1

(117 replies, posted in General discussion)

Am bit confused with this part..

This is only a very first step in our plan to bring a whole bunch of new content to the game for more stuff to do "between PvP sessions".

"Whole bunch of new content" ... sounds good

but..

"between PvP sessions" ... makes PvE sound like it is designed to be something we just halfheartedly do while waiting for the next exciting PvP session.

2

(117 replies, posted in General discussion)

Savin wrote:

So what is the problem?

I would say that whole system is flawed. Quoting myself from page 1

Petteri Petraaja wrote:

The current system is..

Boring and repetitive

They keep spawning and I keep shooting and looting and they keep spawning and I keep shooting and looting and they keep spawning and I keep shooting and..

Assignments. Gaming should be fun, no? So why does the system encourage us to make repetitive circles (some call them "laps" now?) pushing same buttons over and over again. Even if you do different "laps" and harder/longer assignments it all comes down to being boring and repetitive.

Meaningless

The lore of the game is not coherent with the content. It really is just one huge Farmland where you either farm nic, research or standings with no other purpose than to hoard resources to be used in PvP.

To me it seems that the DEVs think PvE players are all powergamers who get enough joy and reason to keep playing out of optimizing their farming.

PvE should be about fun, enjoying playing a game. Imho, to consider this games PvE (PvNPC) fun you really have to like optimizing a) your nic/h b) your setup/tactic to deal with a difficult spawn.

(a) Might keep certain type of players entertained, doesn't work for me. As Jita said in this thread "I expect pve to be about fun, not about reward."

(b) Also might keep certain type of players entertained? But for how long? The static spawn points give you specific target to prepare for, but to enjoy and consider it fun for more than few succesful attempts? And the more difficult bots are in Beta so you also have to enjoy the possibility of PvP. But since this is about enjoying PvE I think PvP should not be brought in.

I cannot really find anything positive to say about the PvE(NPC). To me there is no fun in it. The question should be "How to make PvE fun in sandboxgame". Already gave my answer to that earlier..

Would be nice to know the DEVs definition for what a sandboxgame means to them. They should give us some sort of framework to work with if they really want our ideas and opinions.

3

(117 replies, posted in General discussion)

Other wrote:

If robots and equipment aren't lost on a large scale then, from creation to destruction, you've mostly cut manufacturers out of the life cycle of the currency.

I guess PvP and lagspikes are the only major factors that contribute to robot destruction at the moment. But yea, I also think we should see more destruction.

My 0.02NIC on how to more things would brake/explode:

- More incentives to PvP

- Permanent damage that would sloooowly build up over time ending up in a need to bring the bot to a dedicated industrialists garage for maintenance. No actual bot destruction included but would still require materials.

The war against NIAns that is supposed to be raging

- Regular large scale PvE events. The Syndicate and NIAs natives duking it out. And I still maintain that it would not deviate the game from being a sandbox. (and once again, there are silly amount of definitions and opinions on what a 'sandbox' is, would like to know DEVs version so everyone would be on the same page (sort of))

These PvE events would not just increase the explosion counts but could also bring more meaning to pve and storyline. Syndicate needs to expand and conquer more land/islands from NIAns (There is a ongoing war right? .. hard to really say if you examine the game content) and instead of making it just a line in a patch note stating "three more islands added", the players would actually have to make it happen:

Each Mega Corp would target one new island. Regular pve events would put players on a battelfield against the forces of NIAns. Tactically interesting (battle)maps needed for this phase just like new tools for squad leader (for example ability to mark targets and areas to make random group of players somewhat organized.. and/or Avatar Creations sponsored voice coms?).

-Static defence systems (cannons/minefields) would cover for the lacking AI.

-DEVs could take control of the NIAns. Spawn bots, set targets for cannons/artillery and even pilot the Commander of NIAns, some type of General Megabot that would require a dedicated group to take down and even more so in the middle of a raging battle.

-Some mechanishm to prevent blobbing the poor NIAns and exploding the poor server in the process. If enough people sign up for the event -> several battlefields/fronts?

-Winning battles would further Mega Corps goals and losing them would hamper them. Some sort of Conquest meter <-----I-------> included to know how eachs Mega Corps invasion is proceeding.

-New types of assignments would allow players to directly advance the combat efforts. For example after certain amount of assignments have been completed a non regular/scheduled attack event opens up. Industrialists could build defence structures or some such to aid in the war effort?

-At first only these events (and assignments?) would give access to the new island, but after certain phase is reached in the attack the conquered part of the island would become available. And why not the NIAn controlled part too, but it would be more or less an suicide as the NPCs there would be big and nasty but could provide some very challenging fun for groups.

-New islands could have PvP!? Ability for players to actually hamper the Syndicates efforts to finish conquering the whole island. But this would need somewhat complex alignment system considerations and I have no idea how to make it all happen in a balanced way, but for sure the option is there for the PvP to play big part. (But no one should be forced to PvP, but I guess that discussion is going on and should stay in that other thread)

-Players taking part in the events and completing conquest-related assignments could gather some sort of faction-points? Go up in ranks allowing more options to X? Players would be risking their bots and some sort of reward system should be in place.

4

(117 replies, posted in General discussion)

(am copy-pasting some of this from my thread "Farm Online")

The current system is..

Boring and repetitive

They keep spawning and I keep shooting and looting and they keep spawning and I keep shooting and looting and they keep spawning and I keep shooting and..

Assignments. Gaming should be fun, no? So why does the system encourage us to make repetitive circles (some call them "laps" now?) pushing same buttons over and over again. Even if you do different "laps" and harder/longer assignments it all comes down to being boring and repetitive.

Meaningless

The lore of the game is not coherent with the content. It really is just one huge Farmland where you either farm nic, research or standings with no other purpose than to hoard resources to be used in PvP.

To me it seems that the DEVs think PvE players are all powergamers who get enough joy and reason to keep playing out of optimizing their farming.



What I think is needed to fully utilize the PvE potential of Perpetuum:

- Instances with scripted content!
- Evolving and well written storyline
- Regular PvE events
    - npc factions attack syndicate controlled areas/bases (and if succesfull take them over requiring players to take them back)
    - instances/open world events where players attack bases/convoys/something
- If PvE players play well, the syndicates goals should advance and if not the npc factions should advance their goals

Most importantly PvE content should be fun and entertaining, like for example meaningful and challenging.


It can remain a sandbox game even with instanced and PvE-only/focused content.

I'm not 100% against players being vulnerable to PvP all the time but it would take careful balancing to make it actually work. It should not be just a matter of PvP heroes cruising to a mission area and start shooting PvErs.

PvPers like to scream about risk vs. reward, yet they tend to forget how they themselves generally do everything to minimize the risk for themselves. (equip-to-escape, alt scouting, hide behind numbers, spy on enemy channels etc)