By the way, how about black Rivelers, Lithuses and Symbionts? Are they planned too?

Scarabs? big_smile

Lobo wrote:

Little bit late to the party but can a prerequisite or necessary item for a black bot be that you deliver a Mk2 of said variant to a Beta 1 station in exchange for this black bot?

Dont want to site the "other game" but all faction stuff is traded by giving a player made equivalent to keep the produced materials from just appearing in game. To get a navy scorp from faction shop straight up you need the faction points, isk and a regular scorp as a trade.

The Beta station only infers a slight bit of danger in getting your newly minted bot. Also other game most blueprints and faction point trade hubs are in lowsec.

"Other game" have covert ops frigates for blueprints and cloaked haulers, so no risk taking anything from station in lowsec.
And another game is another game, and not very interesting or most successful one.

Некоторое время буду вне игр. Переезд, финансовые дела и работа над большим проектом.
Не кикните там, чар под бустером, вернусь - вкачаю какого-нибудь таклера smile

I've thought by black bots you mean modular bots big_smile

Interesting news.

I'm a little worried about the reputation requirement for new bots. 650 means it's necessary to run misions in PvP zones to get a carebear bot smile
Can you reduce it to 600 at least when buying for credits?

Maybe larger bots don't need to actualy use multiple tiles, and only visually take more than one?
For example, give every bot a radius value.
Shooting: check Source -> Target1 || Source -> Target2 || Source -> Target3 || Source -> Target4, where
Target1 = actualX + radius
Target2 = actualX - radius
Target3 = actualY + radius
Target4 = actualY - radius
find best radius values for bots.
run this check only if hit of actualXY is blocked or size of bot(it's large or extra large) requires it, to optimize resource costs.
points reducing to 2 if you can plot perpendicular line.
or might be increased (diagonals), then it'll be perfect, but will require more calculations.
Collision: something simmilar.
Height: Add Z axis to this check(?)
Just an example of how this can be with point-to-point.
The better variant can be somehow using new values of bot's width, length, height and existing direction info...

Well, the biggest problem i see is larger bots, i wonder ho much work is required to make it possible with the current engine...

And it's also more about the art than new technologies. Some old games looks great even without shaders or DX 10.

I think the Conspiracy guys are quite capable to make good graphics without using 3rd party engines wink

I'd vote for content. It's more important.
Imagine EVE with old graphics but with landing on planets.
But graphics is important too, of course. Many important things...

183

(44 replies, posted in General discussion)

There is no timer for booting players. Except for 24-hour session limitation. So it's a connection issue.

Interesting idea about NPC activity.

184

(8 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Jasdemi wrote:

But this would give the native Russians of Nia unfair advantages.

No, this would be fair. Because there are already islands which are too warm and dry for us fuuu

-1
People spent their time and money to get their stuff, there's no reason to rip them off exept for your jealousy.

If they can't find a proper use for their reserves right now then it's not their fault. Maybe they waiting for large/capital bots to spend it on, or something else somewhere in the next age.

Row assignment bonus should work in opposite direction, obviously.

You can't even  buy a Kain mk1 now. Simillar with other bots.
It't really not the time to think of something permanent or ideal. Do something.

Drop T1-T3 Items in loot and rewards, put bots on market - any price is better than no market.

+1, a lot of disconnects recently.

189

(43 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

+1
Transporting raw ore hurts...

190

(8 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

It's strange, why there's no winter on Nia?

This could be interesting island type for Industrial faction with neutral missions. Or just one alpha-2 island in a middle of map, and some beta/gamma variations.

Ask for freigters. 5 times bigger, 15 times slower, 20 times more cargo space, big HP buffer and 1000 reasons to gank it.

Sorry, but i can't support this.
i like the station interface because:
1. It's feels safe and calm there. Even if it's alpha island anyway. Maybe it's because of privacy, and no teenagers running and jumping around you.
2. It's a content. Removing it will make game flatter and less interesting. Because it's 23rd century, we don't live on open ground these days smile

Although sometimes the loading bars can be annoying, when running missions, for example. I've read that DEVs were planning to add the same buttons as field terminals have to big terminals, this will solve it, and no need to remove the sanctuary interface smile

By the way, how about removing loading bars from teleports? Replacing it with some animation, and add a bridges between islands - long bridges, with loading islands on the fly somewhere in a middle of them. Maybe something interesting like convoy NPC on them(a perfect place for it), so they won't look dead and empty.
This would be awesome, and also solve the long walk for someones: shift+click on another island and relax. Or use teleports if you want it fast but annoying way.

193

(56 replies, posted in Balancing)

Or you can add heavier bots.

When these packs will be in website shop?

195

(26 replies, posted in Balancing)

logicalNegation wrote:
logicalNegation wrote:

If more income means the game gets more development and players online: then I'll concede my point.

My only suspicion is that once it can be argued that this game is p2w, it will be labeled as such.  Many players avoid this out of some moral imperative in how games make money.  Wasn't the first big surge of players because Eve just announced something that could have been leaning into p2w territory?  Those players left out of protest over just the idea of it, and ironically injected a lot of members into the game here.

My question is: should we expect different results?
If it works, and this game comes to life, and devs can justify investing more hours (and new hires) for the game, I'll get over it.

You talking about SP Pack story in EvE? Is it been canceled?
can't it die alredy as it is, so we won't hear these news about how low the initially good game can fall...

On the topic...
Unlimited EP Packs would be P2W. But we have only one per account. And i hope it'll stays this way, sane, unlike those crippled fools from CCP who need to lose a significant number of players to begin thinking a little.

As for sparks. I'm not really care, i'll buy it for EP, but if it's really P2W then it's no good.
Shop and F2P is a good idea.

Inda wrote:

Too much EP in bucnh they cant know how to use them wiesely - give to them by adding to daily EP gain at least

Sparks is helping your gameplay (pay to win) - remove

generally Ville is wrong, if we would have 10 000 player tomorrow, we will have 2000 next day and 2 weeks later we will face the same amount we have now, you know that. - reduced price wont help, just less money probably (think of the free to play aspect, if Perpetuum would free to play nothing would chnaged really.

Well, of course there will be bad side effects like, for example, the newbie with the pack will be able to pilot Mk2 heavy with average efficiency. Any reason to buy something lower than mk1 heavy?
But there isn't much players who'll buy the game and all the premium packs at the same time. In most cases people buy packs when they've know what to do with it, after hey've played some time and figured things out.
So i think, this change have much more advantages than side effects:

1) people wanted to try the game before buying, because price is too high to just try. Solved. A client more likely buy the game, and if he likes it, buy other stuff. If not... i don't think DEVs will have less proffit, but it's definitely better for playerbase. Although we still need other stuff like banners.

2) aren't you all wanted F2P with cash shop anyway? single-time packs with very good stuff is very common items in cash shops. And that's doesn't mean every newbie will buy this packs. Actually, such items are not exactly for newbies only.
It pretty same in all shops:

  • limited packs with a lot of stuff, including unique for a decent price, like "starter pack", "ultimate pack", etc

  • usual unlimited stuff like consumbles and boosters with standard price

  • vanity stuff

Some games failed to strike a good balance with cash shop, though, turning it in payMore-to-win.

We should understand that for the game to survive, many things in marketing and pay model should change. Change is always a pain and risk, not olny for vets. Sooner or later, but it's inevidable. And a change in this blog is not ruining the game, so it's already good. If they'll make EP purchasable unlimited times then yes, it'll time to go, but so far it's a healthy direction, i think.

Azyrex wrote:

Really? You're allowing people to purchase EP now? That's pretty money-grubbingly low. EP should not be able to be purchased, only accelerated. That's bullshit.

I've been worrying about this too. I totaly agree that EP selling is bad, but the blog says:

* Each upgrade kit can be purchased only once for each Perpetuum account

So in this case i'm very like this news. Vets are not nerfed - they can buy the same package. And just one time, so EP won't depend just on money, or so called pay to win. Don't know about sparks though, haven't tried them much. Just talking about EP.

This might not solve the other problems why people quit, but the base game price was redicilously high, so at least it'll solve most cases why people not buying. And the cases when people decide to wait for a few months to have a "better start".

I hope to see non-steam version soon smile

198

(12 replies, posted in Balancing)

Inda wrote:

Ville, why we lost every players from sales? Maybe they dont get entertained?

Hate to say it, i like the game, but i'm bored.
I miss such things as 5-player dungeons, or quite fun global map PvE events in Defiance.
PvE should be interesting not just because you need kernels or something.

199

(44 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Naismith wrote:

My point remains.

20 dudes spending 2 hours in-game is worth more then 1-2 dudes spending 2 hours in-game.

One man sitting for 30 minutes in game can worth more than another 50 nerds sitting all day wink

Anyway, if you have much more firepower than your enemies, then i think you shouldn't give anomalies too much weight in your equation?

200

(44 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

I have no interest in bases, bu i agree with OP. This isn't quite right.

This feature was meant to some tactical advantages like this one, to have an oppertunity to attack base from flanks, avoiding some camped bottlenecks.
But not teleporting directly inside the base.

Also, i've thought the teleport destination of anomalies is random (could be even other islands) but it remains fixed for current anomaly.
Not just closest anomaly as it turns out to be.