 eccms.)

That Kain took almost 5 minutes to take that Vaga out because that's how long its injector charges lasted. But sure ... take out those two ECCMs, apply all 4 ECMs to an arti ... and then see how long it takes that arti to kill the vaga. My guess: about a minute after the vaga's dry.


(113 replies, posted in Testing server)

Rage Rex wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

As far as I can remember, this has been what many of you asked for.

Manipulation by thread and post count. It's the same few guys complaining over and over but you don't see it.

This is completely delusional. It's your side that floods basically every thread.

Well, this predictably turned into a corp dialogue thread sad
It's a shame because I think you're making good points. Right now, Perp is doing great at discouraging PVP by having everything stacked heavily in favour of the numerically superior opponent (and this includes ewar).

The worst offender are teleports, imo. I don't know what happened pre-steam, but not being able to escape at all unless your opponent is using a mech class one higher than yours and doesn't have demob Zeniths is crazy because it highly incentivises not engaging at all. Before, engaging a numerically superior opponent was a risk, now it's basically guaranteed to wipe 80%+ of your fleet.

Ville wrote:

Because some people used the test server?

huh? I meant on the test server. it's hard to say anything else here until we see new stuff implemented to actually test.

Stranger Danger wrote:

The problem with ewar is one group of people uses them well, while other groups cant grasp it beyond the assumption that its OP and its not their fault for improperly using them.

Always good for an amusing post, Stranger. It's a bit megalomaniac and ridiculous to assume that all these posts are due to CIR using ewar.

P.S. Why has nothing new been implemented yet sad

well, these heavies are pretty broken and they weren't part of the point system. best to get it out of the way before planning starts in earnest smile

[Delete me]

Nice initiative! A low ep bracket could be interesting if (and that's doubtful) enough teams sign up for it. Point allocation sounds good too, but you forgot to assign a point value to the reward heavies from the last tournament. It's unlikely that someone's gonna bring em unless more are up for grabs, but they should probably still be included in the point table. As their masking is somewhat ridiculous, giving them a super-high point value or even limiting them to be flagships only seems appropriate.


(11 replies, posted in Balancing)

This is unacceptable. In the new meta, the Ictus won't be able to fulfill its role unless it can neut through terrain. Also, it's missing an accumulator recharge bonus--it should be able to recharge at least as fast as a Waspish MK2!

The error burial described above happens consistently between clients--i.e., bots are shown as moving to new positions after stopping. None of the movement markers are being drawn, but the bot's still moving.


Feel free to repeat these tests with different configs. As for the results ... no, the bots weren't jammed 100% of the time, but i'd argue that they were still rendered ineffective. Also, you could use all 4 ecms and increase the chance of completely jamming both bots. Problem is, this wasn't really needed. Sure, the vaga died both times, but it also jammed the Kain sufficiently to cancel out all damage it did (as long as the injector was active). It also held its own for two and a half minutes against a Mesmer Mk2.

We do agree on the solution though. Look at tuners, then see how stuff works out. Limiting ecms to two per bot also seems like a reasonable step beyond that. Oh, and the entropy thing, of course.

Syndic wrote:

You're asking that the whole game balance is destroyed, entire bot-types and playstyles completely invalidated, all for the sake of you 5 guys not wanting to diversify/recruit/train other people. Head-first through a brick wall.

This is *** ridiculous. Stop ignoring what's being said and making anti-corp BS out of it. I know you like arguing from a heavily biased perspective and with a slant for propaganda, but can't we leave this crap out of the test forum? No one's asking for iwin buttons, especially as ewar changes will not change anything for us as corp or on the field.

Syndic wrote:

If the EWar doesn't jam, it wasted it's cycle. (10 seconds) If the Heavy gets jammed, it wasted it's cycle. (2-3 seconds)

Heavy with 230 SS (2 ECCMs) will get jammed 30-35% of the time without the changes.

That means the EWar has 65-70% chance to waste it's cycle (be irrelevant).

That's balance.

Your complaints are with ECM Tuning raising % to higher levels and I definitely agree the ECM Tuning needs heavy disadvantages to compensate for that 35% increase it brings.

However, you're asking the Devs to give you a Heavy that is impossibly hard to jam without needing to fit EWar defense, so you can stack tuners/range and not care.

If Ewar has a 65% chance to waste a cycle on a single module, it has a 60% chance to at least jam once when using two modules. When using three modules, it has a 75% chance to jam at least once. Also, people are NOT asking for heavies to easily fend off ewar, but for bots that actually go for the ewar counter to be more effective than they are now. At least, that's what i'm asking for. This doesn't only include heavies, by the way. A Mech with a similar fit is also still pretty ***. Below are some logs from the test-server.

Kain MK2 (EM Guns, 2 Amps, 2 ECCMs) vs Vaga MK2 (4 ECMs, 1 Tuner, 1 RE--only 3 of the ECMs were used against the target):

Mesmer Mk2 (EM Guns, 2 Amps, 2 ECCMs, 1 RE) vs Vaga Mk2 (4 ECMs, 1 Tuner, 1 RE--only 3 of the ECMs were used against the target):

Yes, the Vaga was injecting, but the time the bots need to kill the ewar isn't really the main point here. Rather, how many of the ECMs still make it through. Maybe the primary issue is the tuning, which is why i suggesting messing with it only at first and then expanding to other (reasonable) modifications.

Rex Amelius wrote:

Ozy, are you suggesting that a more balanced fit is more tuners for dps? Fitting multiple types of head slots is what balance is all about, CHOICES. You cant have full tuner PVE fits for PVP and expect to win.

I'd regard the 2 amps + 2 eccms as specialised anti-ewar headslot config. "More balanced" would be stuff that focuses more on the natural strengths of the heavies (i.e., more emphasis on range/shield or rep-tanks/damage, with maybe at most 1 eccm).

Syndic wrote:

You need 5 ECM's to proc 100% of the time in evenly spaced distribution to achieve "jamlock".

You're being very literal about a bot being jammed out. A heavy with 2 amps, 2 eccms a range extender and a tuning does pretty horrible damage, relative to a more balanced fit. If that heavy gets jammed so it can only bring 50% of that firepower to bear, it's effectively not relevant anymore and the ewar has done its job.

Also, right now there's the expectation that all dps must specialise/make trade-offs, but generally speaking, the same expectation isn't true for en and ewar (you mentioned yourself that your corp doesn't even use tuners).

Edit: To prevent escalation, the last sentence mostly refers to easy availability of RSAs and the lack of tuners in most ewar fits.