26

(27 replies, posted in Bugs)

This has happened before so it might be related and be a returning bug.
Can we get this noted plox Devs?

27

(4 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Honestly I'd rather see robots bounding along rather than waddling but it's really too late to change the models much now.

The lights and assaults should have been more animal like and not weird cow-robot like.

Current design concept:
light ewar - insects
light combat - small animals
assaults - larger animals
mechs - bipedal animals
heavy mechs - larger bipedal animals
destroyers - war machines

Sadly lights and assaults don't really look the part right now. Maybe we'll see a few redesigned in the months to come.

28

(4 replies, posted in Localization)

Corpotato.
Someone was playing too much Portal 2.

29

(4 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)

I am sure I saw this "Noted" in another thread. There is an issue with extensions (Extensive and Intensive) not being applied sometimes.
It should be being looked into but I can't find the thread where they said it was noted.

30

(26 replies, posted in General discussion)

DEV Calvin wrote:

Has anyone tried the new interference emitters?

The issue with those is you have to either leave them behind as you flee (Which usually results in being dead as kiting a blob the blob following usually wins) or charge into the enemy and die. And then there is nothing stopping the enemy group just blowing them up. They really don't add a lot of interference either. Their value is the same as have a few more robots in the fight and not a crippling "Oh noes, kill him before he drops an emitter!".

So, no.

31

(26 replies, posted in General discussion)

Well, the expansion was cool.. Added lots of new terrain to see which was fun to explore and it enabled some pretty epic battles. I can't fault it.

Explosion damage seemed pretty cool but it's certainly not solved blobbing or reduced engagement sizes. It's still completely possible to get a large 50 vs 50 fight and have explosion damage mean very little. I'd much rather see a mechanic that makes it beneficial to break up into smaller groups. What happens in a blob is simple. As soon as you target an enemy with more than three or four people that person falls back and lets someone else take their place. The only way to kill an enemy is to spread fire and switch primaries to a secondary locked target in smaller groups rather than all at once. For this to work you simply need superior numbers and be willing to lose at least half of them (But crushing the enemy is worth it, no?).
To all those out there that have fought in blobs, would you not prefer the game to favour smaller 10 to 20 man squads moving as separate entities yet operate as a whole?

Why doesn't break up work now? What's stopping us just doing it? That's simple. When fighting a blob if you break up into smaller gangs and attempt a entrap the enemy all the enemy blob needs to be is rush the smaller or weaker groups first and easily overpower them. The only time this doesn't work is when you have greater numbers and then strategy doesn't make a different. You'll some robots but as long as you don't run away you'll win.

This game does something most others can't. It supports large fights easily which is great but honestly after winning and losing a few large fights I feel like they're not as exciting or enjoyable as smaller gang fights. I'd really like to see interference rebalanced or a new mechanic that works along side it that supports smaller gangs from the rushing blob scenario. Just because the enemy has more numbers they should still have to fight in smaller groups and from different vectors. Perhaps decrease the damage but increase the fall off of robot explosions but I don't think that alone would do it.

This is posted in general discussion for a reason. I'd like to judge how other people, large and small, feel about this. There is nothing stopping NAPs and blobbing as long as you train everyone to understand where they need to be in a fight.

Mining missions should give you a "Suggested" location but if none available you can mine the mineral anywhere. Mining assignments should not be "We have to make the player walk for 5 minutes first because it's a level 4" and more that more minerals are required and rarer minerals are required.

I agree. Explosion damage should be applied in 2 waves (Unnoticeable by those effected).
First plant death is calculated and then LOS and player damage is calculated. That way the area will still be cleared of plants but steep slopes and walls will cover you. Perhaps a missile like LOS or at least something that will pass over small bumps but large walls will protect you.

Image example

34

(8 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)

Annihilator wrote:

one of my corpmember got some really nasty disconnects today too. ping around 50 all the time - then suddenly off. then sometimes another DC while deploying back to terrain.

You're not the only one.
I too have a weird DC issue. When I teleport sometimes my screen goes black and that's it. I have teleported to the new location but I can't do anything until I restart the client. If I wait I get booted to the login screen after a few minutes/random time.

35

(4 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

+1 as long as it doesn't increase network traffic too much.

Short range pewpew kains are purely roaming and less defense robots. I like this.

With all the other balances it's now worth fitting the right robot with the right gear and is hugely important.

If you're getting a lot of light robot fights it's now extremely easy for one mech to kill 5 or so but it will require anti-ewar. I care not the speed of lights and ewars anymore. 5 vs 1 should always, no matter what, end in one solution.

However all too often I've seen 5 light robots meet a mech and 3 lights bugger of, 1 dies and the others GTFO's after his friend dies. There is no team work, no support. If you can't figure out the solution to a problem then you're not flexible enough for ANY MMO.

The is still powerful but its role may have changed. It's sometimes going to be good at what it is known for but not always.

37

(54 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

Long range, low damage and high accuracy Seths FTW!
Volley a light or ewar at 700m. Nice I say.. Very nice.

Even better on a gropho I'd say. All that extra damage. Nice.

38

(14 replies, posted in News and information)

DEV Gargaj wrote:
DEV Calvin wrote:
Bonnie Jose wrote:

Please can u set up your board so that links open in a new  browser window or tab!!!!!

Done. This has to be some kind of record. Thx, Garg.

I still think it's a bad idea though.

I agree with you.
There are options to open a link in a new tab or a new window in almost every browsers and if not then don't use it.
I can still open these links in a new window without it forcing me to focus on them which is nice so I guess for this method no harm is done.

39

(23 replies, posted in General discussion)

The exploit was probably the PVP protection exploit. smile

From the resource list it seems the new patch adds a new logo! big_smile

41

(18 replies, posted in Feature discussion and requests)

I like this idea but what I like about it is the possibility of also deploying another structure that allows you to monitor the plants rather than it happen automatically. Each monitor could have a 500m plant range and you can't place a monitor (Maybe could work as a radar too in future with masking and detection?) within 1000m of another monitor.

42

(4 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)

Have to be on each others friends list. That's how it's meant to work sometimes it's buggy.
Just like blocking sometimes breaks.

Hidden Screenshot 1
Hidden Screenshot 2

Possible Spoilers. These are so far unused images.

erp_thermal leads me to believe there will be a plate for each damage type and only damage of this type will be converted into energy. This also makes me think the modules aren't so cool any more or useful.

44

(49 replies, posted in Recruitment forum)

When these guys act maturely it is impressive what they can achieve.

Jeremey wrote:
Alexander wrote:

One comment I have is that anyone targeting using the mouse is already failing to control their robot. It's a lot easier to use the R and F keys to Primary and Secondary lock a selected target.

I'm using these keys too. My thoughts is not about mouse locking at all - you can apply them to using keyboard too.

What I mean in (1) and (2) is that if you have multiple locked targets and first dies, second one must automatically become primary. After all, you already locked it - why you must additionally make it primary, despite hitting "space" (shoot)?

Because sometime you lock both enemy and friendly targets. Also why would the next target become a primary? It sounds nice an NPC made easy suggestion. You don't always lock 4 targets and kill them in the order you locked them. It just sounds like a waste of time. If you primary something and it dies you will then have to start the entire process of selecting a new target. Having other targets already locked helps but as the fight progresses you might find those are no longer valid. The other ideas are nice but the change to locking mechanics seems more for NPC'ing rather than PVP.

One comment I have is that anyone targeting using the mouse is already failing to control their robot. It's a lot easier to use the R and F keys to Primary and Secondary lock a selected target.

However if people wish to fail but not fail so much I guess a change to the double click system isn't too day. I suggest in your post you note that all locking mechanics discussed are the double click mechanics and using primary and secondary keys are not effected. It would be very annoying to primary lock everything I target when I don't have other targets current locked.

This post will be focus on just the tutorial aspect as outlined in the OP's post. Read on only if you're interested!

The OP is completely correct!
The tutorial should have at least three stages. Stage 1 is learning the basics and a little combat (1 drone and perhaps targeting the practise target). Stage 2 should be combat based and stage 3 should be industrial based. Break the stages down into about a maxium of 5 assignments each and make them optional. Stage 1 will get you the Arkhe MK2 and will complete the transport assignment. Stage 1 will be the longest but the most important. Skipping Stage 2 and 3 would then be optional but at least the most important information would be out of the way first.

Stage 2 would give you your combat light robot and Stage 3 would give you a choice of either an Argano or a Laird. (Not both).

Stage one (Basic training):

  • All new players would START with this assignment already active. It would be a small amount of text explaining the game as simply as possible and explaining where the help files are available. It should explain the extension system briefly as well as the EP system. It should also explain the story line in a very small amount of detail as this is missed by most new players currently.

  • Move around, target the practise target.
    Reward: Some bullets, Standard Small Armour Repairer and NIC

  • Kill two drones
    Reward: A Standard Lightweight Frame and NIC

  • Go to another terminal
    Reward: 2 Standard Autocannons weapons and NIC

  • Return from that terminal
    Reward: Arkhe MK2 and NIC

Stage two (Military training):

  • Kill five Factional Drones
    Reward: (2 Factional Weapons, Basic ammo*) and NIC

  • Kill three Rank 0 NPC's
    Reward: Standard Sensor Amp and NIC

  • Kill 3 Rank 1 NPC's
    Reward: Factional light robot and NIC

Stage three (Industry):

  • Area and Tile Geoscan for newbie material
    Reward: Titan ore area and tile geoscanner charges, Titan mining charges and NIC

  • Area and Tile Geoscan for Titan and extract 2500 units
    Reward: 2 Standard Miner Modules and NIC

  • (Reverse Engineer Tutorial Item **)
    Reward: NIC

  • (Produce 1 unit of Tutorial Item ***)
    Reward: Standard Industry Robot, choice between Argano or Laird and NIC.

NIC Rewards should always be around the same value as 4 reloads of ammo @ NPC prices. Giving too much NIC is a bad thing but they need to be able to purchase enough ammo and not get a false sense of scale which the current tutorial gives.

If a Dev reads this and thinks "I like the idea but that would mean implementing a few new systems" then there is something very wrong with the systems already in place. If new players are meant to enjoy the game within the first few hours of playtime it's not happening this the current tutorial.

* This will act as a large hint that there are other weapons and while continuing to use bullets is a valid option they should also explore what other weapons do.

** Level 1 Decoder would be required. I suggest not giving one for free but that is an option. New players should get used to using the market. They need the full experience. If they can't find a level 1 decoder on the market then something is very wrong and decoders should be investigated as no one but utter newbies should be using level 1 decoders but they should still be worth selling on the market. If decoder market is bad they should be seeded but for more expensive than current trends (Around 10k is good for an NPC seed).

*** The CT created from reverse engineering should be completed in under 10 minutes (It needs to be stated that this will be much faster than items will reverse engineer outside the tutorial. The CT should also not be usable, installable or tradeable. The CT should require a very small amount of Titanium, around 50 units.

48

(6 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)

Every nexus is different. There are about three to four different ways to calculate the percentages.

I'd rather see a single unified nexus system with better balance on the nexus and on the skills and rather than some weird math where you take the extension level and divide by weird numbers I'd rather just see the 1's and 2's per level getting added directly on to the base bonus.

The current system is causing differences in nexus that suggest by their description that they will be the same. This is confusing and it's hard to tell if there is a bug or error with them.

49

(31 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)

DEV Gargaj wrote:

Mmmm. If the red light flashes SOMETIMES that means there's still some incoming traffic. This can mean two things:
1. The server is buggy and for some reason forgets to send any more of the important data.
2. The incoming network connection is lagged as hell and packets end up being delivered by paraplegic turtles on downers.

I think it's the former rather than the latter. However the N/A won't effect everyone that runs two clients but it will increase their lag a little. Perhaps this small increase in lag can sometimes cause the server to think they've D/C'ed?

Now I really hope it's the latter because I can just imagine the internet is full of tiny turtles. Robot turtles.

50

(31 replies, posted in Resolved bugs and features)

What Gargaj is saying is that when you get N/A lag he wants you to watch the lights to see if they behave normally.

The graph won't change with N/A lag but the lights will still flash. Now what I'd expect to see if the green light flashing but no red light activity.