1 Reply by Rodger Dodger

(55 replies, posted in Recruitment forum)

CoyoteTheClever wrote:

<<<<< (Insert Alt here) <<<<<

And Coyote is a sexy beast!

Probably true since he keeps being f**ked by a roadrunner tongue

Oh, does this count as a bump?

Go to forum: Recruitment forum

2 Reply by Rodger Dodger

(30 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Jelan wrote:
Arga wrote:
Neoxx wrote:

You obviously didnt hear about the intrusion event from last night.  Numbers is not the deciding factor in a fight.

Contributing factors in Infestation's favor to counter numbers -

T3-T4 equipment
EA enhanced skills

Granted, those alone are not enough, but if the other side had a majority of pilots (80 out of 100 instead of the 10 of 100 they probably had) with those additional factors + numbers the outcome may have been different.

What gibberish lol, yeah we had t3/4 equipment, we've worked f'ing hard to get it, that doesn't fix 2.5-1 odds.  It was great intel, great tactics, great team play and great leadership that won the day, fact

Ummm sorry but I got a confession to make...

I pretended to be a dying kid and put it in as a request to "Make a Wish Foundation" otherwise things would have been different.

They would have been different, OK?

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

3 Topic by Rodger Dodger

(4 replies, posted in Open discussion)

For all gamers going out this season, please understand some simple interesting encouraging statements.

I'd like us all to start the new year on a fresh foot, wipe the old slates clean and begin rebuilding old relationships that I feel have become tarnished or frayed like a well worn rug with one too many licks.

I've been playing for a short while and I'm saddened that already my corp, M2S, seems to have been the victims of a campaign by many to smear our name and this behaviour is also in direct violation of the forum rules we all abide by.

For example:

1. Do not create duplicate topics. Always use forum search before you create a new topic.

I have thus far counted over 20 topics posted on these forums by players all criticising M2S, reporting M2S for various grievances (clearly over cloying knee subtelties). Surely the constant creation of these hate topics in in direct violation of this rule? So why does it continue? I am not finger pointing here but asking we all start afresh and remember the rules.

Secondly

1. Posts containing obscene or vulgar phrases, pornography, extreme violence, references to illegal drugs or activities, real-life threats, insults aimed towards race/ethnicity/religion/ancestry/nationality/sexual preference of others, or otherwise objectionable content are forbidden. This also applies to links pointing to pages containing aforementioned content.

This links in to my previous statement but what has genuinly upset me is that if the target victim is M2S then screen shots of naughty words and vulgarity is allowed. There is no warning that screen shots contain such horrible language yet the original poster is not punished for the violation of this rule. There is a recent example where a corp member I look up to as a role model was the victim of this campaign and had his tongue severed from his own head.

But again I bear no ill will towards those who post these screen shots, I say imploringly are they thinking willingly about this situation?

To reiterate I am not pointing fingers, laying accusations or trying to get people into trouble but hoping to make people think that maybe M2S is not to blame and we should be left alone? Simply helping in this society, is that a bad thing on New Years Day?

Finally please bear in mind you're all clearly under new times supposedly, some might say due to the time of year, please please please give everyone another chance and let us all get along?

Thank you all and remember peace in symphony solidifies smile

Roger

Go to forum: Open discussion

4 Topic by Rodger Dodger

(9 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

As part of my ongoing quest to come up with ways to make beta islands more attractive I was listening to a conversation the other night about how alliances on other beta islands let anyone on to mine whatever whenever they like which prevents market cornering.

So I thought what if certain types of ore or plants could only be found on unique beta islands e.g. titan ore was only found on one beta island?

This would could be combined with introduction of new beta islands and generate land grabbing and fights over land that was actually worth more compaired to other islands, beta or alpha.

It would also generate actual alliance negotiations that go beyond "don't shoot our sequers and termis please" plus for those beta islands people don't want to visit then they have a choice, take a big risk for big profits or pay extortionate prices.

It might also make heavy industrial alliances that own beta outposts to rethink their attitude towards the current free for all approach they have if their unique claim on the market was under threat.

Thoughts?

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

5 Topic by Rodger Dodger

(2 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Was thinking about new player owned structures that could be introduced and whilst driving past the beach on an island I thought about why those vast expanses of water have not yet been exploited.

So how about a player owned desalination plant structure a corp could set up to extract minerals only found in the sea which could be essential for any new mech/module/ammo?

Thes structures can only be installed in islands by corps who own a station which then brings emphasis on beta islands and a bonus for owning stations.

These structurs would also be vulnerable to attack so create static targets that can be attacked and defended or even open to being raided so players can come along and instead of destroying the structure they could steal any minerals extracted but not yet picked up? Possibly in an overflow container so they couldnt get everything maybe

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

6 Reply by Rodger Dodger

(21 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

The issues such as how do combat players make nic and the quality of missions are seperate, niether of which should be resolved by the kernel rush and none of which have anything to do with any one corp.

Blaster wrote:

*cough* m2s *cough* so after you made bilions of NIC by doing this, you decide you made enough so other players cant catch you up? Good call! lol

Would it help if I said I had this view prior to joining M2S and my being a member of M2S has nothing to do with the realisation that there is a definate problem. If I was kicked from corp today I would still believe this is a problem because it does actually exist.

There are in fact several problems involved here all coming together to form a rather damaging issue to the economy but also feed into several other issues such as Beta incentive and pilots in mechs that exceed their skill set. All of these have the same root cause in common; NPC buy orders for kernels.

The factors include but not limited to:

  • disparity between buy orders

  • rate at which low level kernels can be farmed (npc respawn rate)

  • no risk high reward factor

  • NPCs having such a high impact on a supposedly player driven market

Some suggested ways forward include but not limited to:

  • Increase the size of kernels to take up more cargo space

  • Low end kernels e.g. from mechs only found on Alpha need their buy orders significantly reduced

  • missions need a slight tweak (nothing too much or problems return)

  • miscellaneous loot value needs to be upped (perhaps reduce cost to repair)

  • risk has to be part of any reward.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

7 Reply by Rodger Dodger

(21 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

And another point that confuses me... there is the apparent disdain towards missions as apparent by posts in this topic yet what are missions but going out and killing npcs... and what is farming kernels but going out and killing npcs.

So where is the difference? Why the worry that removing buy order for kernels will equal great difficulty in combat characters making nic?

Its also best to try to keep any solution as simple as possible then build on that rather than go for complex solutions that can cause any number of new problems.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

8 Reply by Rodger Dodger

(21 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Another reason to either get rid or significantly reduce NPC buy orders for kernels: rmt nic sellers (commonly known as gold selelrs).

With more and more money entering the system through this uncontrolled faucet prices will spiral upwards since the value of nic will lower. With high costs applied to everything new players and players who don't want to spend several hours farming npc spawn spots will be the target customer base for gold sellers. Not to mention the game is basically handing easy to obtain nic to the gold sellers to perpetuate their trade in relative ease.

This is a long term problem. Short term its all nice being millionairres but eventually, and this is evident in other MMOs where the currency is devalued due to the economy being flooded with currency, your millions will count for nothing and the market will become stagnant.

Jita makes a valid point as well, although the loot an npc drops in Alpha is largely ignored for two reasons first the cargo size so it is inefficient to carry it all back second the high costs associated to repairing damaged modules make reselling them unattractive.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

9 Reply by Rodger Dodger

(21 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Define combat char? If you mean a pvper then so far as Im aware players dont drop kernels, if you mean pve then mission hand ins and selling loot on the market, actually I expect a combat character to make nic the exact same way they make it now.

The only difference being the kernel price is set by players.

I think a good description of kernels is it is their "bounty" the reward a game tacks onto completiong a certain task, in this case killing an npc. But it is a nic faucet whose valve has been set to maximum, the npc buy orders are continuously pumping more and more nic into the economy.

When I think about it there is a second factor thats is contributing to this and that is the very fast respawn rate of npcs, especially at mission spots, which means an unlimited and rapid income of kernels and thus nic.

Fast respawn rate with low end npc mechs (say lvl 1 mission npcs) being insta locked, insta popped, insta respawn and insta sell kernel for gauranteed price thats an insta problem right there.

Taking into what others have replied with thus far I think a way forward would be to:

-Remove npc kernel buy orders.
-Kernels only drop from mission npcs if the player has the mission to kill them
-The mission hand in reward includes an additional bonus for returned kernels
-Players whose standings give access to lvl 2 missions do not benefit from lvl 1 kernel bonus rewards, likewise lvl 3 players cannot get lvl 2 kernel bonus.

This additional reward can be shown as a seperate payment such as "In addition to killing 7 serant filche deliver their robots kernels and youll get an extra 15k nic" which are taken out of the cargo hold when the mission is handed in. They must be in the robot hold for this to trigger allowing players can stockpile kernels in the storage hanger for use or sale on the market without accidentally handing them over on mission completion.

Kernels will still drop as per usual from random non mission npcs but their spawn times are not as frequent or as predictable as mission npcs. This enable advanced players to farm low end kernels still.

By doing this the income for players who choose to pve is still there but they are not in unfair competition with advanced players. It will still provide an nic income into the economoy but a more controlled one and encourages players to start spreading out across the world map instead of sitting on the same mission spawn spot.

It can also make beta islands more attractive by having mission on beta island stations trigger kernel drops that can only be obtained from picking up and running missions on beta islands.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

10 Topic by Rodger Dodger

(21 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Pretty simple really, remove the NPC buy orders for kernels and allow players dictate the market as opposed to having artificial set prices.

I appreciate that players need an income however the NPC buy orders are heavily taken advantage off and the ease at which nic can be earned by players simply farming lvl 1 missions spots is game breaking e.g. you get players earning noc faster than their character can develop resulting in players buying and jumping into expensive mechs far beyond their skills can manage. Slow down the rate of easy nic will help manage this learning curve.

Also new players have to contend with players possessing advanced mechs and skills because the lvl 1 spots are more lucrative. Example of this are those who boast earnings based on farming mission spots below their actual "level".

Removing NPC buy orders will encourage older players to progress to higher tier missions and eventually to beta island missions if they want to keep progressing. With the majority of ore on alpha isands and easy nic fonts also on alpha islands why go beta?

Another benefit of removing NPC kernel buy orders means a more realistic free market will evolve and not shackled by this money font. Kernel price may plummet or it may drop but that will be decided by the player base which is far more engaging than some faceless npc with unlimited pockets.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests