101

(52 replies, posted in Q & A)

Tonnik wrote:
Annihilator wrote:

are lowest level beacons really no solo content as some say?

You can do lol 1 mech beacons solo so no that's just whining

I bet that's pretty damn hard, unless you have a mk2 heavy with great skills - so all in all, every newbie is still going to get hurt by getting very little solo ways of getting kernels.

102

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Rynikwiz wrote:

Well I for one don't see the rationale for the spt change....why would you bother with a gamma outpost if you cannot spark to it, you have no epi there. I think having 3 sparks one for each type of island is a good compromise. For goodness sake change the sap mechanic....let saps drop loot if not attended, so people roam for that, and let it revert the ownership over time if unattended.

if its about pvp...that make no sense - say one person at the station, enemies come over, either the person wont engage (as out numbered and no way to have other peeps spark in). = less pvp

my thoughts are have 1 alpha, 1 beta, 1 gama spark, no blood spark

I'm sure they could implement it like this somehow, the 1 spark per island type would be ideal.

103

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Inda wrote:

-16 general speed decrese on bots (20 khp increase to basic)

+14 on highways (50 increse to basic)

I'm against this until they fix auto to include highways before shortest path.

104

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

Inda wrote:

DEVs I would really ask you what is your goal about this change and what is your opinion what will change?

Some hints:
1) I will lose many ability to my actual play as: Spark to Gamma to harvest Noralgis, spark to Beta to scan my Beta bases event, spark to Alpha 1 to set buy and sell orders to maintain our new player market. Also it will decrease my incom to even worse, so I will reach the point I dont have any profit.

2) It will incentive more alts and logout/logins.

3) Its again hit even harder the solo players, your agenda seems like to not allow as many players to play but less availability to players.

This! Many players commenting here only see the implications of one corp being able to park over dozens beta outposts to get sap loot. This does help either the newbies (that want beta) or butthurt alliance (that are piss afraid of cir) get some stations, as many people will be too lazy to travel 4 islands just for a sap. I dont particularly see PHM keeping laosura or initia after the sparks get removed (unless they are really dedicated).

HOWEVER!! The removal of sparks are a big pain in the *** for the producers, especially gamma ones. Not to mention a huge time loss you spend just by moving.

105

(1,455 replies, posted in General discussion)

I still think there should be spark teleports, even if the cooldown is a week.

106

(52 replies, posted in Q & A)

Annihilator wrote:
SunnyJester wrote:

Hey Dev Z, how about adding common kernals to SAPs to encourage more PvP @ SAP times?

wow, first you want to remove them, now you want them for free?

It's your fault we are getting saps for free tongue

107

(148 replies, posted in General discussion)

Burial wrote:

Alpha is only good for making corporations die of boredom. It's not a PVE game. Look at the population if you think I'm not telling the truth.

The recurring theme of yesteryear is coalition reaching critical mass, capturing all Beta stations and then leaving most unused and empty. Happened like three times now, right? Waste of a perfectly good content creation real-estate. Doesn't promote PVP and doesn't promote population growth.

New corporations need to feel they can achieve something on their own and have anything besides blue donut or a steady career on Alpha to look forward to, and veterans need PVP to continue with the same ol' PVE.

Not some agenda-pushing strat, I said the same thing when we held all the stations. ***'s broken.

Then start moving out, pvp, destroy bots, capture stations and freaking do anything on betas and gammas. You do realise that no matter what the devs do, if you dont move your arse to beta, nothing is going to change?

108

(7 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

There is already more than enough nic in the game. The problem is we have nothing to spend it on. NIC is so worthless that a lot of players trade goods for goods.

109

(5 replies, posted in Bugs)

So my comment was deleted, you know it was just a wordplay?

Having an option to enable only proximity probe sounds in options would be great. As i play multiple accounts and like to listen to music/speak on ts, i generally have all sounds off. If i mine stuff in beta and gamma, i have to enable UI sounds i believe. And that means every 45 mining cycles i get a jumpscare from reloading. So adding an option to only hear proximity probe alerts would be awesome. Please make it happen.

111

(52 replies, posted in Q & A)

JcJet wrote:

c) A passive obtaining of kernels from some "research" thing. A small amount so even a novice will make more on low level missions. Just select the type once and it's generates some amount of kernels every day. And the extension to increase it a little bit.

Well, something like R&D agents in eve, which aren't proffitable, but a little passive income is interesting, even if it'll be just a small bonus when you sell it all a year after smile
That way there'll be an additional small but constant flow of kernels to the market.

+1

112

(3 replies, posted in Buying Items)

You are a disgrace to Ethos.

113

(3 replies, posted in Buying Items)

WTB ICE, common kernels and tokens.

114

(20 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

+1

logicalNegation wrote:

Ok, I might be the only person who does this but sometimes I do like to do HW, watch TV, read a book, or just sit afk cause *** you that's why. 
This general description is what is known in the gaming community, as I understand it, a 'casual gamer'. 
Though I would like to emphasize my playstyle should limit my ability to acquire wealth, and participate in some activities.  (Ex: afk pvp... definitely not a thing.)  I have done all-day Scarab liquid mining, but I can easily eclipse that output with <1hr with a riveler, but at a semi-afk state.
So it is clear there is a spectrum of activities that can be done to some degree of effectiveness based on the player's participatory rigor.  The question is how can we create equitable rewards based on the degree of this rigor?  Instead of: how can we eliminate content for our already small playerbase based on their playstyle preferences?

Botting devalues real-players participation on any level.  It introduces too much volume to the market, prices drop, and the activity becomes meaningless for real players.  Bot detection would be the best avenue, instead of nerfing activities that are 'bottable'. (citing the number of people that have mentioned this earlier).
However an alternative or additional measure against botting is like what was a major component of random assignments: the randomness!  Now there is no guarantee on where you go, what you do, etc.  I would argue this does not terribly decrease real-player's output from assignments now, vs earlier.  So we have new and more content, arguably more entertaining than the monotony of the prior system, and it eliminates botting potential; huzzah mission success (good job devs)!

Also the Risk:Reward ratio.  When it comes to alpha the risk is zero, so what is any reward/0?  Well its invalid math, but what if we say risk approaches 0, then reward approaches infinity.  Clearly some risk should be introduced.
However I must emphasize, real players autopilot, real players haul between market hubs, real players mine alone without pvp/pve support, new players live here at least for a while, mostly alone.  So how can we introduce risk without completely making the game unplayable if a new player undocks at the wrong time, or walked too far from terminal wanting to explore (or do a mission, or mine, etc.)

First, as many noted, reds on alpha2 only, allowing alpha1 to still be safe from pve aggro, and decreasing resource amounts on alpha1's.  But what types of reds, and what spawn mechanics on alpha2?  Drones? Observers? L5's?  I think most would agree, given that alpha is the only teleport pipeline between factions, having high level red gangs makes travel, even in reasonable company, very risky, too risky for the rewards.

My proposal is introduce red arkhe drone-types and/or L0's sparsely and with fixed 'homes' (like mission spawn mechanics now) with a generous but not infinite lasso radius (the distance they may chase their aggro'er from home coordinates).  They can have some tricky ecm or enwar, and some dps (no demob: again to emphasize a player paying attention should survive more than a player not doing so).  But a real player should be able to fit a gun and a tank on their miner (they have slots for it), go out, do their mining mission, pop drones as they aggro along the way (not unlike hi-sec eve rats).  This way new players, and indy players, at least are introduced to fitting tanks, paying some attention so that they aren't slowly shot down, but not insta-popped because a red gang popped up on their radar while they were tabbed out. 

This would mean you couldn't be completely afk, or you would sacrifice mining output or speed to fit a more robust tank.  Which is reasonable, I think.  But should alpha2's be populated with Red observers? I think not.

This is my opinion, and while from a personal perspective I would posit that at least some players also don't want to have a game monopolize their time, but still want to participate in some way and make meaningful progress in the game.

+1

116

(15 replies, posted in General discussion)

1)They regenerate block by block - so if you mine one tile of titan field, there is going to be another titan field that grows by one tile.

2) the fields despawn if untouched after a week i believe

3) you can set the color of all tiles on your geoscanner to red, so its really easy to see

Annihilator wrote:
Illiathos wrote:

Then give me those 100 reasons. You realise you havent given me a single concrete argument?

sorry, i am not one of those who can explain e=mc² to backyard kids, nor do i have any reason to do so...

If you think that this discussion is on the level of the principles of general relativity, then you are sorely mistaken. And wtf does this equation even have in context to the whole discussion? You are full of bullshit, you havent given me a single argument AGAIN and you're just making things up to stir the flaming war.

Annihilator wrote:

there are probably 100 more reasons for the changes that don't fit into your head - you just concentrate on a few that have been mentioned, and even there, you concentrate on single phrases.

there is a fool-proof evidence that everything they changed or will change in the near future has not worked up to now: <100 active player in a single shard open world online game.

Then give me those 100 reasons. You realise you havent given me a single concrete argument?

Jita wrote:
Illiathos wrote:
Jita wrote:

Secured against who? The minute anyone can be bothered to pull 25 people together any gamma in the game is dead. If you believe more turrets etc will help your in for a surprise. Your real security is in blueing anyone who would present a threat. Spend money on that.

But you people arent pulling 25 people together. And until you do, I'm calling it secure. Not saying you cant, saying you arent.

EDIT: secure against the random groups of 2-3 people that skirmish.

if it takes 40 ice to do that with a squad of fifty people your in real trouble there sonny jim.

We've got enough of everything as it is. 40 ice is just the topping.

Jita wrote:
Illiathos wrote:
Jasdemi wrote:

Red NCPs on alpha2 were removed as a band aid fix due to rampant griefing. As AI stuff is now fixed, I hope they're coming back asap. Made alpha2 life much more interesting.


Yet your corp still had to sell me 40 ICE few days ago, to acquire some NIC. I'm not judging, but get off your high horse, son.

So goth went on shopping spree and we have secured beta and gamma. Our wealth has nothing to do with balance. And the last sentence contradicts itself.

Secured against who? The minute anyone can be bothered to pull 25 people together any gamma in the game is dead. If you believe more turrets etc will help your in for a surprise. Your real security is in blueing anyone who would present a threat. Spend money on that.

But you people arent pulling 25 people together. And until you do, I'm calling it secure. Not saying you cant, saying you arent.

EDIT: secure against the random groups of 2-3 people that skirmish.

Jasdemi wrote:

Red NCPs on alpha2 were removed as a band aid fix due to rampant griefing. As AI stuff is now fixed, I hope they're coming back asap. Made alpha2 life much more interesting.

9) Sure, but you've been around for a long time. When NSE first started, we went through blood and tears to get a seth, now we can produce gamma terminals with ease.

Yet your corp still had to sell me 40 ICE few days ago, to acquire some NIC. I'm not judging, but get off your high horse, son.

So goth went on shopping spree and we have secured beta and gamma. Our wealth has nothing to do with balance. And the last sentence contradicts itself.

CORRECTION: Person in corp sold, not because he had to, but because he chose to.

Jita wrote:

1) if you have proof post it

2) Gamma mining is fine, you lack perspect. Its literally impossible to die to rats or PvP if you are not afk

3) Resource accumulation ANYWHERE should have risk.

4) I agree. I would also say if you have proof post it. I also think when your talking about how you have abused a bug for months and done nothing about it you are just as bad.

5) I think its important that Alpha 1 mining, ratting and missions are nerfed to prevent exactly this

6) see 4, your a hypocrite

7) I'm more bothered about stuff that wasn't intended and still isn't fixed

8) reds were around long before you and they worked fine

9) I've built two gamma bases on my own using multi boxing while dealing with red rats. Sometimes you will die, get over it.

1) proof has been shown by corp members, the devs did not respond well

2) its impossible to die of reds with 1 account, when you multibox, you will inevitably die, no matter how much you try to avoid them.

3) I believe that only higher tier resource should have risk, but both point are valid.

4) I havent used any software, I never will until its legal

5) Mining isnt nerfed, you only have smaller fields. For ratting, we have beacons. For missions, we have beta outposts.

6) I dont understand your reasoning

7) I'm genuinely bothered about both

8) Then why did they get removed? Also, they might have worked with higher game population. The game that is balanced for 500 people might not be balanced for 50.

9) Sure, but you've been around for a long time. When NSE first started, we went through blood and tears to get a seth, now we can produce gamma terminals with ease.

Since a couple people fail to comprehend my condensed version, here is the long, explained one.

Afk mining is referred to when people go afk for at least a couple hours and their bot continues to mine. Without using illegal software, this can be done by either sequers or scarabs.
As these 2 bots have low mining capacity, they can NOT influence the market in any significant way. If you dont believe me, i can show you what 8 rivelers do in an hour. So, the ore is nice, but not big enough to cause game-wide imbalance.

Multiboxing is referred to when a person uses multiple clients (accounts) to play the game. No illegal software used. The balancing around this one is fragile. If you dont limit the multiboxers, they are going to run over the "normal" one-account people. On the other hand, if you limit the multiboxers too much you 1) piss off the biggest donators of the game and 2) the corp suddenly lose a lot of miners and producers (for example, gamma is unminable right now due to reds and energy usage by bases isnt negligible)

Botting is referred to when a player uses illegal software to automate his accounts. He can go to bed or do something else while his robots continue to farm as if he was manually controlling them. This is a major problem. Botting isnt even that hard from technical aspect, especially with farming npcs and old missioning. This creates massive imbalances to the game economy and should be controlled asap.


Now that we have the basic terminology down, here's my gripe:

1) The DEVs absolutely refuse concrete proof of botting that would get players banned in pretty much every other game. If players are able to see a guy's botting, then the DEVs should be able to see it from a mile using game codes.

2) The DEVs would rather implement some mechanics that indeed make botting hard and yet makes every other legit account feel like taking a bullet to the head.
The reintroduction (or "fix" as some call it) of reds on gamma made it inferior to mine there. Yet the buildings arent cheap and the upkeep takes many a cryoperine that the corp members are apparently going to be forced to mine at alpha freaking 2. Do you understand what this means for gameplay? You are finally a nullsec, gamma, base-owning corp that is forced to go to carebear islands because gamma and beta just arent worth it. (The field size is not even a close enough buff for reds out there wanting to kill your ***)

3) Upcoming reds on alpha 2. Again, by trying to combat botters, you are putting all accounts to risk. Especially the multiboxers. When I go to beta mining with 8 rivelers, im not going to run away from reds. I am going to die if they find me. But thats ok, im mining epriton and i am willing to take the risk. But on alpha, mining ore that is 20x less worth than epi? Nobody sane would want to do that. You are hurting everyone, especially the multiboxers that indeed supported your game. (past tense if you dont stop introducing changes that outright tell us to uninstall perpetuum)

4) Get a freaking botting detection sofware and start banning people. This is one of the few games i know that doesnt ban botters. I mean, why shouldnt i use botting software to get ahead? Its against the tos, but im not gonna get banned, so i might as well do it. <-- this kind of mentality is killing both the economy and the game

5) Stop making such extreme balancing changes. I dont see any DEVs playing. Which is ok, if they are busy coding, giving us new stuff. But if its balancing, please STOP doing it so quickly and harshly. It looks good on paper. But when it comes to real gameplay, it most often isnt how you want it. For example, getting reds to alpha 2 is just going to make my mining operations change to alpha 1, where i know you wont introduce reds due to n00bs and all.

6) The scarab incident - the scarab was able to use 3 nexuses that depleted his accumulator yet still managed to give us buffs. I have been to the game since october last year. The "bug" has been there since october last year at least (probably longer, but i can safely tell you this long). How can you make high-level balancing changes if you cant even find a bug that every player that is at least 2 weeks old knows? Disappointing.

7) The "it was intended" speech. Yeah, "it" might have been intended, but what good is it if its bad as hell and makes the game worse for everyone? (replace "it" with many of the balancing changes you disliked)

8) Good job on missions, but please, get your act together for balancing. Or at least start listening to the players when they tell you stuff about the reds and how its going to affect the game. Because apparently the devs dont play the game they are coding.

9) And the summary for botting: by trying to lower the botters using game mechanics, they are basically giving the middle finger to multiboxers (the biggest donators to the game). And if you believe a corp of 10-20 people can get any gamma rolling without some multiboxers mining, you're up for a surprise.

124

(31 replies, posted in Balancing)

DEV Zoom wrote:
Illiathos wrote:

i believe that delivering an item for mining is just unnecessary and brings a lot of pain without any gain.

But you already have to deliver an item... the minerals. What's the difference between delivering minerals and an item that spawns at the same place where you mined?

I guess im still talking about the old missions where you dont have to deliver the ore. My bad. If its like that, then it doesnt really matter whether you have to deliver the ore or the item that drops.

125

(31 replies, posted in Balancing)

Jasdemi wrote:
Illiathos wrote:

By trying to deter people from botting you are by my opinion using wrong measures that hurt the whole population, like reds in alpha 2. For bots, just get recognition software and actually ban the people. And no, multiboxers arent botters, but the devs are trying to put both down for some reason.

As for dev Zoom, i believe that delivering an item for mining is just unnecessary and brings a lot of pain without any gain. If i really want to multi missions, i can still get my 12 accounts on them and have goffers, its going to be a pain, but its not going to make me any less op that i am atm.

Who gave this guy drugs? Or is it just failed attempt at trolling? Can't tell.
While you're at it, why don't you suggest to remove the transporting part from Transport missions? It's silly and unnecessary.

I fail to comprehend what you're talking about, give me some concrete critic about it.