51 Reply by Calio

(22 replies, posted in Balancing)

Arga wrote:

Your still working off the assumption that 25% ct's are worthless. Anni just said he's willing to pay 100k each for them, and I pointed out that they can be used for single bot creation.

Its difficult to agree to disagree, and move on to talking about solutions, when we disagree on the existance of a problem to solve.

He's looking for a single one and if he posted on the trade channel this weekend he'd probably have 5 offered to him. Like I said even if there are 9 others like him out there, there are more 25's in game than the max number of players logged in during prime time. The market isn't just flooded with them, it's tsunamied (if that's a real word).  There is absolutely no way to absorb them all with the current game mechanics.

Go to forum: Balancing

52 Reply by Calio

(22 replies, posted in Balancing)

Annihilator wrote:

recycling CTs sound stupid...  what do you get out of it? a bunch of bits and bytes?

Bits and bytes are info. Info is a product of research and generally useful.

In any case, even if I grant that MK2 industrials are useful enough to build & buy (let's just leave at that we agree to disagree), as I said at the outset, that is the minor problem.  The big problem is the 25% MK2 CTs, whose only use right now is as storage wallpaper.

As the game is currently structured, the ONLY items besides MK2 CTs that cannot be reduced to something at least minimally useful (and therefore at least minimally valuable) are kernels, MK2 cpus, and decoders (and level 1-3 decoders suffer from the same problem as 25s - huge oversupply).  Kernels and cpus have found supply-demand equilibrium points and have managed to retain some value (slowly rising for kernels and slowly falling to steady for cpus), so they don't need floors under their values. The 25s are a disaster area, they need something that puts a floor under their value by allowing them to be removed from the game in exchange for something else which has at least some minimal value.  You want to debate what that mechanism should be, fine. I think it would be a useful discussion. I have my preferences, but I'm ultimately agnostic with respect to what the solution should be. I just think a solution is sorely needed.

Go to forum: Balancing

53 Reply by Calio

(22 replies, posted in Balancing)

Hugh Ruka wrote:

what market do you speak about ? certainly not the ingame market window since I cannot find CTs there. forums don't count as a market for many people.

The trade channel, which is where all CTs are currently offered/bought.

Go to forum: Balancing

54 Reply by Calio

(8 replies, posted in General discussion)

Arga wrote:

I'm saving mine simply because I don't have recyc 10 yet, and 30-50K more ore from them at this point doesn't really mean much.

I agree. Smart move IMHO. I'm doing the same. Just stockpiling them. They require no maintenance and I can recycle them any time.

Go to forum: General discussion

55 Reply by Calio

(22 replies, posted in Balancing)

Arga wrote:

I disagree with the premise that 25% CT's are worthless, they have no value for mass production, but they are entirely feasible for upgrading a single unit.

What your asking for is a way to get around paying 30M NIC from someone that has found a 75% CT. These are not so rare that you can't get them.

I have plenty of 50's & 75's CTs, thank you very much, both combat and industrial, and the ones I don't find, I buy cheap enough.  Edit: and BTW I resent that second statement.

My purpose was not to avoid paying for a 75 (though anyone who pays 30 for anything but a heavy combat mech CT is a fool - It'll degrade to 50 before they get their 30 back - better just find/buy a 50). I just don't have the heart to destroy my 25's and I think it's just wrong that the worst and most common artifact find (few fragments and a low level decoder) is worth more than a relatively rare CT. 

Something is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. Are you paying 30 mil for 75s? If so, I got some to sell you gladly! And if you're not willing to pay for something, your statement of its worth has no credibility.

And yes, there are 10 people out there who would buy a 25 to upgrade their bot.  In fact, I got lucky when all CTs were still scare and managed to sell one.  But there are hundreds of 25s sitting in people's storage now (I have 14 myself and I only do artifacts casually). The market is beyond flooded with 25s. They are essentially worthless.

My own personal prefence is to make them usable for research, not combinable, though usefull for repairing a degraded CT as someone suggested sounds OK too.

As for how great the MK2 industrials are, sure they are better than regular ones, and certainly worth it if you're getting it from your corp. I personally don't intend to do a run of any of them because I don't want to tie up a few K of briochit in bots that take me 2 months to sell off if I'm lucky (and those are the lights and assault industrials for which many people already have the EP/skills and which at least sell slowly.)

Go to forum: Balancing

56 Topic by Calio

(22 replies, posted in Balancing)

What follows is based on my firm belief that no rare finds/drops in an mmo should be completely worthless.  They can be worth very little (bad luck on the loot table roll), but not worthless.  If you disagree with that, you will disagree with everything else that follows.

As things stand there are two fundamental problems with the MK2 CTs, one big one and another small one.

The first and biggest is that 25% CTs are completely worthless.  Once we got past the initial rarity of CTs in the first few weeks, every artifact hunter had a dozen+ in storage and many just destroy them now on getting them (that's often the advice in the trade channel to a noob who just got their first one).  Two things contribute to this situation. 1) they are too expensive to build. 2) there are more than enough 50% and 75% CTs out there (relative to the number of manufacturers actually building MK2s) that there is no need for almost anyone to actually build off them.

I'm not suggesting that the drop rate be reduced (nerfing loot drops is never a good thing) or that CTs be upgraded (25->50, 50->75, 75-90, or just 25s ->50's) as I've seen a few people suggest.  That's no sloution as it would flood the 50% market more (it's already flooded) and make 50's worthless.  Best I can think of is to either make them researchable for manufacturing info (at more than a normal kernel and less than an observer kernel) or allow them to be combinable (e.g., perhaps 3 25's to make 1 50).  This would put a floor under the 25's (the value of the research).  It doesn't have to be a lot, but at least its something, so that hairy run into a bunch of NPCs to get at the Sci artifact at least got you something for the trouble.

The second and smaller problem is that industrial MK2 CTs (even 75s) are worth very little.  The reason here is that the bonus on almost all MK2 industrials isn't worth the added cost to build it.  Yes, there are some people who say that they are worth it (look at the threads from right after the patch that introduced them). But the market never lies! These things just don't sell! In other words, people who are spending their own nic (as opposed to their corps) don't think they're worth the cost.  The best way to fix this is tweak the bonuses (e.g., more cargo space maybe for hauler, higher mining/harvesting bonus (maybe 2% per level) for miners & harvesters.

I'm sure others can  come up with other options. I just think both these things need a fix.

Go to forum: Balancing

57 Topic by Calio

(8 replies, posted in General discussion)

I find this bit of information in the patch notes very intriguing:

"New: Mining and harvesting cycles can now occasionally yield rare materials. These are more dense isotopes or more pure variants of the standard raw materials, and can be recycled to their standard counterparts. There is also a chance that mining one type of mineral will yield a variant of another loosely related mineral. Currently rare materials have no other purpose than spicing up mining and saving some cargo space."

Note the first word in the last sentence: "Currently."

The implication is that they will have other uses down the road as the devs continue to develop manufacturing. T5 mods? MK3 bots? special prototypes? new modules entirely?

For manufacturers these implications are great news. I can see this becoming the best crafting system since SWG.

For PvP/PvE combat people, better equipement

For miners, this adds to the fun (this adds a nice loot drop table to mining).

The anticipation is killing me.

Go to forum: General discussion

58 Reply by Calio

(165 replies, posted in General discussion)

Smokeyii wrote:

So maybe I'm a little late coming to this realization, but I've got mixed feelings about this change, as I assume that the removal of epriton componets means that they'll also be removed from recycling.


Exactly! Be careful what you wish for. You may get it. 

More importantly, this does absolutely nothing for new crafters. T1 stuff drops as loot. There is no cost to the player selling loot and so they always drive prices below manufacturing cost for any module that drops often. That's why no one manufactures most T1 stuff. You can't make a profit on it.  But, now, once you get the kernels up to T2, you have a little espitium from recycling to manufacture with.

Soon, that will be no more. Then you have to pay the big Beta corps for all (as opposed to some/most) the epriton, which will drive prices for T2+ even higher.

No one benefits from this except the big Beta corps.

I really wish the devs would spend a little more time thinking through the ramifications of their plans.

Go to forum: General discussion

59 Reply by Calio

(41 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

DEV Calvin wrote:

We are looking into the container mechanics as we completely agree, teamplay is a good thing, but should not be forced onto everyone. So far the ideas that came up:

- introducing tractor beams and reducing the container activation range to what it was
- being able to deploy longer term containers (lots of exploits and abuses involved though)

Please share your thoughts on these.

Unless the tractor beam (presumably a fitting) allows you to actually drag the can back to the station, I don't see the advantage of this.

A counter to one potential problem with longer term cans would be to make them very expensive and reusable (making 'littering' very costly), with security codes that expire after some reasonable length of time (like npc loot cans but longer), so that it is possible to 'clean up' after another player (and so get a free expensive can) who is purposefully dumping cans on the landscape for malicious reasons.

Go to forum: Feature discussion and requests

60 Reply by Calio

(2 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)

Have you tried temporarily disabling your anti-virus? Mine was causing the DL to lock up at consistent points (e.g., 38.1 mb). Once I disabled it, everything went smoothly.

Go to forum: Resolved bugs and features

61 Topic by Calio

(1 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)

a floating rock on landscape @ Doaden 560, 1368 (SW of Asintec)

edit: correction: 561.00 1369.00

Go to forum: Resolved bugs and features

62 Reply by Calio

(386 replies, posted in News and information)

761

Go to forum: News and information

63 Reply by Calio

(10 replies, posted in General discussion)

Nice post. It brings back memories.  I'm gonna give away my age, but I still remember when Blitzkrieg II first came out (and I played it then).  Only it wasn't the garage, it was the dining room table and it wasn't the dog messing things up the counters, it was my mother.

But, you're quite right about the hobby point. I played EVE for 5 years from launch and hope to be with this one for as long.

Go to forum: General discussion

64 Reply by Calio

(23 replies, posted in Balancing)

@Dev Zoom

I understand your point, but almost anyone able to take on an infestation 2/3 mech is able to take on one of the solo T1 mechs that are permanent spawns on the alpha islands (and which drop the same loot as the infestation mechs.  So, the people you appear to be trying to appeal to are a small minority of the game population.  But, for the majority of the game population, you run into a problem that is a combination of economics, probabilities, and psychology.  Let me phrase the problem in a different way.

Players have a finite amount of time in which to play and advance their characters' goals and tend to pick relatively efficient ways to spend their limited amount of time.  The hard-core players will calaculate it down to how many NIC/hour various activities yield, but even the casual players get a general sense over time of whether what they are doing is worth the time and effort they spend doing it.  If their sense is that it doesn't pay, they eventually stop doing it.

Let's say a hypothetical player takes a hypothetical mission to kill 10 bots or decides to go farm one of the solo mech spawns.  The drop rate for kernels is 50% and let's say (for the sake of the example) that the chance of the npc dropping a T2 mod is 5%.  They spend 10 minutes traveling to the spawn, some length of time (say 20minutes) fighting NPCs and 10 minutes returning to base.  They've spent 40 minutes on the activity.  The chance of a kernel dropping is random, but because they had to kill 10 bots, they almost certainly got SOME kernels for their effort.   If they repeat the activity several times, the avergae drop rate for kernels per trip will approach 5 .  If they repeat the activity a few times they may even get lucky and get a T2 mod to drop.  Either way, they have something to show for their effort and at worst (only a few kernels) are satisfied that what they did was productive despite their bad luck  and at best (lots of kernels and/or maybe a T2 mod) are ecstatic about their good luck.

On the other hand, our hypothetical player hears in general or corp chat that an infestation mech has been spotted.  They interrupt what they were doing - e.g., drive their sequer/waspish/whatever back to base (say 5 minutes), travel to the spot (10 minutes), fight the mech (5 minutes), and then have to travel back in order to resume what they were doing originally (another 10-15 min).  The chance of a kernel dropping is 50% again, but there is only 1 'coin toss' possible.  The odds are 50% that they have nothing to show for their half hour besides a few k worth of plasma and if so, are pissed off that they just completely wasted a bunch of time.  After 1-2 bad rolls, the next time they hear about a mech being spotted they just continue doing what they were doing because the activity hasn't paid off for them in the past.

My point is that some kind of reasonably consistent pay off has to be re-established for these spawns or they will continue to be ignored by the majority of the player base.  If you think that's OK, it's not my place to tell you how to structure your game.  I just think it's a shame that something you guys worked hard to produce is not being used by most players for lack of interest, where that interest once existed, but no longer does.

@Arga: You just illustrated my point very well.  You will go after them if it's convenient, but won't interrupt something else to hunt them down.  If the drop rate were 100% then you might very well interrupt what you were doing to kill them. I certainly would. After all, the certainty of getting a 500k drop makes the interruption worthwhile because most other actiivities are less productive.  The mech then becomes a disireable target.  It isn't any longer as things stand now

The spawn was due east of TM apha terminal near the coast (just north of the T3 light Pelistal bots that are part of a lev 3 destroy and recover mission you get in TM alpha and west of the permanent solo blue mech spawn which was being farmed at the time)

Go to forum: Balancing

65 Reply by Calio

(23 replies, posted in Balancing)

DEV Zoom wrote:

Calio:
According to your arguments the only thing infestation NPCs (and thus ALL normal NPCs) are worth killing for, are kernels. Is this really the case? Have we arrived at the point where modules and NIC are completely worthless?

Thanks for replying, but you misunderstand the problem. 

Normal NPCs respawn. If you take a mission you have to kill some number greater than 1 of them (usually 5-16). If you just want to farm you can kill as many as you want.  In that relatively large number of kills, you will get a some number of kernels (~half the number of kills), some loot, plasma, etc. making it worth the time it takes to make the trip to the spawn point.

Roamers and infestation NPC's do NOT respawn.  A typical roamer convoy will have 1 mech, a few bronze sequers, and a few T3 light combat bots (these last are the same type as any normal T3 alpha spawn).  A typical infestation spawn is 1 mech (lev 2) with 1 light bot (lev 3).  Once they're dead, it's all over.  It's just not worth the investment of time to make the trip to intercept them on the 50% chance of getting just a single mech kernel (and maybe 1-2 bronze kernels and a little of the same basic loot that you can get from any normal npc spawn in the case or roamers).  In a normal npc spawn you can fill your hold with loot and/or plasma as long as you made the trip, making the trip worthwhile whether or not you get lucky on the kernel drops.  Not so on the Infestation NPCs and (to a slightly lesser extent) the roamers.  Plasma doesn't enter into the equation at all. You can get it anywhere, so again, one is better off working a normal npc spawn (which is also usually more convenient to get to than the infestation/roamer).

It's all about the return on time invested in game play.  My point is that if one wants mech kernels, it is now much more efficient to farm a normal spawn or do combat missions, selling the lower level kernels and then buying the mech kernel, than it is spending 15 minutes traveling to MAYBE get 1 mech kernel. Same for the bronze assault kernels. 

My point is that infestation spawns and roamers take longer to get to than normal spawns and (because they are 1-time spawns) the possible reward for making the trip is lower.  So, why bother with them.  Yes, eventually someone will come along and kill them, but you don't see people racing to be the first to get there any more.  You don't even see people slowly walking over to them nowadays.

I remember spawning an infestation 2 mech last week and then coming back the next day in search of an observer spawn and having to finally kill it then (just because it was in my way and I didn't want to fight it and the observer at the same time).  This was despite the fact that the mech was visible in landmarks for over 1000 meters and there were people farming npc spawns and mining in the general area when I first spawned the NPC.

Go to forum: Balancing

66 Reply by Calio

(23 replies, posted in Balancing)

I didn't make a point of saying infestation PNC's "need" to drop better loot. I made a point of saying there needs to be a reason for people to invest the time and effort to kill them (and roamers).  That reason can be better than average loot drops, better than average kernel drops, or anything else the devs can dream up. I'm agnostic on what the solution is. I just mentioned some possibilities that came immediately to mind. I am not wedded to any of them.

P.S. Leave it to the random number gods to prove me wrong as soon as i open my mouth (my last post) yesterday.  A T2 infestation cache just dropped a T3- module for me for the first time instead of the usual T0 and T1 versions.  But that's the cache, not the mob, and it doesn't make the guarding mob any more worth killing.

In fact, I grabbed the cache and ran, leaving the mech standing there. He was still there over an hour later when I next passed through the area, meaning that all the other people who had seen him hadn't gone to the trouble of taking their non combat and low level combat bots back to their bases to get their mechs to take the npc out. It just isn't worth the 10-15 minutes to go get their mech on the 50% chance they'll get a kernel and even smaller chance of getting a decent loot drop.

The Devs have invested time and resources in creating these aspects (infestation NPC's and roamers) of the game and since the kernel drop rate was reduced they are being ignored by way too many people.  In in essence this is a waste of the time and resources the devs invested in creating them. That's a shame. PO is a bootstrap operation and they don't have  that many resources that they can afford to waste a bunch by letting an already-existing aspect of the game atrophy away.

Go to forum: Balancing

67 Reply by Calio

(23 replies, posted in Balancing)

Arga wrote:

Infestations are part of caches to defend the cache that could hold -T3 items, not as additional loot.

Grand observers still drop kernels 100% of the time, as well as having a nice cache. This is acceptable because GO's do not have a fixed spawn point so can't be farmed.

To compensate for the kernel removal, the game needs to increase or add another extension to improve the amount learned per kernel. Increasing the drop rate is not required, and would simply make NPC farming much too profitable per hour since the NIC 'bounty' was added.

Yes, Infestation NPCs defend the cache, but they are not worth killing and they once were. That is my point. 

Infestation caches have no more a fixed spawn point than GOs do. And the caches on both types suck consistently. I have never (to the best of my recollection) ever gotten a T-3 mod from an infestation cache (always from salvage chaches)  Some missles, ammo, fragments and that's about it.  The loot from a GO spawn is the T2 mods the GO always drops, along with the kernel, not the cache, which is the same basic crap as an infestation cache.  The infestations drop no such T2 loot. You don't want them to drop kernels, then make them have a DECENT chance  (not the usual 1:100) chance of dropping good mods.

I never suggested that the drop rate for NPC kernels be increased! I don't know where you got that from at all.  I suggested that the drop rate on kernels for infestations and roamers be increased to make them worth actually killing. That's all.

Go to forum: Balancing

68 Reply by Calio

(23 replies, posted in Balancing)

GLiMPSE wrote:

You can spawn these roaming spawns with artifiact scanning now...so it's fine..

However they can be generated, they are NOT worth generating or killing since the kernel changes. That's my point.

Go to forum: Balancing

69 Topic by Calio

(23 replies, posted in Balancing)

An MMORPG is an extremely complicated integrated system and changes to one aspect of the system will have a ripple effect through other parts of the system, many of which will be unforseen.

The devs are clearly trying mightily to add PvE content to the game in the realization that it will help greatly in retaining players, reducing the "churn" rate and start the sub rate climbing.  The coming new islands aside, the addition of roamers and then exploration a while back were fun steps in that direction.  Then came the kernel changes (reduced to 50% average drop rate). The changes were beneficial - on balance, but...

Since then, exploration for salvage, science, and observers has remained fun, but infestations are now a borderline waste of time and roamers are now a complete waste of time. 

When the kernel drop rate was 100% roamers were worth tracking down and killing because they represented one of the few chances on alpha islands to get mech kernels and bronze assault kernels.  If you spotted a convoy (or were told of one), and took the time to change bots and track it down, you always got a reward  for the effort: the kernels.  Now, it's no longer worth the effort.  They drop lousy loot and if you're lucky, you'll get 3-4 kernels from the entire convoy (half of which are from T3 lights/assaults, and can be gotten anywhere).  I don't know how many convoys I've seen since the kernel changes that have been completely ignored by players. 

The same with infestations.  I personally now only use my combat bot for observers and use a fast small bot for all other explorations. For infestations I spawn them, grab the loot and run. 95% of the time I never go back, because the few times I have I got crap from the drops most of the time. I only go back now if the infestation is lev 2 or 3 and near enough to a teleport or outpost to endanger someone zoning in.  What's more, many of the lev 2+ infestations I've spawned could be spotted from trafficed areas and they were still there hours later, so I'm not the only one ignoring them.

In sum, the kernel changes made it no longer worth while to go through the bother of hunting down roamers or infestation spawns.  The loot drops are normal and represent stuff that drops from every other normal (and easier to get to) npc spawn and the kernel drops are not reliable enough to make the time and effort to kill the associated mech (50% of 1 = zero 50% of the time) worthwhile.

So, by making the kernel changes (which were worthwhile), the devs accidentally gutted 2 other aspects of the game.  These are special (non-repeating spawns). It should be possible to code them for 100% kernel drops (like observers), a better chance of T2 loot drops, or anything else that will make the travel time and effort to kill them worthhwhile again.  It's a shame that a significant chunk of their earlier effortss has been effectively harmed by their later efforts.

Go to forum: Balancing

70 Reply by Calio

(38 replies, posted in General discussion)

Arga wrote:

It would also be interesting to know under what circumstances the travel is frustrating to players.

I run a lot of transport missions, x Time = x NIC. Yes, it is boring and frustrating, but that is what I'm getting paid for. If it was faster and easier, the reward would be lower.

Here are the other travel circumstance;

1) Moving supplies from/to alpha/beta
2) Moving an insured bot between islands
3) Driving to/from a remote farm point
4) Driving to/from a remote mining spot
5) Mission runs
6) PVP roaming
7) Moving Squads before/during Intrusions

Any change to transportation has to take into account how it effects each of those uses.

I agree with your (and others') general point that travel is integral to game play in PO, and messing with it risks changing important game dynamics, but there are elements of travel that make zero sense, are frustrating (and contribute to players leaving) and don't contribute to game play at all.

For example:

1) Why does/do the alpha outpost terminals require a 3-4k meter run to get to?  The drones pose no challenge to (and can barely scratch) a three day old player in an arkhe 2.  They just eat time for no good purpose.  Why should it take longer to go from ICS alpha -> Galoli Belli tele -> Radholme west tele -> Radholme outpost than it takes to go overland from ICS alpha to Radholme outpost

2) Why are outpost entrance points offset inside the entry tunnels (why have entry tunnels at all)?  Why, even if you can line up to an entry tunnel and hit auto run, do you not go straight in, but get directed and then hung to one side or the other, if you don't first get blocked by aa stanchion that happens to be directly in fron of the entry tunnel.  This is just bad design.

3) Why are the causeways between the alpha terminals and alpha island teles not lined up?  Sheeesh! Can't even hit autorun for the 1k meters and look away without getting hung up on the causeway edges.

I could go on, but hopefully you get the point.  There are many aspects of travel that contribute nothing at all to game play and just add to the frustration factor by not even making it possible to use the autorun on routine trips.

Go to forum: General discussion

71 Reply by Calio

(2 replies, posted in General discussion)

Many thanks for the clarification Alexander.

Go to forum: General discussion

72 Topic by Calio

(2 replies, posted in General discussion)

I have a couple of questions:

1a) Say I'm researching T2 light kernels from a specific faction and get some T3 lights from the same faction. If I use them, will they add to the T2 research before (or while also) starting T3? If so, will they add to T2 at a higher rate?

1b) If I then get some T2 assaults and use them will they add to the research from T2 lights (both yield small mods) or start to research different items?

In other (more general) words, I'm asking what, if any, redundancy there is in kernel research.  There is some. I've started a new type of kernel in the past and with the first use I've added to existing research.  e.g.: first use of a new type gets me 20 (+x) where x <20

2) If there are 5 tiers of bots/kernels and 5 tiers of tech to research, what do observer kernels yield?

Thanks

Go to forum: General discussion

73 Reply by Calio

(117 replies, posted in General discussion)

In terms of specific suggestions, the most pressing at this stage of the game's development is to make missions more dynamically varied.  Having the same corp give the exact same 3 missions from the exact same terminals is boring.  Vary them.  But, variety requires more types (and more spawns), and having a bunch of of new spawns all over the landscape will make travel difficult.  Go to instanced spawns (lots of suggestions for how to do this posted already). I would suggest putting entrances to the various eye candy buildings littering the landscape and make them the locale for the missions (clean out building X that has been overrun by...).  This is something you are going to have to confront sooner or later.  That outdoor spawn of 6 npc's is OK for the 1k people logged on at any one time nowadays (and 2 people doing the same mission).  But what will happen if the game grows (as you no doubt hope and pray) and you have 5k+ logged on and 7+ players all trying to kill the same 6 npc's.?

In terms of a more general suggestion, let me refer to EVE (the game Perpetuum is obviously modeled after).  The key to a great sandbox game is for there to be lots to do and good reasons to do all of it.  In EVE, you have many different things to do and all can be done anywhere by anyone if they so choose (and are willing to risk the danger).  Any player can venture in unsecured or 0.0 space and have a reasonable chance of being succesful even if the don't belong to the controlling Corp.  this is because of gate to gate jumps, cloaking, and a variety of others skills and player techniques that balance out the risk and reward (it's risky but you can possibly get the reward often enough to cover the losses). 

Not so in Perpetuum (as far as I can see after a few weeks).  Beta islands cannot be accessed successfully by anyone without the permission of the controlling corp/alliance.  There are no ways (I'm aware of) through the choke points as a solo player and so there is zero chance for success and going leads to a sure death.  So, the beta islands cannot be accessed (in practical terms) by a significant chunk of the player base for pve purposes.  That makes the sandbox 50% smaller than it would otherwise be (and it's not all that big to begin with).  I'm not saying access should be easy or that a blob of 20 should be able to sneak in undetected, but there needs to be a way for people who are willing to risk the danger to get into the beta islands and have a chance at survival that at least equals if not outweighs the chance of death.  If not, they just won't go.

Go to forum: General discussion

74 Reply by Calio

(6 replies, posted in General discussion)

Thanks everyone for the advice.  I Just uninstalled and reinstalled a fresh DL.  Everything works fine again.  I also think I discovered the source of at least some of my problems along the way.  The Avast anti-virus.

There are several spots in the client DL (e.g., definitely @ 38.11 mb and I assume @ ~4mb on the patch) where the DL slows down to a snail's pace.  Not sure why there would be such bottlenecks in the DL's, but they're there.  If the Avast is on, then the DL will hang up at those spots.  If I disable the Avast (as when I used safe mode to DL the client originally, and disabled the Avast this time), then the DL's work (but, slowly) through those bottlenecks.  Disabling the anti-virus also seems to stop my "connecting to database..." failures when trying to launch the client in order to play the game.

So, for anyone encountering similar problems, temporarily disable your anti-virus long to connmect or DL the cient or patch.

Go to forum: General discussion

75 Reply by Calio

(6 replies, posted in General discussion)

Alexander wrote:

XP x64 is not a support operating system but there should be a way to get the client to work.
The client becoming non-responsive is a little worrying as it's essentially hanging before even connecting to the server. If you're running in full screen mode I'd advise against it but it seems a little system specific to choose between what's best. Some get best performance in windowed mode and other in full screen. If the client won't close without Task Manager that's a bigger issue.

Might I ask where you are in the world? The patching and downloading will be a pain due to packet loss. It seems that no matter what they do, if they have tried anything, if you lose 1 packet during the patch it hangs and never really catches up again but resuming the download should fix this.

If it's giving you a DirectX error I'd suggest downloading and installing DirectX in case there is an error there. (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/d … 6652cd92a3)

If the client is crashing before it even loads it may be worth reinstalling it. Perhaps a rare corruption in the GBF file or perhaps even the EXE.

If your system specs are more than capable of running the game and you have no issues running other DirectX games and reinstalling doesn't work then I am a little at a loss. The crash reports being made, what size are they? It would be a good idea to zip them (Should massively reduce their size) and email them to support.

Thanks for taking the time to try and help.  Let me clarify a few points.

I'm running in windows mode and in the US (east coast).

The directx error only happens when I tried to patch the game in safe mode (probably because neither directX nor my nvidia vard are loading in safe mode) after the initial attempt to patch that hung up at ~4mb and the failure of the client to resume patching when started again.  So, I'm not concerning about the direct x error since I can't resume the patch anyway. The safe mode DL was my workaround for the hang-ups in DLing the entire client in the beginning and I was hoping to repeat that success when the patch hung up at ~4mb.  But, since it won't resume patching, that is irrelevent.

Once I was able to DL the client (about 2 weeks ago) the game ran smoothly once it was able to connect to the data server.  The problem was that it would usually take between 2 and 10 tries to actually connect.  Letting it try to connect for more than 30 seconds was a waste of time (if it didn't make the connection fairly quickly, it never would) and I would have to use task manager to end it so I could try again.  But, if it gave me a crash report pop up it just froze up.  That was the situation until the 12th.

Now, the client is not loading at all. Since the failed attempt to patch this morning, I get the crash report pop-up when I start the game (either from shortcut or folder), which actually submits a report and then closes, but the client never starts after the report is submitted.

Go to forum: General discussion