You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Perpetuum Forums → Posts by Snowstyle
Just realised BoyC's posts are on another forum. The BoyC on there might be fake. Has anything been mentioned through official channels?
That's not a fake BoyC
Still doesn't make it speculation. Wishful thinking though? Definitely atleast a little of that. Hopefully they do implement it.
It's not that hard to collect souls. One of my friends sold his for a piece of dry toast. Not even any butter.
I believe that FFXI's EULA or TOS stated that if you took Square to court you had to defend them at the trial.
Suggestion:
Travel mode.
All modules (weapons, repariers, etc) and active radar (Can't target anything, overview distance is shortened from 1k to 500m) are deactivated. In return, you travel 1.5x to 2.0x faster.
Travel mode takes 30 seconds to enter, you must remain still while changing modes and is disrupted if you are damaged during that time. Modules take 60 seconds to power back up after leaving travel mode (either intentionally or unintentionally).
This means someone can enter travel mode, move to the area they want to go to quickly, but they are useless for a full minute after arriving. This prevents people from travel-moding up on top of you while you're farming and mowing you down. You can enter travel mode faster than they can leave travel mode. The 30 seconds it takes to enter travel mode should ("should") be enough time to still be able to ambush someone normally (iow: tacklers are still useful).
A little OP for logistics pilots no?
Nuclear launch detected.
Corps charging its members for mechs? I assumed this whole idea was a way of distributing things at low risk during off hours by having them up cheap, but not free as to prevent mass theft, and being reimbursed later.
If I am wrong then my idea of how successful guilds/corps run is going to need a serious rethink. Never heard of such a thing.
Not all corps are ran the same way. This is just a tool to make it easier for a Corp to do it their way.
"Have a good Perpetuum experience"? If I was new you would have just made me quit the game.
There are not enough skills utilized by Politics/Eco to make it worth it. If you want those extensions you are still better off with a full combat character as you will be utilizing a lot more of those extensions. Therefore saving you more EP then a hybrid build, and saving EP is all attributes are good for.
Vorgrim, Corps don't put things that they intend to sell in low level storage for anyone to take out. If its a corporation that sells Mechs, then the CEO or Directors of the corp hold on to the Mechs until a member purchases it. So adding a corporation market wont change the risk.
I like the idea that corps have to risk losing a lot to efficiently distribute bots and equipment to their underlings. It is a great check on corp bloating and corp heist drama is always good for amusement.
Corps don't risk anything cause atm they don't use the market to distribute products among members. Adding this feature wouldn't remove any risk to corps that is already there.
Snowstyle wrote:auster wrote:All I am saying is that trailers could be balanced better than a single big hauler.
Take for example a big hauler with high requirements. In this case you won't have many ppl who possess and can control one. Thus you will always have ppl complaining about not being able to transport their stuff without an ridiculous amount of runs. Additionally you will end up with ppl not transporting their stuff at all.
.
Larger cargo should have higher requirements. Your reasons behind wanting trailers to get around those requirements is a bad one.
- They should come with new extensions.
- Trailers would be new items that you have to build (resource requirements).
- They could be attacked separately.
- The more you equip, the more they slow you down.
I guess there are enough possiblities to increase the requirements. So I don't exactly see your reasoning to say its a bad idea.
Read your original post. You said that bigger mechs are a bad ideas because they would require extensions that not everyone would have. Trailers were your solution to this. I said that that's a bad solution because your problem isn't a problem. If you want trailers to have more extensions as well then that doesn't solve your original problem and makes the whole trailer concept pointless. Why not just have bigger cooler looking bots?
Snowstyle wrote:PvP should not be turned into PvE. Nor should the two be mixed.
Then the POS should not be targetable at all because its a environment item. Which leaves scheduling Incursion type events to capture or destroy the POS.
Edited: PVE to environment, its environment because it is not occupied/controlled by a player.
The E has to fight back for it to be PvE. Kinda like how ganking afk miners isn't PvP. No matter how satisfying their loot is.
If you happen to have a very large supply of 3rd star and up kernels, I believe such an arrangement may be possible.
Dread makes M2S Pelistal pilots a bunch of sad pandas 
Snowstyle wrote:Your missing the point. Automated defenses make it so that the attackers now have to bring a force strong enough to overwhelm both you and your "blobette" repelling NPCs. Attackers should only have to defeat the defenders. Not defenders + handicap.
That is exactly why people throughout history and in games build defenses.......that is their purpose. From your statement all battles should be held in open fields with nothing that can be used for defense? What would be the point in taking/holding an outpost then?
PvP should not be turned into PvE. Nor should the two be mixed.
I can't read anything here, just having that blue in my peripherals destroys me.
Your missing the point. Automated defenses make it so that the attackers now have to bring a force strong enough to overwhelm both you and your "blobette" repelling NPCs. Attackers should only have to defeat the defenders. Not defenders + handicap.
Any automated defense system which could fend of an attack without the aid of other defending players is then impossible to capture when defending players are around.
Snowstyle wrote:And why is that?
Because what the f*ck would be the reasoning behind removing your recharge other than a desperate attempt at "balancing" a completely ridiculous idea.
If you had this on and no recharge, there would be no way you'd 500+ meters at the much reduced rate of speed that you are basing this on.
What's the problem with putting in a restriction for the sole purpose of balancing? If you think the module itself is stupid then comment on that. I just think it could easily be made unexploitable by miners, which was your original grievance.
And maybe my reading comprehension just sucks but I'm still waking up and I have no idea what your trying to say in your second paragraph.
And why is that?
Snowstyle wrote:Neoxx wrote:Then I'll sit still on my miner and never be detected. Derp.
Make it cost a lot of cap so you can never be cap stable with it while running mining modules? Or just make so when it's on you no longer recharge cap.
Miners have the best accumulator stability. I would take off 1 or even 2 of my miner modules just to fit something so I would never be detected. Voila! You now have riskless epriton mining!
Did you ignore the part where I said it should stop you from recharging cap?
neKr0w wrote:Alexander wrote:Full territory warfare should make the game a lot more fun and there is a lot of potential PVP. As soon as "Blobing" is fixed with penalties there should be a lot more roams killing a lot more thinks. Sneaking in under the radar will also be nice. Tackle bots fitting a module that reduces their detection range down to 900m or 800m.
I also think it would be cool if speed also affected the radar. Let's say you fit said module or skill, well then reducing your speed decreases the distance that they can see you at. So that if you are moving and < 10 you won't show up till your within 100m. That would keep people actually watching the terrain and significantly increase the adreneline of coming in for the kill (tackle).
Then I'll sit still on my miner and never be detected. Derp.
Make it cost a lot of cap so you can never be cap stable with it while running mining modules? Or just make so when it's on you no longer recharge cap.
I love it when Goddleyeke talks.
Is syntec going into business with google?
All I am saying is that trailers could be balanced better than a single big hauler.
Take for example a big hauler with high requirements. In this case you won't have many ppl who possess and can control one. Thus you will always have ppl complaining about not being able to transport their stuff without an ridiculous amount of runs. Additionally you will end up with ppl not transporting their stuff at all.
Trailers on the contrary could have different cargo sizes. You could also limit the amount of trailers you can equip by some new "robot control" extension simulating some kind of driving license.
Larger cargo should have higher requirements. Your reasons behind wanting trailers to get around those requirements is a bad one.
Perpetuum Forums → Posts by Snowstyle
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 3 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
Generated in 0.208 seconds (55% PHP - 45% DB) with 7 queries
Copyright © Avatar Creations
