Official server shutting down soon, more info on the standalone server, and the release of the server source code: … us-report/

Deployment has to be delayed a bit, sorry about that. New ETA is possibly tonight, or in less fortunate circumstances in a few days. We'll keep you informed in any case.

Server will be down on 2017-10-22 from 15:00 servertime/CEST (13:00 UTC) for a few hours.

During the downtime we will deploy a server and client update, which will clear the way for you to use the announced standalone server solution. The official server will not change from a player perspective, but the update is necessary to keep everything compatible.

At the same time we will also release the Perpetuum standalone server installer on Steam. More info will be available upon release.

Last but not least, I'm happy to inform you that the Perpetuum server will become open source, so we will release the server source code as well.

Line wrote:

Also, he doesn't know enghlish, and GT doesn't translate well

And we don't know Russian, so we still need to run it through GT. Why not do the courtesy to do so in the first place? It is an English forum after all.

Celebro wrote:

I agree with Syndic though, client should be free, as in no charges. Afterall community is the one dealing with all the grunt work and server maintenance.

As long as the official server is running, we do have considerable expenses that have to be covered somehow.

(Also I realize that MMOs are somehow special in a way that unlike normal games they are not considered completed after release, but it's not like 10 years of development suddenly equal to nothing. That's just my opinion though.)

Perpetuum development is discontinued, but with your help it has a future. Read all about it here: … perpetuum/

I wanted to do this in a blog post but yeah we've been silent for too long, so in short this is how things are now:

I'm sorry to say that Perpetuum is not actively developed anymore, but you probably noticed that.

Me and Gargaj officially left the company a while ago and Avatar Creations (the development company) is not worth to keep for the remaining developers. So yes, Avatar Creations is being shut down.

That said, the game is and has always been published and run by its sister company, Gamestorm Ltd., which is still alive. Thus, Steam distribution and running the server are not affected by the closure of Avatar Creations.

Nevertheless, we didn't want the game just simply die and fade into nothingness, so in our free time all of us have been working on a standalone server for Perpetuum that you can run on your own. Most of the work is done and it will be ready for testing soon.

The official server will still be around for an undetermined time, but since we won't be able to control the standalone servers, the game will practically become DRM-free.

Once the standalone server is ready I will do a more detailed blog post about it.

tl;dr - Perpetuum is not shutting down, but is not being actively developed.

Try now.

There was a bug in the wiki but it's fixed now. Thanks for contributing!

Patch notes:

Our server ISP notified us that they will be performing some network maintenance on 2017-02-16 between 05.00 CET and 07:00 CET. You might experience lag or disconnects between those times.

Server will be down on 2017-02-16 from 21:00 servertime/CET (20:00 UTC) for the deployment of patch 3.8.3. The patch brings the final wave of Syndicate robots, and numerous balancing changes. Downtime will be about 1 hour long.

Line wrote:

Btw not a word about Armor Nexus changes. Will it change to provide resist bonuses?

The underlying system would need to be changed so that's delayed for now. I tried to do it, but as the system is set up now, it's not possible. It would need 4 separate nexus effects for all 4 resists, and that by itself would max out the 3 effect limit on one robot.

Blocker wrote:

What about the velocity nexus Zoom ? If nexus modules are being "re-balanced" to be fit mainly on heavies where does that leave the multitude of bots that have a legitimate use for the velocity nexus, like scouts, haulers, EW just to name 3.. Seems like a shotgun approach again..

Actually if heavies are the only bots capable of fitting velocity nexus then you may as well remove them altogether. Even with a velocity nexus a heavy is not fast enough to catch anything anyway, including mechs.

The velocity nexus played a big part in this change as it wasn't intended for that kind of light bot solo use that became commonplace.

Blocker wrote:

Why Tryannos get no missile cycle time love ?

It got it in 3.8.1 already when the Echelon came along smile


(10 replies, posted in Bugs)

When I click the button at this event it brings up the screenshot upload window for me.

I don't think that light robots pose that much of a bigger threat to them even with the higher damage tunings (since they have a harder time with increased accumulator usage anyway), if that's what you're asking.

The final 4 robots of the new Syndicate line make their debut in patch 3.8.3, alongside of numerous balancing changes. In this blog we'll take an in-depth look at all these updates: … inal-wave/


(10 replies, posted in Bugs)

No, as I said above the button does the same thing as if you would click on the toast notification pop up when it comes up. If you miss to click it, you haven't had any way to do that action again before those buttons got in there. It only uploads a screenshot if the event is a screenshot notification, but it shouldn't be there if the event is a toast that does nothing when you click on it.


(10 replies, posted in Bugs)

Take a screenshot, bring up the event log, click the button, and the screenshot upload window should appear.


(10 replies, posted in Bugs)

It does the same thing as if you would click on the toast notification pop up. Like bring up the screenshot upload window when you took a screenshot or open the mail window when you got a mail. I don't think it does anything for EP balance, that's true.


(73 replies, posted in Balancing)

NPCs will be affected by the tuning change of course. Most of them only use 1 or 2 T1 tunings which shouldn't mean too much difference. There are a few high ranked ones that use 4 or 5 T1 tunings, but I currently don't plan to change this. They will of course need different strategies to take down as they will hit harder at first, but their accumulator will drain fast.

With cycle time bonuses removed, prototype tunings will only have a fitting and mass advantage after the change.


(73 replies, posted in Balancing)

The point in turning around tier efficiency was to give usefulness to lower tiers too. Higher tiers DO perform better (as in: provide higher damage modifiers) but this happens at the cost of efficiency.

If your goal is pure damage and can handle the penalty, you go for higher tiers. If you are concerned about accumulator stability, you go for T3 or T2, or a mix of them.


(73 replies, posted in Balancing)

Making lower tiers more efficient is a good point, and I also widened the tier gap for weapon tunings, so here are the revised numbers:

(Note: The efficiency ratio columns in my previous post were accidentally shown using 4 tunings, so it could have been a bit misleading regarding differences. Ratios are now shown using 1 tuning module here.)



TIER	Acc MOD		Repair MOD	Cycle MOD
T0	1.3		1.1		0.97
T1	1.3		1.3		0.95
T2	1.3		1.3		0.95
T2+	1.3		1.35		0.95
T3-	1.3		1.4		0.92
T3	1.3		1.4		0.92
T4	1.3		1.5		0.9
T4+	1.3		1.55		0.9


TIER	Acc MOD		Repair MOD	Cycle MOD	Ratio
T0	1.4		1.1		1		0.79
T1	1.2		1.2		1		1
T2	1.1		1.2		1		1.09
T2+	1.15		1.3		1		1.13
T3-	1.4		1.4		1		1
T3	1.4		1.4		1		1
T4	1.6		1.45		1		0.91
T4+	1.7		1.55		1		0.91


TIER	Acc MOD		Gather MOD
T0	1.3		1.1
T1	1.3		1.3
T2	1.3		1.3
T2+	1.3		1.35
T3-	1.3		1.4
T3	1.3		1.4
T4	1.3		1.5
T4+	1.3		1.55


TIER	Acc MOD		Gather MOD	Ratio
T0	1.4		1.1		0.79
T1	1.2		1.2		1
T2	1.1		1.2		1.09
T2+	1.15		1.3		1.13
T3-	1.4		1.4		1
T3	1.4		1.4		1
T4	1.6		1.45		0.91
T4+	1.7		1.55		0.91
  • Only T3 and T4 have diminishing returns now, for T1 and T2 accumulator usage and drain/neut modification scale uniformly.


TIER	Acc MOD		Drain MOD	Neut MOD
T1	1.1		1.1		1.2
T2	1.1		1.1		1.2
T3	1.1		1.13		1.23
T4	1.1		1.15		1.25


TIER	Acc MOD		Drain MOD	Neut MOD	Ratio
T1	1.1		1.1		1.1		1
T2	1.1		1.1		1.1		1
T3	1.2		1.13		1.13		0.94
T4	1.3		1.15		1.15		0.88


TIER	Acc MOD		Damage MOD	Cycle MOD
T0	1.5		1.03		0.97
T1	1.5		1.05		0.95
T2	1.5		1.05		0.95
T2+	1.5		1.055		0.95
T3-	1.5		1.075		0.95
T3	1.5		1.075		0.95
T4	1.5		1.075		0.925
T4+	1.5		1.085		0.925


TIER	Acc MOD		Damage MOD	Cycle MOD	Ratio
T0	1.4		1.05		1		0.75
T1	1.1		1.1		1		1
T2	1.05		1.1		1		1.05
T2+	1.05		1.2		1		1.14
T3-	1.3		1.3		1		1
T3	1.3		1.3		1		1
T4	1.55		1.4		1		0.9
T4+	1.7		1.5		1		0.88


(34 replies, posted in Q & A)

yep, thanks smile


(34 replies, posted in Q & A)

I have posted the last remaining things (here and here) to be done for the patch, if the feedback is positive I'll post a new blog during the coming week and the patch should come shortly after that.