426 Reply by Stranger Danger

(189 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Lucian Cain wrote:

I find it hard to understand that people who have been pvping for a long time are arguing in favour a mechanic that lets people disengage at will, safely and with no tradeoffs.

Let me remind you, that same mechanic is what enables you to "warp" to the fight as you like to say.  So again warping to a fight to kill the smaller force but not away from a fight when the blob comes is broken.

Yes because the ability to safely TP away....

wait...wtf are you smoking? did you read what you wrote?

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

427 Reply by Stranger Danger

(94 replies, posted in General discussion)

Mitix wrote:
Shadowmine wrote:

Only allow comments from accounts involved in the engagement.

I want to encourage dialogue within the community, not stifle it. Checking the killboard after missing an engagement and being able to interact with your friends is integral to what I'm trying to provide.

+1

Go to forum: General discussion

428 Reply by Stranger Danger

(27 replies, posted in General discussion)

Shadowmine wrote:

Dev Zoom. big_smile

That wont bring your beacons back

Go to forum: General discussion

429 Reply by Stranger Danger

(151 replies, posted in General discussion)

Syndic wrote:

In all seriousness Zoom, you will need to address ore fields at some point. Instant ore respawns completely nullify any need to conquest and secure for more territory.

Meaning it doesn't matter if someone parks 2 people or 2000 people on 1 island. Ore is instant. Ore is infinite. I've had ~30 Riv mk2's pounding the cr*p out of New Virginia and Daoden for weeks now, their only downtime is finding the new field.

Syndic was drunk when he posted it.  Please disregard. 

Forgive him for he knows not what he posts.

Go to forum: General discussion

430 Reply by Stranger Danger

(189 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Dazamin wrote:
Stranger Danger wrote:
Shadowmine wrote:

Lol, that broken *** clock has been ticking for 2 years now... Someone should have that thing looked at..

You guys have stopped trying to pvp for a while now.

You seem uninterested in beta terminals.

You guys are not publically recruiting.


Seems RAD is more relevant right now than STC unfortunately.  We all would love for STC to grow a pair and start...defending their saps, attacking ours, coming with a fleet...growing...being a good enemy corporation that makes the game fun.

It seems to me you guys desperately want perpetuum as it was a few months ago...no players...no competition...endless beastmode kills to pad the kill mails.

post that youtube video of you guys taking down empty PHM/Chaos bases......that stuff...the pve...that's what you guys want...not the battles where you might lose.

the tick tock is over man, you guys appear to have given up now that you have a populated and competent enemy alliance to deal with rather than a small upstart and a dying game to deal with.

Problem is, with the game now free to all of us...there isn't not much chance of everyone else leaving so you can bask in the good ole days...all it takes is a ping to draw up people from other games ect.  Denying pvp isn't going to save you guys via everyone leaving this time....

Thanks for another *** post, just what this thread needed

why would they censor the word "accurate"?

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

431 Reply by Stranger Danger

(189 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Shadowmine wrote:
Rage Rex wrote:
Shadowmine wrote:

Last I checked STC was you guys's only opponent. sad

Tick tock

Lol, that broken *** clock has been ticking for 2 years now... Someone should have that thing looked at..

You guys have stopped trying to pvp for a while now.

You seem uninterested in beta terminals.

You guys are not publically recruiting.


Seems RAD is more relevant right now than STC unfortunately.  We all would love for STC to grow a pair and start...defending their saps, attacking ours, coming with a fleet...growing...being a good enemy corporation that makes the game fun.

It seems to me you guys desperately want perpetuum as it was a few months ago...no players...no competition...endless beastmode kills to pad the kill mails.

post that youtube video of you guys taking down empty PHM/Chaos bases......that stuff...the pve...that's what you guys want...not the battles where you might lose.

the tick tock is over man, you guys appear to have given up now that you have a populated and competent enemy alliance to deal with rather than a small upstart and a dying game to deal with.

Problem is, with the game now free to all of us...there isn't not much chance of everyone else leaving so you can bask in the good ole days...all it takes is a ping to draw up people from other games ect.  Denying pvp isn't going to save you guys via everyone leaving this time....

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

432 Reply by Stranger Danger

(189 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Cassius wrote:

Stranger you kind of make my point. I think the idea of no flagged tp is fine, but you are stating it means get a blob and deal with it. Why should everyone be forced to join a corp in order to have PvP? It definitely "hampers" small scale PvP, and one thing the "escape" tp did was allow smaller scale fleets to actively engage larger ones, with some hope of possibly getting away. Now even more so fleets will not risk engaging if it looks like certain losses.

All sides play this way.
And seriously, all sides used the armoured one as much as the other, we just don't bother to try and pretend just the other side does. Look on the PHM recruitment thread for pics of ppl jumping out via armoured.

TL;DR. The change narrows the range of PVP. That's the only thng I don't like. And should have included externals as well.

Well you better hope a lot more people join the game to make your beloved "jump a miner" pvp more of a common thing.  Just now youll have to make sure the locals don't notice you just ganked someone since it will be harder for you to get out asap after the lithus and miner die.

Personally I think this game needs more large scale corporate wars, as that adds so many layers of purpose and depth to the game...but then for that to happen a worthy second alliance/corp needs to rise up.

Also this "narrow range of pvp" is bs.  if you don't have intel, don't have allies, and don't have a purpose...which is what the random roams as a form of pvp is...there isn't much else....

Players create the content.  This will only narrow the range of pvp if you are too cowardly to risk those bots on the roam...just like youll now need to risk the fleet in a war vs scurrying off to beacons.  PVP isn't fun when the fights either a quick gank or everyone runs...which is precisely what was wrong with the game in the past.  People like blowing up robots...that doesn't happen when the second largest alliance runs away all the time even when numbers are even...leaving only random roam ganks...which imo is as narrow as it gets...and not very fun...which has been pvp in perpetuum for years now.

that ends now.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

433 Reply by Stranger Danger

(189 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

For those crying about this change....yeah its gonna ruin your attempts to preserve kill mail integrity via fleeing from a battle that might result in more than one or two losses....so now youll have to commit or be a pve corp...no more "well we will go in with our blob but if more than a few show up on their side well say they blobbed and run rather than potentially having a fight that might go either way"

However, dry those teary eyes my friend.  This has a silver lining to it all.

Now it will be easier to use tactics (more than running if near evenly matched).  If we get flagged on nova it will be a hell of a lot easier to attack another location, it will be easier to set traps, it will be harder for a large fleet to be one place and then TP to another quickly.

So yeah if an entire alliance mobilizes to attempt to catch and kill a smaller group...they are going to lose their mobility to TP quickly to another island....


Also you could easily negate this blob BS by actively recruiting... one side didn't get large without recruiting new people....its possible for you to counter the blob (and btw you should know damn well how many people we can field, and you should have enough friends and members to easily match those numbers...either you fail at diplomacy or you fail at recruiting and helping new players get pvp ready)

Games like this are built on large scale tactical battles....its about damn time we went back to having such encounters.  Armored beacon spam was wrecking what little shred of this we had left.

But again, this only solves some issues.  I expect many FC's to run and beacon out while the minions get flagged and die...seen it plenty before...


Edit: Zoom is it possible to patch in some balls?  Some people could use battle courage.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

434 Topic by Stranger Danger

(13 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Add a new item, call it robot cores.  When you kill an enemy his core will drop in the can, and can be looted.  Attached will be the players name and the bot from which it came.

Specimens will now require enemy robot cores rather than random crap.

Those not interested in SAPS can collect as trophies.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

435 Reply by Stranger Danger

(151 replies, posted in General discussion)

I miss beacon pits, it was fun and a great addition to gamma...

perhaps make some gamma specific beacons we can use and construct pits to use them...

Go to forum: General discussion

436 Reply by Stranger Danger

(26 replies, posted in Balancing)

Maximum wrote:

The community here is riveting, "NOO MAN YOUR IDEA SUCKS BGLAHHH!"

Its pretty much the dumbest idea ive seen on these forums, what did you expect?

You don't crap all over the vets in a game like this...especially with the population it currently has...

Go to forum: Balancing

437 Reply by Stranger Danger

(26 replies, posted in Balancing)

No.

You don't reset progress to create an advantage for you and your motives.

Give the developers a bit of credit here, it would suicide for a fledgling game to do this.

This game NEEDs its vet population now, it doesn't need to *** on them and watch them all leave.

IMO its an insult to the devs to even consider they might do something like this.

Go to forum: Balancing

438 Reply by Stranger Danger

(21 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

\o/ someone reads my posts

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

439 Topic by Stranger Danger

(1 replies, posted in Q & A)

Just curious what exactly this does.

If I link 3 accounts with my steam accounts does that mean I run the game from steam and three clients will open and ill be able to log on all my accounts?

Go to forum: Q & A

440 Reply by Stranger Danger

(34 replies, posted in General discussion)

Ioci wrote:
Gunner wrote:

"Someone launches a Distress beacon on the mag strip"

All I know is I had a dozen red dots show up on top of me, out of nowhere.
Point still remains the same.

Happened to me in a rivaler mk2.

forgot you have to pull your head out of your *** on alpha 2.

eventually you learn, adapt, or make a forum post claiming distress beacons did it and it was low impact gamers who are trying to kill the game...which sounds way less derpy than "my head was fully inside my *** and I died to roaming mobs"

Go to forum: General discussion

441 Reply by Stranger Danger

(151 replies, posted in General discussion)

Q:hey who wants to spend the next 5 hours camping patrol mobs and or static red mobs camping this ore spawn?

A: <crickets>

Q: (lies) come on is really rewarding and fun....

A: potential pvp everyone spark to beta

Farming mobs is fine, you need more pve content for combat bots...

roaming mobs have their place ofc...

but expecting 3-5 people to dedicate hours and hours of camping an ore field for miners...not so efficient...which is why it never happens.

Also: part of the big allure of a mining account is that I can be productive mining while I pvp or watching tv..or whatever...making mining a full focused 100% attention task isn't going to make it fun...hell that is stressful...

Go to forum: General discussion

442 Reply by Stranger Danger

(19 replies, posted in General discussion)

The concept of roaming mobs is ok, it has its place...however...

there needs to be good locations to drop a can and farm, available for every type of robot and skill level.

Also, hunting roaming mobs is walking intensive...as youll soon hear from the steamlings...this will be a major issue given that one of the games biggest issues is the amount of down time walking.

My point of this topic however, is that in a sandbox like this, I feel having an arbitrary system dictating what to farm via missions is lame.

Im not saying they shouldn't exist perhaps, but right now combat PVE is lacking, and I do miss the predictable mission locations, where I can drop a can go farm them and make some tokens on the side

I honestly feel that perhaps the alpha islands need more beefing up of PVE combat stuff...farming...not run around activating items and going on a goose chase....anything that will minimize the loathing players will have in knowing that they are about to walk for 20min before doing something fun.


Oh and I think mobs roaming a giant circle is meh...id like to see static robot factories with defenses and static mobs, then NPC resource supply depots, also guarded, and caravans going too and from...

Go to forum: General discussion

443 Topic by Stranger Danger

(11 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

A solution to ore spawns permanently located under mob spawns.

Since its too inefficient to farm those spawns while mining, which could take many hours and require a large group...

Why not make ore spawns just relocate every X days since its last respawn.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

444 Reply by Stranger Danger

(3 replies, posted in Bugs)

shift+click too stronk

Go to forum: Bugs

445 Reply by Stranger Danger

(69 replies, posted in Recruitment forum)

Shadowmine wrote:

LMAO! Great post Ville! We would have loved to have fought on that day, But sadly after giving you nearly TWO HOURS to rally your troops. We couldn't wait any longer for "The Biker Chicks" to engage.

But even still, in a last ditch effort to get you guys to engage our Mechs with your Heavy Mechs. We presented you with the most sought after of all prizes in perpetuum. Merkle. Our indomitable leader selflessly flags up, risking his own life in a vain attempt to provide enjoyable pvp content for his fleet...

But alas, not even a chance at killing the fabled beast could awaken you from your drunken slumbers. Instead of jumping your fleet in to engage, you sent in an unarmed lithus transport bot to sit on the teleport and write incredibly long forum posts about the pvp that never was.

Want to wait 2 hours in the hopes that your corp can scrounge up enough balls, I mean people to pvp? Want your CEO to spend his time drunk watching archer and making forum posts? Want a corporation that will not engage in pvp unless they have numerical AND bot size advantages? Then PHM may be the corp for you.

But if you want to spend your time roaming islands with a great group of guys? Want a corporation that spends its time out looking for fights, instead of talking about ones that didn't happen? Want corporation leadership that will risk it all to get fun pvp action for his corp members?

Join STC. Now recruiting.


Are you joking?  You guys have done nothing but avoid encounters since I came back.  kill boards verify this.  You know where we are, you know what saps to hit for a fight.

Question is....will you engage when we start taking your yellow islands?  Because so far...

Im curious where the STC pvp is occurring....you know the stuff you wrote about....because its sure as hell not in Perpetuum...just a quick glace at the kill mails will show who is pvping and who isn't....

Put your mechs where your mouth is...come to KKO say hi...


Your new players must be getting bored....

All you need to do is look at the kill boards and see what corps name seems to be missing...as one by one we take every beta...not because we want them...but because we want a fight...

Go to forum: Recruitment forum

446 Reply by Stranger Danger

(28 replies, posted in General discussion)

Tux wrote:
Burial wrote:
DEV Zoom wrote:

PC or items that you buy with PC might be tradeable in the future, we'll see.

Bad idea.

Agree..

PC and NIC should be completely separate.

If the items that are bought with PC are tradeable it then will do two things:

* Make it really easy to buy PC ~> convert to NIC ... instant billions = unstable economy

* Kill the cash shop because people wont buy the items with $$$ they will just wait until some rich guy does and ^^ pays NIC for these items which will lower the profitability for AC.

PC Items (I'm not referring to boosting or downgrades) should have an equivalent purchase (non trade able) mechanic in game like mission tokens but the token cost should be around 5x to 10x the cost of the item with PC. This will give incentive to players who dont have $$$ but have time to "PLAY" and grind missions. or buy tokens or what have you.

^^ But for any of this to work we need a wide variety of PC items ... which means more content design. ... I want a Fedora for my Ictus big_smile


Same concept as ICE.  Good way for billionaires to offload nic to poor people with jobs.

Go to forum: General discussion

447 Topic by Stranger Danger

(0 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Stick a spark teleport button on the top UI.

that is all.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

448 Reply by Stranger Danger

(4 replies, posted in General discussion)

was drunk when I posted this, disregard.

Go to forum: General discussion

449 Reply by Stranger Danger

(179 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Merkle wrote:

Stranger Danger I would agree with you if the player base was a bunch of absolute *** that have no idea where anyone plants noragis, or mines epi, or where other players live, or what routes they run, or what bots they drive, or what player is in what corp, or or or...

If I see a termis die on beta, I can guess what he is doing, if I see a Symb Die on better, I can guess what he is doing.

Look at the corp tag of who died, find there active OP, nora spotted and dead.  Wonder where your scarabs are?  Look at beta they are located on, find there alpha in point.  Scarabs found. 

Common guys this isn't rocket science, even PHM has figured it out.  ( I kid I Kid.)


This wont effect larger alliances and clans as much as it will the smaller start ups and lone wolf people who get their kicks out of creating clever traps ect.

Its more the point of keeping the metagaming in the game vs a website is all.  Hurts the small guys most, and those who value and enjoy the intel aspect of the game.

I don't think its a game breaker, but its just as stupid as posting your cords into general chat after a death.  Doesn't make sense and it will make intel less valuable.

I don't see any advantage to it other than Doeks website becoming a vital intel tool now.

Anyway don't see a point continuing the discussion really.  CIR is against so STC must support it ect...

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

450 Reply by Stranger Danger

(179 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Doek wrote:
Ville wrote:

Ultimately, I am trying not to be biased on this, but it is a little hard.

It does seem to always end up exactly like that, doesn't it?

You and Stranger make valid points, but weighing them against how I feel about the metagame and how I know how well those tools work for other games, I've got to say, we need to give this a try. To have killboards is to convey what Perpetuum is about, imo.

Besides, it's not like this actually does paint a target on your back on any activity on beta and gamma, you need to die for it to register, and that data is still as ambiguous as it comes.

Well you have to think about how it will be exploited and abused to understand the issue with it, as well as it shifting metagaming aspects outside of the game vs in game to really get what this will do.

I get your point though, its going to be great for your website.  Where its currently a fantastic tool to get "news" on what went down, it will become a vital intel tool...which imo...is just too much to remove that vital intel aspect out of the game and onto a website.

Just off hand I can think of this ruining traps, and exposing nora fields, not just to the people who committed the kill, but rather everyone in game.  So you get that kill, some harvester hitting nora, and well...you better GTFO now because the whole game just saw where a nora harvester died...

Yeah it probably wont have any effect on immediate pvp fleets, but it just takes too much out of the game and puts it onto a website.

Im trying to think of what benefits, other than website hits, this will add.  You think people will be more or less likely to avoid pvp hotspots if their exact locations are known?  Because people already know what two beta islands to go to for pvp...and well...seems the most pvp occurs with planned skirmishes since it seems to be getting avoided....so I don't think making specifics known will increase pvp.

My main concern is with diluting the value of good intel, having to contact people to see where that STC fleet was when someone died...and try to figure out stuff...rather than going to the internet and seeing exactly where it all went down.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests