One thing I have been finding myself to need is a list of installed CTs separate from productions going on. Corp or personal level. Remotely.

102

(5 replies, posted in Events)

Results of the Fourth Arkhe Tournamnet

Trepoleth:0

Trepoleth received for most kills 20 million NIC and a heavy mech cortex.

The price for kills would have been 1 mil per kill.

103

(6 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Should the naming survive being traded? Should there be guarantees that it is authentic?

104

(0 replies, posted in General discussion)

Epriton is super high. Modules are at usual prices. Now is a great time to overcome your fear of death and step foot into beta.

Thanks to the mission revamp on betas there is now an actual incentive differential to be in betas! And people are starting to realise it. It used to be that only 5% of player base would use the outer rings of islands but now it has become viable playspace.

Come take the part of the cake that belongs to you! Don't let the few brave reap disproportionate reward. See the error of you alpha ways.

105

(94 replies, posted in General discussion)

There is no real problem with mechanics. Either a player is better off mining titan on their own or its more efficient to buy it from the market. Better mission payout means that buying from market is more often the case. If its it time efficient to mission and buy ores with the rewards those that insist on mining their own titan are just fools. If all miners quit mining to mission grind and buy ores then the efficiency of raw resources by buying would lower.

The market is moving more into actual trade being made and you are complaining about that?

Khetar wrote:
Rolafen Azec wrote:

I am in a situation that I have the game open on the other screen and check up on it every 5 or 10 minutes. However this results in some bots just simply being lost.


You should check up on it more often.

The exact level on what checking levels provides which level of security would be an interesting discussion. If you check on it once every vision range travelled that is still quite a lot of checking. For example miners are not subject to that level of attention bullying unlike in certainanother game where you need to more often change your mining target.


Khetar wrote:
Rolafen Azec wrote:

Also there is a big attention assymmetry when it comes to haulers vs gankers. A ganker needs to pay attention only one gank trip. A hauler typically makes only a fraction of the value of their cargo and spends a lot more on the road than any bandits. If you have a loss rate of 1 bot per 10 trips and you make only a tenth of your cargo value each trip (10% profit rate is quite optimistic) you only break even.


If a ganker sees you, a warning sound won't help. Either you avoid him by planning smart and using help of other people (scouts), or you will get ganked anyway, with or without a scout.

I am not asking for any of those factors to be messed with. I want those to be the main safety factors. However now they are pretty irrelevant. I am not intending to this to signficantly help against human danger factors (althought it makes it harder to ninja up to people).

107

(43 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

If you value U compacteness in your raw resources do rare materials.

I would wonder if there was an option to lossfully turn standard ore into rare variants how many would use it?

108

(43 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

SunnyJester wrote:
Rolafen Azec wrote:
SunnyJester wrote:

Real Pvp isnt ganking haulers, or limiting people's hauling capacity.  There is no issues with this in Eve, so why is it an issue here?

http://forums.perpetuum-online.com/post/130579/#p130579

SunnyJester wrote:

-1, no care bear ***

So PvE hauling is okay to be hard but PvP hauling isn't supposed be to be hard? I am detecting slight inconsistencies.

Hauling in Beta and Hauling in Gamma and Hauling in Alpha is all the same.  It is just a necessary evil in the game.  Why make it any worse than it has to be??  If people want to take the risk and haul more at once, then they should be afforded that option.

By that logic you should support the linked suggestion as it is towards the same end.

Beside, kernel grinders don't get arbitrarily hard NPCs to grind against. Miners don't get arbitrarily high end mining equipment. The loss of cargo is not the only factor like the spendage of miner charges isn't the only factor in mining.

109

(43 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

SunnyJester wrote:

Real Pvp isnt ganking haulers, or limiting people's hauling capacity.  There is no issues with this in Eve, so why is it an issue here?

http://forums.perpetuum-online.com/post/130579/#p130579

SunnyJester wrote:

-1, no care bear ***

So PvE hauling is okay to be hard but PvP hauling isn't supposed be to be hard? I am detecting slight inconsistencies.

110

(43 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

The reason people are upset about small hauler sizes is that piloring a hauler takes full attentino in pvp so you can't have them operate all the time or you will be bored out of your mind.

Increasing the cargo capacity would also mean smaller windows of vulnerability.

The nouses are quite low for such a high end skill. Suggesting demob resistance as the benefit.

I am in a situation that I have the game open on the other screen and check up on it every 5 or 10 minutes. However this results in some bots just simply being lost. While I can live with the mechanics as they are I know a lot more people are way more afraid of death.

Its also that the red packs are quite dense. This results in them not taking that much space so it become more hit and miss whether you ran into them or not. And if you do run into them its not like only 1 locks you but several at once. And usually one of them has a demob. I could imagine that having your bot wear down by losing only a fraction of health on each "collision" could be more desirable.

Also there is a big attention assymmetry when it comes to haulers vs gankers. A ganker needs to pay attention only one gank trip. A hauler typically makes only a fraction of the value of their cargo and spends a lot more on the road than any bandits. If you have a loss rate of 1 bot per 10 trips and you make only a tenth of your cargo value each trip (10% profit rate is quite optimistic) you only break even.

It is also pretty stupid looking when the dreadded posibility of a hauler and a bandit meeting in the field results in the bandit shooting the hauler to death without the hauler reacting or noticing. Given that it's a pretty rare occasion having it be more dramatic could easily be more fun.

Well atleast I can take solace that if things say this way and reds come to alpha the same issue will present regarding alpha2s making transporting actually cost a damn thing.

while custom interface dsigners will come up with all kinds of permitted and non-permitted helps I would think this is a functionality that the vanilla interface could provide. It does raise the issue if reds are supposed to be hinderance what kind of hinderance there is intention to be. If the intention is that you have to path around or stop to wait for the path to clear to increase travel time that would be fine. But if the idea is that travel requires attention every 30 seconds to be bot loss risk free from reds then it would prevent a lot of players just walking into reds because they didn't notice them. While completely unseupervised travel AI migth be undesirable I do think that being semi-afk in the sense of being ready to take contorl at a moments notice would be sufficient tending.

Could we have some feature which would make a sound to alter the player to pay attentin on whether they want to avoid potential danger?

The locking sound effect is very proper but it is not much use to alert a player not actively paying attentino to the game in time.

I realise this might make avoiding red NPCs too trivial. I dont' care if I have to equip a module to benefit from it. Maybe it could be made piggyback on the detection module?

I would make it like configurable tot he radar range marker. Have toggels for orange and red NPCs and a relation setting for agents.

114

(25 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

I have had moderately positive experiences in having ennui losses with nora and me avoiding it because I can't tend it. The idea of a separate profession of noralgis harvester separate from the field establisher is also cool.

I I had the option of instantly killing every nora plant within 300 m and and get 2/3 of the yield they currently have in their branches I would probably push that button quite often.

Alternatively one could introduce a new "high risk high payoff" good with like quick harvesting but a limit of not being able to be placed denser than one unit per 100m x 100m square. You could make it like explode and chain react when shot.

I am fine with there being a difference between careful nora tending and plant abusing approximate tending. However when going for the approximate it feels too unhandy.

115

(20 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Injectors take a ton of U. Plasma takes next to nothing. The equation seems mathematically challenging. Try to have a scarab full of injectors vs a sequer full of plasma, with nic per energy that someone migth agree to. Sounds like too much of a stretch.

And anyways Earth needs that energy. The whole point of the enterprice is to get that Nian blood to feed the machine back home.

116

(9 replies, posted in Balancing)

[01:42:30[ <Josef Schlevinsky> What -are- they supposed to do?
[01:42:41] <Rolafen Azec> that is a bit of a mystery
[01:42:45] <Michael J Caboose> chemo bombs had been supposed to get rid of plants
[01:42:48] <Rolafen Azec> I think I tried the m on plnats
[01:42:57] * EyeOfRa is now online.
[01:42:58] <Rolafen Azec> but it like killed 1 and wounded 7
[01:43:03] <Michael J Caboose> but since a certain patch, they only marginally scratch plants
[01:43:07] <Josef Schlevinsky> Lol? Odd
[01:43:15] * thefusion is now online.
[01:43:20] <Michael J Caboose> not odd
[01:43:38] <Michael J Caboose> they implemented a kind of AoE damage when you shoot at ground tiles
[01:43:53] <Michael J Caboose> due to that, they have beefed up plants resists
[01:43:59] <Michael J Caboose> without beefing the bomb

I have loved how gamma terminals don't have any natural supply. What I would like is some sort of conveyor or item teleport system. But that is basically what you are asking. I would expect heavy energy upkeep.

118

(8 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

damn leg slot module "snow tracks" -75% snow slow down.

Also winter in Nia can just means that temperatures get subtropical instead of tropical.

There are more edge cases in regards to dying. After death for a short while you dont' have a robot. While it could be overcome there is no canonical way to extend this to "field terminal" style terminals.

I do have the case that in some computers the game runs if I don't go out to the field. Arguably it would be smoother to multitaks other task in your computer if you are for example just monitoring the market if you don't have to keep the 3D environment loaded. I do kinda like idea of being docked althought the "virtual reality" aspect could be explored further.

Also this would kill the spin counter sad.

I am meaning for the scarab to be human piloted. The only "hard" mechanic change is lessening the need to be physically present in the selling location when buying.

I do think that the U efficiency between sequer/lithus/scarab would become more apparent but this would be through unobfuscating existing mechanics rather than introducing new ones.

121

(37 replies, posted in General discussion)

Could we have like "teleport destination" beacons"? It could have a larger spool up time but once spooled it would be a valid destination for other teleport beacon departures.

Aslo could make sense as a gamma structure that would make more sensible beach heads.

Players don't appriciate hauling stuff from place to place. Many suggestions try to circumvent the "placedness" of goods. one of the reasons is that coming up with a NIC value for transport is tricky because private transport assigments are somewhat dormant. One of the biggest obstacles is that they have delivery spans of days when usually the "logistics customer" just wants the item now instead of having to haul or price shop for it.

Instead of being issued by the item owner this type of contract is issued by the carrying capacity owner. He spesifies from which terminal will the volume to be transported will leave, when the departure will take place and when and where the volume will arrive as well as how much volume. For example "Shindalar Main 11:00 8.1.2214 - 60 U - Tellesis Main 13:00 8.1.2214 500 000 NIC, collateral 5 000 000 NIC" . Other agents can accept this by specifying what items from the departure terminal they want to include and paying the cost. This will form very similar / the very same transport assigment as curretnly available.

When shopping for items in the "remote markets" section there should also be a listing for all pending transport assigments from that terminal to your current terminal. There should also be a "buy as couried" button where you buy the item and enter it as the transport cargo to the relevant transport order. This would circumvent the need to be present at the selling location. However the inability to order it elsewhere than where you currently are would be a comparable restriction.

If we have such an UI element the visibility of current style transport assigments could be improved by being able to "buy as couried" as a proactive action. That is you would fill in the current style transport assigments info (except destination forced to be your current terminal) and enter money into escrow for enough to buy the item. Then if/when someone accepts the transport assignment, you immidietly buy the item and it is entered as the cargo to the assigment. If someone else buys the item the transport assignment is canceled. In order for it to serve real ASAP needs the floor on delivery time should be lower. Currently its one day when it could be for example 1 hour

123

(5 replies, posted in Events)

Results of the Thirds Akrhe Tournament

Chefcook90: 2.6
Rawlarious: 2
Michale J Carboose: 2
MR Woland: 0.5

Honorable mentions: Jasdemi

For most kills Chefcook90 received 25 million NIC

For most deaths Chefcook90 and Jasdemi split 5 mil NIC each receiving 2.5 mil NIC.

124

(3 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Body switching still can't be done on terrain and extension installing has little sense to be done instantly.

125

(9 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

We should instead work on reducing market injections for any goods that are otherwise obtainable.

We could for example cut seeding either entirely or have only things made by faction tech tree be seeded in alpha2.

Mid tiers do not need seeding. Are industrialist only supposed to make profit from T4s? The dual role of mid tiers as consumables and inputs to the next tier could be utilised more. For example extension bonus for "mid tier" prototyping or production only. Another thing that because the tech tree is linear one can't be a "mid tier only " producer. Or I guess one could be if prototype selling was an actual thing that happened. but now research and being able to produce an item are very very linked.