You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Active topics Unanswered topics
Search options (Page 6 of 189)
logicalNegation wrote:Perhaps some questions to consider:
How long is it supposed to take to get to 3 mil? What about 1 mil? How fast is this actually being achieved with afk mining or other exploits?
It's impossible to get a solid answer for that. We have players who casually play an hour every 3 days, and we have hardcore players farming 8 hours a day. The latter gathers EP at least 20 times faster.
The aim of the change was to incentivize EP gathering and make people play. Any rule or limit we'd make to "solve" this punishes people who "play too much".
And yeah, balance wasn't made for the hardcode ones, because they are the minority, so there will be extremities. And we're fine with that.
logicalNegation wrote:I recommend that EP boosters should now increase the EP-reward % as well.
We'll consider that.
Celebro wrote:Progressing faster will just make player leave sooner
Progressing in the game isn't just about extensions, they only enable you to use stuff that you still have to get somehow. EP gathering so far was just some sort of a delayed unlock-mechanism that you had very little control over, and as such it held no incentive to play. We are not subscription-based anymore, we don't gain anything by locking content behind timewalls.
Yes, we're aware of this problem, fixing soon.
Basically the main drive behind this change was:
1. You shouldn't be turned away from the game because you have to wait for EP to be competitive, while you can't do anything about it.
2. If you are playing to get EP, that means you are playing, and that's what we wanted.
Ludlow Bursar wrote:When AC's income streams are to a large extent derived from sales of EP boosters
They are not, by far.
In your Steam client please go to the properties of Perpetuum, and on the Local Files tab click the "Verify integrity of game cache..." button. That should update it to the latest version.
The Steam client updates to the wrong version for some reason, we're working on it.
There is something wrong with the Steam client, we're working on it.
Server will be down on 2016-06-24 from 14:00 servertime/CEST (12:00 UTC) for the deployment of patch 3.7.6, including an upgrade to the Extension Point system and a few fixes. Downtime will be about 2 hours long.
Patch notes:
http://www.perpetuum-online.com/Changelog:2016-06-24
All that, but blocking is handled on a separate level. Every plant and structure, be it functional or decorational (rocks too), has a tile-based blocking layout made up of columns of different heights, which are placed down automatically when the plant or structure is placed on the ground (and removed when it dies). These are simple tile-data (one height value) much like tile blocks which prevent you stepping there, but tile blocks are 2d, and blockheights (as we call them) are meant for height-based blocks. (These were the ones blocking the shots against gamma buildings because they overreached the spherical hitbox at the top and bottom.)
How it looks in the dev client.
It probably sounds way too complex for what it's meant to do, but it's a legacy of the tile system.
Annihilator:
This is fairly different compared to plants. Buildings are separate objects placed on the ground, and combat against them is more like robot combat. Whereas plants are not really objects, but sort of an "extension" of a ground tile, where we know that it's a plant because the tile underneath it says so, so we can damage it when the blocking column on the tile is hit. For buildings this would only be possible if all the tiles underneath is would hold the information that there is a building above.
Update: we have found the source of the problem and it will be fixed in the next patch.
The problem was that shots were actually blocked by the building's own blockings, when firing from a steep enough angle from either below or above. This happened because when you're firing at a building, LoS is calculated by drawing a virtual 3D line between the center of the building and the source of the shot. The actual point of the hit is determined by subtracting the building radius from the length of that line. The bug was that this effectively resulted in a small spherical hitbox inside the building instead of the intended cylindrical shape, which practically made it impossible to hit the building from anywhere else than the sides.
You guys keep talking about a perceived idea that you can't get past turrets on a hill in assaults because you die.
I'm talking about a bug where you try to shoot ANY building from below and you get a "shot blocked" message when there is nothing apparent that could block it.
Two completely different things...
Ville wrote:That's what he was trying to tell you! You can't terraform the hill down to shoot the turret.
"If i can TF a slopped "wall" around a teleport and put turrets at the top of the slope. and my enemy cannot Tf the slope to attack me then what have we solved.
Again, this is not about terraforming at all. He talks about not being able to terraform with the aim of creating defensive walls at the foot of a turret.
The LoS issue in the other topic is about shooting ANY building that can be even on a natural hill that you can still terraform regardless.
Ville: that was about terraforming, not LoS to a building so I don't get your point.
Just a heads-up for everyone: I got some reports that a certain gamma base is near invulnerable, more specifically it can only be shot from a few specific positions.
After some testing it looks like there is a problem with line of sight calculations if you are lower than the base of the building that you're shooting. So lone buildings on the top of hills may exhibit this problem.
We're still trying to find out the reason for this, I just wanted to put this out so everyone is aware.
Balance is being looked into along with the new robots, but I don't see such extreme problems that would require stretching this out to multiple months.
On the other hand, whatever changes there might be, I fully expect people to complain nevertheless because everyone seems to have different opinions about balance.
Working on the Syndicate robots part.
Honestly the balance patch has been blown up to be the sole scapegoat for the current low number of players, because that's convenient. Even if it had some bad decisions in it, I think the majority of the changes was good (light/assault boost, role bonuses) so there is no need for a rollback. That said, with the introduction of Syndicate robots I will take a look at overall robot balance again and make changes if necessary.
BeastmodeGuNs wrote:Any estimate on when we are getting that test server tool for the mix and matching then?
Unfortunately the test server had to be sacked for the foreseeable future (budget reasons), so the mixing and matching will be mostly done by me. I'll post them in a blog along with the general traits of the faction, and you can of course suggest combinations if you feel something should still get in.
logicalNegation wrote:What's next after the EP upgrade?
Probably Syndicate robots.
Maybe you guys missed that part in the blog, but time-based EP won't go anywhere.
Done, I also created a mirror here.
logicalNegation wrote:Paw brings up a good point though, does buying a DLC end up screwing you out of more EP if you deferred the purchase?
Maybe I'm missing something, but it doesn't matter at what point you buy a DLC since just like daily EP packages, they are not affected by the handicap mechanic, and always give the exact amount.
Sure, if you buy them early, the amount of activity that would have been needed for the same EP increase is less compared to when you buy them later, but their net EP worth stays the same. It's more like a psychological dilemma, do you jump forward early when EP is pouring, or later when it's slower.
Posts found: 126 to 150 of 4,706
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.
Currently installed 3 official extensions. Copyright © 2003–2009 PunBB.
Generated in 0.121 seconds (64% PHP - 36% DB) with 6 queries
