Burial wrote:

It's quite easy to multibox 2-3 EW accounts- nothing should be that passive.

I find it quite challenging to use just one ewar account effectively and I spend most of my PvP time on EW. I would not even attempt to use two (unless the second was a Follow Bot on the old mechanics).

You must be Ultra-Pro. I think you should take your High-Pro-Skills into account and think of yourself in the top 1% Pro-Skill category. With that perspective you may realize that none of your ideas work for the other 99% of the community who simply cannot keep up with your Pro-Skill-Nature.

LOS for ewar may be within your Pro-Skill-Set but then the rest of us would never be able to compete with you.

+1

Blah blob blah blob blah

The propaganda on 'blobs' and 'small' scale pvp are strong in this thread. I guess "blob" is defined as "at least one more player account" and "Small" is defined as "at least one fewer player account"

Kill the armored TP. It needs to be completely removed from the game. The only other decent alternative it to make it 20U+

179

(92 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Syndic wrote:

When you wipe gamma, why would anyone want more then 1 gamma island? There is no economic or industrial need to EVER own more then 1 island, the biggest alliance can exist on 1 island exactly the same as the smallest corp can.

Not sure that is a bad thing. The more powerbases the better. Tighter quarters means more conflict I'd imagine.

Only issue I have within mining is the conflict with static NPCs. But I guess anyone who wants Infinite Mining limited would see the Static NPC issue as at least some small breaking mechanism to the current infinite minerals.

If any chnage is decided with the infinite mineral supply I would hope Devs at least take a slow balancing approach, and not one day wake up and turn the whole system completely upside down 'because xxx since forever'

180

(12 replies, posted in General discussion)

Eye Spy wrote:

Seeing gamma is being wiped, why don't we do the same for Beta.
Move all [my trapped]gear back to alpha, same as with the Gamma wipe.
Reset station stability to zero.

Let the scramble begin. Instant PvP on steam launch.
Give the Steamlings something to watch, and at least the chance of a station that's not coveted by the vets.

Where is all your stuff trapped Alt?

Burial wrote:

We currently have zero motivators for any large scale Beta fights. Sorry to disappoint.

Syndic wrote:

What is an actual danger to the game is if new people actually make the mistake of joining your corporation, and get involved in your fleets. That has to be eye-gouging boredom, and I don't blame any of the corps that don't fly with you anymore for their choice.

Coming from a guy who has blued up practically all of the current Beta population.

You have the balls to talk about Bluing up the whole server. Your memory is so short its pathetic. When STC was founded under RPS leadership it was a breath of fresh air to this game. Now it's a Frankenstein disease of lost players. Die already.

182

(151 replies, posted in General discussion)

DEV Zoom wrote:

Duma: that's a very noble way of thinking, and how it should be, but unfortunately you're the 1% of players.

We'll likely re-introduce red NPCs to Alpha2 in the future once we figured out how to do it properly, but quite honestly right now I would be better off without the daily tickets of "xy pulled NPCs on me and I demand my bot back".

I'll bet Dumas nice summary is more likely the Majority View on NPCs. But you choose to move forward regardless. On the eve of Steam you are completely changing NPC behavior both in Rubber-Band-Go-Follow-Forever and the sudden Napalming of Nia with Agent Orange.

You guys keep surprising me with your weird changes. You say you wanted to change rubber banding "since forever" and use THAT as your rationale for turning NPCs upside down. No actual tested plan. Just why?

183

(151 replies, posted in General discussion)

DEV Zoom wrote:

off: I love it how true you are to your name big_smile

I earned it smile

Seriously though, it comes from my passion for your generally awesome game. Don't forget that.

184

(151 replies, posted in General discussion)

DEV Zoom wrote:

I'll ask back: is there any real reason to have red NPCs on Alpha2? They are tougher than on Alpha1 either way if you attack them, so pretty much the only effect they caused was sending you around them if you didn't want to fight.

Yes, Alpha2 is supposed to be a more dangerous place than Alpha1, the problem is that players make it more dangerous than intended.

And no, we won't go back to rubberbanding because that was plain stupid and we wanted to solve that since forever.

back when you made that change, many liie myself disagreed with the Orange NPC. I loved the challenge of Red NPC on both Alpha.

Balancing is a delicate art. I barely appreciate the nuts and bolts of the coding task you face, but in general your Dev team appears to approaches balancing with too heavy a stick. I just don;t know what to say anymore.

PUT IT BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Rebalance NPCs with a REAL PLAN after you finish UPDATING MISSION SYSTEM and GAMMA and STEAM and ...omg where are your priorities?

185

(151 replies, posted in General discussion)

DEV Zoom wrote:

Well... tried to keep it interesting as much as we could but it doesn't work apparently. We'll change all alpha 2 NPCs to orange.

BOOM!!! Shotgun Balancing

Why do you guys insist on having Red NPCs follow forever? What is wrong with the old Rubber Band Mechanic?

And Roaming Spawns, will they be Orange also? How far do you the unintended consequences have to follow befor you realize the original problem needs a different solution?

What is the Original Problem?

EDIT...found it

DEV Zoom wrote:
Jasmoba wrote:

What in the world were you thinking when you made npcs chase you non stop ?

Two things:
1. People have been asking us for years to remove fixed spawns in favor of free roaming NPCs everywhere. We practically did that.
2. If there is any limit that prevents NPCs going further, they become extremely farmable at the boundary.

Apparently this interferes with missions too much.

1.) Remove Fixed Spawns in favor of Roaming NPCs.

"We practically did that" ...are you kidding me? Do I have to explain how stupid that reasoning is? No not stupid, comedic. I think you must be trolling with that rationale.

2.) Limit that prevents NPCs going further ... farmable ... boundary.

Ummm, what? What does that mean? You don't want people "farming" static NPCs? Farming is part of any MMO. People need NIC and KERNALS and whatever. You want the existing playerbase to forever dominate the Research Tree? You don't want new players to "farm" to catch up with the unGodly assets accumulated by vets? WTF are you talking about with Number 2?

And if you are worried about interfering with missions, your Solution to 'fix' interfering with Missions just broke the *** out of Missions.

You guys are high.

Shadowmine wrote:

Last I checked STC was you guys's only opponent. sad

Tick tock

Shadowmine wrote:
Rage Rex wrote:

Thus they can still sit on their Armored TP and escape before committing. Meanwhile Flagged players hoping to engage across the map can't play. The result will likely be even less PvP.

I don't mind this change mechanic wise really, but I do expect the end result to be less pvp ... [and more Shadowbable using my quote out of context to further his *** views]

I should clarify and say "The result will likely be less PvP with STC" since you are the guys who have perfected the Armored Escape Path. But between people who actually like to PvP it will only help tip the balance toward committing to more fun edge-of-your-seat close battles that make this game rock!

And all this talk about hurting small gang PvP is crap coming from TP Escape Proponents. I used to be part of the minority for a long time, always with corps playing outnumbered. We used TPs to GET TO the fight NOT TO GET AWAY from the fight.

Dev Zoom you never really listened to me before so don't start now. Just use your new Flag Mechanic. We will adapt. STC ...welcome to the endangered species list.

188

(13 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

+1

Little reluctant on the Specimen part given it's already PIA, especially with addition of new Flag mechanic on Mobile TP. But still good with the bad.

189

(94 replies, posted in General discussion)

Lucian Cain wrote:

if your going to change the KB with api or whatever then do it right like other large scale games are.  make it so anonymous cant post anymore and only the actual in game account can post.  In the end it will clean up the KB from racist comments and useless trash talking that actually hurts the game in the long run.  Most people "other than trolls" don't want to see all those ridiculous comments and if they are to be posted then at least the real persons name and picture will be there.

There is nothing to stop the proliferation of Alt accounts effectively posting anonymously and continuing the scourging comments. But I do like the idea of at least tracking Unique Anonymous.

190

(94 replies, posted in General discussion)

Mitix wrote:

Re: Time/Mail/Comment Icons - Find me something better and I'll use them.

I really like the general rework, especially the addition of ewar.

My small complaint in comments on KB about the icons really is small. I don't think any icon is necessary. Time is self-evident. As for # Players involved and # Comments, the Header Label from before was sufficient. Now all those icons repeating over and over, just seem to blur together with #s. For someone who scans very quickly over numbers it forces me to slow down to distinguish it bit more.

Hope that makes sense and thanks for new look.

Generally glad to see this change as the abuse on Armored TPs was absurd.

But Zoom, you guys don't seem to understand the concept of BALANCE, at least not from from perspective of either adding new counters or making smaller adjustments. When you Devs make changes you make them sweeping.

This change is HUGE, and again I'm glad for it as it caters to my playstyle.

But you could also have simply eliminated the Armored TP which is the Biggest culprit here. And if that did not work then make a more aggressive change like the one done today.

And to answer those asking what the difference is between jumping Flagged through Static TPs versus jumping through Mobile TP. The difference is huge. The enemy can follow you through the static TPs, but not the Squad-limited-access Mobile TPs. Perhaps another balance option could have been the ability to use Mobile TPs universally (but that would have issues).

Again, glad to see the change. it's good for me if I can find the time to play.

Editing my double post to change my opinion...

I've thought about it more and I am liking this change less (still happier than before). Mobile TPs are useful for more than just escape. Even the pursuing player uses mobile TPs to quickly chase down targets when possible.

The problem here is and has been Armored TPs.

But again you Devs do a lousy job at isolating Problems before implementing Solutions. So to fix the Armored TP Escape Problem you rework the Flag mechanic on ALL Mobile TP Usage. It's like you Devs close your eyes and fire a shotgun at all your balancing problems. You never hit the mark, or only hit part of it while wrecking all the good stuff around it.

Yes, this is ONLY HALF A FIX because you still leave the incentive for opponents to NOT flag. Thus they can still sit on their Armored TP and escape before committing. Meanwhile Flagged players hoping to engage across the map can't play. The result will likely be even less PvP.

Better solution is to eliminate the Armored TP and leave Flag Mechanic out of the equation.

Irv wrote:

Day Four: Mining
As Celebro said, I did the basic math and selling the raw materials is much more profitable than refining.  So I bought some credits and respecced out of recycling and refining.

It was a fun time today.  I'm now on travel for a bunch of days, but have a booster going so I can earn EP while I'm away.

Thanks for all the help everyone!

I think the Devs shed a tear of joy on this note. Perhaps the new players will flock to the Perpetuum Shop.

Good write-up. You'll find most Vets very eager to assist, especially when it comes to getting the word out about this game.

194

(151 replies, posted in General discussion)

DEV Zoom wrote:
Kaldenines wrote:

I can already see the NPC gate-camp tactic working.

Step 1: Get a tanky bot such as a Tyranos Mk2.
Step 2: Drag red NPCs under a static teleport.
Step 3: When someone jumps in, wait for them to start moving off the teleport and then jump out.
Step 4: Harvest tears.

NPCs don't attack you until you have molecular instability (this is somewhere in the patch notes I just can't be bothered to find it), so plenty of time to escape to the other side if you find yourself trapped.

Yes, trapped now on the other side, away from your destination. Grief successful.

195

(26 replies, posted in Balancing)

Resetting research and having to grind that AGAIN would be HELL and likely enough to push most production Vets out of the game. Then the market would be *** for long while.

EP does not matter nearly as much as noobs seem to think it does. Just keep asking, I still enjoy the subject.

196

(151 replies, posted in General discussion)

So if I have this straight, Devs think it's a good idea to make NPCs follow a player for an unlimited distance AND red NPCs currently attack anyone in range

This is soooo greifer friendly I have to assume you want to introduce some griefing into Alpha. That's not a terrible thing as content is content. But if you are not wanting to see new little Steamlings in their miners being eaten alive by NPCs led around by greifers, then you need to rethink.

But if you want to discourange AFK mining even more, then this could help, especially if the griefer can take the loot from that afk Riv mk2.

Hmmmmm, the more I think about this the more I like it. I may have to log in and test this ...see how many AFK miners tears I can harvest.

197

(34 replies, posted in General discussion)

The state of the game is dominated by a clandestine group of players actively harrassing new players in an attempt to push them out of the game. I can't say too much but I will say the culprits are vets who do not like the competition that will come with increasing population.  They want to maintain the glory days of 2013 where man dominated machine without interference from other men. Now it appears that not only are they using their power over NPC mechanics to punish this innocent new player, but Dev Zoom appears complicit.

198

(53 replies, posted in News and information)

Ville wrote:

http://cheezburger.com/60030721

watch it.

Very cool.

199

(34 replies, posted in General discussion)

Ioci wrote:

Update,
10 seconds from a Shinjalar Mag strip, gathering Prismocitae in a Sequer. Someone launches a Distress beacon on the mag strip, a dozen bots instalock me and melt the Sequer.

It will be passed off as griefer lulz. Me, I think it's a deliberate attempt by shills to sabotage a game on its last legs. I really don't know if the game has a chance. I can shrug the "loss". It was under a Mill. I can even shrug the waste of time but it does concern me when low impact players get bullied like that. I won't take it personal but that in itself is what concerns me. Anyone coming here from Steam will need to be willing to join the Gamma Zergs out of the gate or will be thugged out of the game.

GL Devs. You have a fight to survive and I don't envy your situation.

yeah, that sounds like a roaming spawn. Besides, even if someone did light off a beacon they would not agress unless you lock or agress them first (unless the damn mechanic changed on that too).

But still cool story in thread that was originally about ...wait, I lost track.

I'm confused. Is this a troll thread? Now that everyone is perma-active does this even matter? Or does posting on the forums operate like EP, where you have to log in to post for three days?