Greetings to "Der Bergmann".
Forum
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Search options (Page 1 of 5)
Perpetuum Forums → Posts by Dromsex
Posts found: 1 to 25 of 101
1 2011-08-01 01:20:52
Re: M2S - Become an Enemy of the People today! (54 replies, posted in Recruitment forum)
2 2011-02-16 21:45:05
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
Nice try, Syn - but its just boring - and thats not good for the game. WoW has more diversity and options to it... sadly.
3 2011-02-16 17:37:31
Re: Molecular stabiliy runs out before syndicate protection (12 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)
Yes it probably is, so that slower players with slower machines cant be insta popped before seeing anything.
4 2011-02-16 12:18:19
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
Yes, bring some diversity to Tom&Jerry Online.
5 2011-02-16 06:58:22
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
And in general sometime there will be wars on heavy robots or it is a utopia?
6 2011-02-16 00:35:17
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
Красной капусты...
7 2011-02-16 00:14:59
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
To illustrate more: we heard there will be MK2 variants. SO what about MK2 variants being an inverse of what the MK1s are?
Fast but light mechs, heavy bit slow LRs. Its simply breaking up that static image of the game.
8 2011-02-16 00:09:42
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
Siddy - im not talking about effectivity - but opportunities. And this game hasnt.
9 2011-02-16 00:01:45
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
Not really Arga - it would mean that e-warfare would be useless. And of course - im talking about light robots and their speed in the same way as im talking about EWs speed.
Those speed differences just make this game a dice game - and to be able to win it mostly - people pick the dice with the 7 eyes side on it. But its boring if everyone does it becasue he needs to.
edit: dont think so close minded guys - of course speeds in general would have to be revised. interceptors just need a temporary boost to fulfill their role - but doesnt allow them to cat&mouse game anytime they want.
10 2011-02-15 23:24:07
Re: Please rename "Stations" to "Teleports" (23 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)
Id actually like bipedal better!
11 2011-02-15 23:23:12
Re: Developer blog - "Corporation Recruitment" (4 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)
Great ideas!
12 2011-02-15 23:08:16
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
This is not about a 3on1 or whatever numbers scenario. EW simply have too much offensive and defensive means at once.
If they have any weapons equipped, they should be as fast as other bot types. Its the classic hybrid issue in balancing within MMOs.
Its not about now making mechs dictae the fight. Its about givin EWsa role to choose from - active fighting(with slower speed) or passive support(with current speed).
edit: i understand fate - but nonetheless its bad design when 1 class can dictate anything. Whats this, spiderling online?
13 2011-02-15 21:16:47
Re: Insurance action (268 replies, posted in General discussion)
Thats the reason why normally such exploiting behaviour results in an instant and permanent ban.
Its not enough to exploit the game, but also countless gibberish argumentations follow.
14 2011-02-15 20:08:05
Re: Please rename "Stations" to "Teleports" (23 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)
Yes, minor issue but still confusing! So yes pls change it.
15 2011-02-15 20:06:58
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
Thats a good way to put it Anni and shows the difference between the current implementation and a meaningful design.
16 2011-02-15 19:20:51
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
Right there is no argument - id thought id just point it out ;> But im sure the DEVs dont want to have only 1 bot that dictates open pvp. Im even more sure - the majority of players doesnt want that either.
And apart from that - it is just weak and flat 1-dimensional design.
17 2011-02-15 18:58:38
Re: Molecular stabiliy runs out before syndicate protection (12 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)
I've noticed this as well. I may be wrong in this assumption, but it seems as though Molecular Instability begins the moment you hit undock, whereas Syndicate Protection doesn't begin until you actually load the zone and appear on the terrain. Those with slower computers will take longer to load, and therefore will have their MI wear down before SP shows up.
Can confirm this behaviour - when i undock for the first time after the game started, it takes a while with my machine - on this first undockings the MI is long gone before SP is still there for like40-60%.
On each following undock - the loading goes much faster (pre-cached resources) and MI aswell as SP are kinda as they should be.
18 2011-02-15 18:40:37
Re: Arena (35 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)
Go ahead pls and put up that list - id be interested. I pretty sure its will be around ~10 overall. But realy, youd do me a favour if you can give me numbers and names. Thanks!
edit: if the <number is too high - we will get more termis on the road - i heard termis likes GG
19 2011-02-15 18:37:29
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
Becasue they pop up somewhere else 2 mins later. Also - the stuff necessary to provide proper defense against themisnt in co-relation.
Also - still EW dictate where to fight and when. Thats simply bad deign.
20 2011-02-15 18:11:27
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
I didnt state its invincible - its too versatile for the low price and progression lvl.
21 2011-02-15 17:57:42
Re: Arena (35 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)
Heckle you should stop making a fool of yourself... i died 2 times in pvp in the hoop - overall - i guess you died more
22 2011-02-15 17:23:56
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
The scenarios are theoretical. You never get a whole group of intruding EWs pinned with 1-2 tacklers - the others can just leave the field.
23 2011-02-15 14:12:22
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
You see? Your forced into EW. Thats a design flaw.
24 2011-02-15 13:56:04
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
Sure, im not specifically talking mechs now - but range is null against EW being able to hide anywhere.
And btw - there is no way you get to a group of invading EWs in mechs without being kited, if they want to. You can let them stay out of reach - but theyre still there then ;>
25 2011-02-15 13:42:55
Re: PvP balance. (again and again) (189 replies, posted in Balancing)
im not talking about being alone^^ - if the attacker EW group kites the defending non EW group - there will always be a single FF target for the attackers due to the speed advantage and the speed gap of the PUG - allthough they're within a group. attacker can pick 1 target at a time without any chance of being attacked either.
As a defender you have the possibility to:
-let the intruders run away and come back at you
-let yourself be kited and die 1 by 1
-have a mixed setup with several tackler becasue once tackling done=dead
-choose EW yourself
-split groups and cut of the kite ways - requires double numbers
If EWs were either dpser with slower speed or EWers without dps but speed - this cheap way wouldnt work.
Posts found: 1 to 25 of 101
Perpetuum Forums → Posts by Dromsex
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 3 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
Generated in 0.051 seconds (91% PHP - 9% DB) with 6 queries