Why?

What's the benefit for the game in all of this?

Only benefit I see is that it would make it easier for you & your friends to try capturing an outpost.

Same agenda as before with unlocking all the Betas.

No risk for all the reward.

Celebro wrote:

Naismith wrote:

Why?

What's the benefit for the game in all of this?

Only benefit I see is that it would make it easier for you & your friends to try capturing an outpost.

Same agenda as before with unlocking all the Betas.

No risk for all the reward.

You never want changes where activity is rewarded. Who is biased now?

Activity is rewarded as-is. That is the point of Intrusion 2.0. You have to show up for SAPs (be active) over a long period of time (X days) to capture an outpost, and you have to be more active then the competition.

What your buddy is asking for, is implementing a relation-based system that

a) requires you to grind PVE to engage in PVP and
b) lowers your standing with your own faction & lowers your own base fortifications

To paraphrase:

"Zoom redesign the system and make NPC's protect us because its not fair we can't capture an outpost."

If I was biased and pursuing agendas like you, POE would be campaigning on the forum for a return to Intrusion 1.0 - 10M sign-up for intrusion, 3 days in advance, whoever wins the fight wins the outpost.

Your a small minded bitter individual that thinks every change that someone requests is based upon their personal gain or your loss. You should really grow up.

I think rewarding activity is a good idea but that activity won't happen until the risk reward is fixed. Perhaps see how the proposed changes to Beta will work post spark / station facility / mission change.

Syndic: You out right, write off any new suggestions of increased 'defence' activity because it favours you, N+1 tactic still in effect; and that's the only way you want to play this game. Get those crucial SAPs, those  that pose a threat to outpost ownership, then log out. Game on, and this will continue until something changes!.

We need more players out in the open fields to increase ganks, pvp etc. A link to the pve aspect of outpost ownership does not mean it's going to be a 5-hour daily grind this could be balanced accordingly, but with you as always no room for discussion. Right now most vets are filled to the brim on stuff there is no reason to fight for anything, just log-in bring more than your enemies log out and not getting exposed to any risks, who can blame you anyways, it the way the game has been designed.

You're so obnoxious. Are you like that for real or is it some charade you do online?

Celebro wrote:

Syndic: You out right, write off any new suggestions of increased 'defence' activity because it favours you, N+1 tactic still in effect; and that's the only way you want to play this game. Get those crucial SAPs, those  that pose a threat to outpost ownership, then log out. Game on, and this will continue until something changes!.

We need more players out in the open fields to increase ganks, pvp etc. A link to the pve aspect of outpost ownership does not mean it's going to be a 5-hour daily grind this could be balanced accordingly, but with you as always no room for discussion. Right now most vets are filled to the brim on stuff there is no reason to fight for anything, just log-in bring more than your enemies log out and not getting exposed to any risks, who can blame you anyways, it the way the game has been designed.

Now you're getting all emotional and bothered.

N+1 tactic is in effect because of bad balancing which made EnWar and EWar worthless as force multipliers - a change campaigned for by your corp because we were murdering you with EWar and Ictus. Now we're murdering your Seth Mk2 spam with our Seth Mk2 spam.

Outpost capturing still works as intended, although it's now easier for us as a defender to hold our outposts since your corp campaigned another change that let us capture our own SAPs. Now we only have to waste 10 minutes instead of a whole hour.

http://blog.perpetuum-online.com/posts/ … usion-2-0/

"A. Remember that the system is gradual: you’ll be able to tell if you’re in trouble, and if your entire corp disappears for a day or two, you’re still in control. It’s by the end of the third or fourth day (depending on how quickly and how hard you were under attack) you’ll have a problem. You can interrupt a Snowball Effect with one capture, and if you honestly can’t field enough force at your Outpost to prevent even one enemy capture, you probably shouldn’t hold it right now. When everyone’s back and ready to fight, you can always take it back the same way you took it to begin with."

The bolded part is what you're having problems with. The bolded part is also the only real answer to your barrage of begging Zoom for outposts thinly masked as "suggestions".

Naismith wrote:

Celebro wrote:

Syndic: You out right, write off any new suggestions of increased 'defence' activity because it favours you, N+1 tactic still in effect; and that's the only way you want to play this game. Get those crucial SAPs, those  that pose a threat to outpost ownership, then log out. Game on, and this will continue until something changes!.

We need more players out in the open fields to increase ganks, pvp etc. A link to the pve aspect of outpost ownership does not mean it's going to be a 5-hour daily grind this could be balanced accordingly, but with you as always no room for discussion. Right now most vets are filled to the brim on stuff there is no reason to fight for anything, just log-in bring more than your enemies log out and not getting exposed to any risks, who can blame you anyways, it the way the game has been designed.

Now you're getting all emotional and bothered.

N+1 tactic is in effect because of bad balancing which made EnWar and EWar worthless as force multipliers - a change campaigned for by your corp because we were murdering you with EWar and Ictus. Now we're murdering your Seth Mk2 spam with our Seth Mk2 spam.

Outpost capturing still works as intended, although it's now easier for us as a defender to hold our outposts since your corp campaigned another change that let us capture our own SAPs. Now we only have to waste 10 minutes instead of a whole hour.

http://blog.perpetuum-online.com/posts/ … usion-2-0/

"A. Remember that the system is gradual: you’ll be able to tell if you’re in trouble, and if your entire corp disappears for a day or two, you’re still in control. It’s by the end of the third or fourth day (depending on how quickly and how hard you were under attack) you’ll have a problem. You can interrupt a Snowball Effect with one capture, and if you honestly can’t field enough force at your Outpost to prevent even one enemy capture, you probably shouldn’t hold it right now. When everyone’s back and ready to fight, you can always take it back the same way you took it to begin with."

The bolded part is what you're having problems with. The bolded part is also the only real answer to your barrage of begging Zoom for outposts thinly masked as "suggestions".

Now you are just trying to change the subject with that ewar nonsense. I never requested it to be changed the way it has; and I am sure no players asked for these robot balancing changes , which were horrible.

The bolded part is what needs to be changed, and you keep defending the status quo post after post. I already said 'who can blame you' for playing the way you like. The issue is you won't look at the big picture, or it's not in your best interests, either way, stop forcing you views for your own agenda. The issue I have is not owning an outpost , it's about promoting more activity by rewarding them in doing so.

Risk vs reward is besides the point, if they give more rewards on beta right now what difference will that actually make? Hangers are already full, where is the reward for that? Bean counting?. There is also concerns that I bet Devs have thought about, which is power creep, this will effect the player gap, so basically you need to keep buffing betas to keep us happy just for a short while, then we are all back into square one.

There is my reasoning, as you can see there is no bias at all. You just keep on being the best at herding those cats to defend at a moments notice , and that's the gameplay you like, which is fair enough, although you can see by the numbers playing it's not very popular.

The only reason your able to dominate when you bother to log in is numbers. Some of us want mechanics that stop numbers from always winning. You of course oppose that as its not your idea.

As for the ewar / heavies thing, thats just your usual idiocy. Regardless of if ewar is overpowered of green or whatever people had different opinions and nobody asked for the current meta.

Grow up.