1 Reply by Lokked

(4 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Bounty Missions:

Renamed Assassination Mission:

Offered by NPC. NIC payout dependant on total EP of Target.
Target randomly selected by NPC. You are shown a general area of where Target is at the time of mission accept.
Only 1 Assassination Mission will be offered at a time, per individual. Can be Accepted as a squad to distribute bounty.
Upon success, System Wide (Yellow Alert text, like when you leave safe area) is displayed depicting unlucky assassination victim (for lols).
24h Time to complete.
Target is attackable in Alpha by the Individual/Squad that accepted the Assassination Mission.
Target drops T4 LWF (ok maybe not this).

Lokked

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

2 Reply by Lokked

(21 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

This needs a more precise look than just saying "Remove them".

Where is NIC introduced into the game, and who benefits most?
NPC Infinite Buy Orders - Combat
Assignments - All
Insurance (to some extent) - All/Combat

Where is NIC removed from the game, and who does this affect most?
Insurance - All/Combat
Extension Installations - All
Prototyping - Industry
REing - Industry
Repairing - Industry/Combat
Intrusion Event Applications - Corp CEOs

Industry suffers the largest NIC loss, and gains most of their NIC from player sales.
Combat has the greatest chance to introduce more currency into PO, which they would spend on purchases from Industry (for the most part) and other Combats (who loot to sell).

Solution ideas:
More bot destructions - Improve AI to make PvE a little tougher and less exploitable. AI should get equivalent locking/targeting upgrades as what players are capable of. Ways of encouraging PvP should be more encouraged.
Reduce NPC buy orders to 1/8 what they are now.
Reduce PvP gear drop % to 30% and have players drop NIC, not from their personal balance, but created.
Bounties on Players, created/paid via NPC, available to opposing corps. At the time of accepting, a general area of where the target can be found is given. Assassination Assignments. This would also encourage players to enter into Corps.
Remove the possibility of creating Alts. 1 Char per account.

Actually, I'm adding the bounty thing to it's own thread. I think this would be fun.

Lokked

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

3 Reply by Lokked

(26 replies, posted in Balancing)

I agree with the portion about Relations playing a larger role and degrading over time. That's an excellent suggestion!

However, the majority of the OP's trouble is in using multiple accounts.

You're right. With similar time investments, the guy with one more account than you is going to be more effective at something. This happens to be your definition of "Unfair".

There are a lot of definitions of "Unfair". At some point soon in your life you see things from a larger perspective and you start to realize that so many of these "Unfair"nesses contradict each other that you'll wonder why you ever bothered considering them at all.

Ah NLP, I love thee.

Go to forum: Balancing

4 Reply by Lokked

(5 replies, posted in Balancing)

I read in depth a few areas and skimmed the rest.

Of the parts I read, I definitely agree that mining and also refining/recycling should be tiered in a way to make it less appealing to Combat chars (who try to remain purely combat) to invest in.

With only a 1 point investment:
Not everyone should be able to mine.
Not everyone should be able to refine.
Not everyone should be able to recycle.

Refining is a HUGE part of industry, and you can accomplish it with 0 or 1 point in a single extension.

It does seem like Mining and Production was just sort of thrown in.

Honestly, can you imagine having only a single account and going the direction of Mining/Production? How long would you last? How hard would it be to renew your account?

Lokked

Go to forum: Balancing

5 Reply by Lokked

(26 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

+1. 4 Accounts = huge pain in the *** setting Corp as Green.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

6 Reply by Lokked

(4 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)

Upon posting my initial, I went and turned VSYNC On, on all my clients.

Immediately, response was fluid and everything was fine. As I played things degraded, but not to the point of where I was before with VSYNC Off.

Each time things start getting bad in the Terminals, I can turn VSYNC Off and then On again, on each client, and it improves the situation for another 30-40mins.

DEVs, I hope this example and explanation can help point you in the right direction to optimizing this, when you begin that process!

Lokked

Go to forum: Resolved bugs and features

7 Topic by Lokked

(4 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)

Hello,

The game eventually takes up an exhorbitant amount of memory (for a game of this complexity).

I'm leaning away from the cause being a memory leak, but not ruling it out.

Memory
When I first start Perpetuum, a single instance uses about 350MB memory, when loaded from the field. Upon entering a Terminal directly from this field, the usage shoots up to ~850MB.

When returning to the field, the memory usage stays at about ~850MB.

As I travel to more fields & Terminals, the memory usage slowly increases.

The highest I've seen it, after a couple hours play, is 1.3GB. While this isn't crippling, memory and collection of unused objects could be optimized.

CPU
As with Memory, CPU Usage seems to increase as different areas are accessed. The main culprit for CPU attention is the Terminal Screen. When logging in for the first time to a Terminal, the UI is smooth, mouse is smooth, everything is responsive.

Visit some fields, maybe another Terminal, and CPU Usage while in Terminals is nearly doubled as compared to in the Field.

Which of these is the cause for the slowdown in Terminals on some PCs, I have no idea. I'll try and provide some screenshots of my Performance Monitor.

Lokked

Go to forum: Resolved bugs and features

8 Reply by Lokked

(3 replies, posted in Balancing)

I agree that for PvP the disparity between RPS counters is fairly significant, however, for PvE I wouldn't make it any easier to kill NPC bots.

It's already easy enough to solo most any NPC bots in this game, even if they are grouped up.

I farm 4th and 5th Star Nuimqul faction Magnetic assault class bots with my Waspish without taking a hit, and Nuimqul bots are the bane of Pelistal bots.

If they reduce the effectiveness of the RPS relation, they better increase NPC AI.

Go to forum: Balancing

9 Reply by Lokked

(9 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

In quite a few MMOs I've seen this information public, such as who deposited/withdrew something from a group public storage (ie. guild bank).

Some corps in Perpetuum operate closer to an actual corp, where the members are working together and pooling resources for the governing body of the corp to use in its members' best interests. In these cases transparency would be useful.

Accountability: Seriously? If at least that part's not apparent to you, why did you even bother posting?

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

10 Reply by Lokked

(9 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

GLiMPSE wrote:

Would they also be able to look at every corp transaction?

Yes.

"Financial activity" is a broad enough concept to cover this and the idea of being transparent should be an option.

Lokked

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

11 Topic by Lokked

(9 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Hello,

I would like an option to have Corporate financial activity viewable by members of the corp without giving them access to remove money/items, or have any other special priveledges.

This allows a Corp to be more transparent to its members.

Lokked

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests