You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Active topics Unanswered topics
Search options (Page 6 of 62)
Pages Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 62 Next
Celebro wrote:Cassius wrote:Celebro wrote:Nobody, ever, asked for SPT.
Not quite true. Pretty much everyone when I first joined complained about the long travel times on terrain and several times a form of EvE clone jumping was requested. SpT was the result and I personally think its wasn't a bad concept.
Other factors harmed the game far more.
Ok, fair enough.
I was never expecting no cool downs tbh. Eve has 24hrs cooldown and game is 1000x larger.
Perfect example......
And if you develop a game listening to all of this you have "Perpetuum".......
+1
Still no on outpost locking being removed. 
Burial wrote:I tested my 205km/h Cameleon MK2 on test the other day and it seemed to run smoothly. Would be ideal to run a stress test but I think it's fine.
Okay good.
Yeah I agree on the stress test.
how will the speed boost impact server performance? Anyone thinking about that?
Think in terms of client keeping in sync etc. We already know that desync happens a lot when demobers run in for the tackle.
Shadowmine wrote:Anyway, I think you should only be allowed to spark teleport to a beta or gamma station owned by your corporation.
I like this one.
Shadowmine wrote: Maybe with a limit on the number of betas or gammas allowed to be owned per corporation. Wouldn't completely fix the problem, but would at least make things a bit more difficult on alliances etc to own a lot of territory.
I don't like hard cut off numbers. But they did it for gamma islands.....
Jita wrote:Weedy wrote:Jita wrote:But at least then we would know those people are breaking the EULA and could be dealt with.
It would be exactly the same thing as you coming back to your PC every half an hour and clicking once. It is undetectable and impossible to confirm 
It's used to good effect in games like firefall.
With your logic for low population and locking outposts, this is not needed until the population grows a bit.
Annihilator wrote:incentives...
gamma needs them 
I totally agree!
Plenty people live on beta. So there is plenty of roaming to be had.....
Burial wrote:What made you think we are after stations.. ? All I personally want is more people on Betas to shoot at. I want roaming PVP to be viable again like it was when I started playing the game.
You need to roam first. Or maybe I don't understand your definition of "roaming pvp".
Annihilator wrote:Gremrod wrote:I would like to have a list that I can add friendly corps to so they can be affected by my outpost aura.
Aura emitter have that setting.
I would like this for Beta also.
Thanks
Burial wrote:Interesting suggestion. Someone just completing a SAP to get the loot doesn't really qualify as an attack. I think a rotting container should have a brief timer in the end when it can be looted by a third party though. All-in-all, the effect is probably too small to waste any development effort here.
Attack or "passive effort" on sap.
Very easy for them to do this one I think. They already have all the code in place for this to be done on sap containers. I am guessing they are the same as regular loot containers.
I would like to have a list that I can add friendly corps to so they can be affected by my outpost aura.
Annihilator wrote:i would love option
C. "ignore them" and pvp with others.
but then the single entity would feel "left out" and show up uninvited.
Go play arena games then.... 
The SAP and it's loot.
The SAP container should only be accessed by those that own the outpost or those that successfully attack the SAP.
This is a very small change that starts in the direction for incentive to own an outpost and to attack an outpost.
If a single entity took over everything, I don't think there would be anything passive about it. There would be plenty of work to be done and on going.
Jita wrote:Gremrod wrote:Jita wrote:Theres a fundamental question here. Do the devs think that a dominant power should be able to own all of beta and all of gamma locking out stations and islands without any passive effort.
Do you mean without any effort? You saying "without any passive effort" seems wrong for your argument.
Passive effort is what I mean.
It is effort to defend and take a station. Its no effort to hold 20 stations because the timers passively stay at 100. If you were required to take your own saps to maintain stability then it would require passive effort to own.
From a gamma point of view there is some passive effort required to maintain a fully functional base. I believe that the ability to create a none passive base is too high and not balanced which is the point of the thread.
I am not sure you understand what "passive" means.
The term "passive effort" doesn't make since in what I think your trying to convey.
Jita wrote:The same mechanics for a mature game with a couple of thousand players will not work on one with 200. Another good example of this would be NPC sell and buy orders.
I am not sure I agree that NPC orders are the same as mechanics. But okay....
What else should be changed or removed due to low pop?
I use to think that the dev created chat channels needed to be removed with the exception of the HELP channel.
Jita wrote:Theres a fundamental question here. Do the devs think that a dominant power should be able to own all of beta and all of gamma locking out stations and islands without any passive effort.
Do you mean without any effort? You saying "without any passive effort" seems wrong for your argument.
Jita wrote:Locking stations is a good mechanic and needed for end game Beta control when the population of the game is such that its useful. When the population is low it just serves as a disincentive to living on Beta and reduces the amount of possible PvP.
I suggest suspending the station lock mechanic until the population returns to reasonable levels and it is once again needed as an extra element of Beta ownership.
=====================================================
Jita wrote:Locking stations is a good mechanic and needed for end game Beta control
Correct.
So because of low population there is no end game content?
Because of low population that means a game mechanic needs to change?
Jita wrote:Burial wrote:Gremrod wrote:Why now and not 1 year ago? This is what causes all the knee jerky etc.
We opened all our outposts.
and when you did it encouraged corps to go out and live there, made people come back for pvp and caused the beginning of the next great war.
You mean the 30 people that were playing the game for the last year?
Burial wrote:Gremrod wrote:Burial wrote:You can't just throw it on low population. PVP was scarce even directly after the Steam launch when subtracting all the Norhoop kills. I'm not saying that closed stations are the sole reasons for PVP being dead but having them open would be way better instigator than waiting for anyone to attack your over-sized alliance.
Why now and not 1 year ago? This is what causes all the knee jerky etc.
We opened all our outposts.
But now you want to take that choice away. Soon there will be no player/corp choices to make in this game.
Jita wrote:Gremrod wrote:Burial wrote:Betas and Gammas should not revolve around one entity being able to shut everyone else off from all of the content.
If a single entity holds all the real estate then smaller entities band together to take said real estate. If people want something they need to take it.
If that is the case Beta will always be owned by one entity unless that entity decides to either not care about other islands or rent / have pets.
Thats idiotic.
So you have never heard of war? One side wins? Or an alliance of people win together and claim the land as their own.
Posts found: 126 to 150 of 1,534
Pages Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 62 Next
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 3 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
Generated in 0.879 seconds (9% PHP - 91% DB) with 7 queries
