It is currently Sat Apr 27, 2024 10:35 am



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 66 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
User avatar
 

Team: Strawberry Pancakes
Main: Trevor50
Level: 4503
Class: Shield Monkey

Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 10:01 pm
Location: Alabama
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
sorry Mr Great Dev of the underworld :P

Thanks.............................................................

_________________
Ricoh wrote:
might sound hard 4 u...but learn reading?

Stay strong, live long, and walk humbly.

Strawberry Blueberry Pancakes


Tue Jun 02, 2009 4:13 pm
Profile E-mail
User avatar
 

Team: None
Main: BlackDragon
Level: 1876
Class: Speed Demon

Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 10:30 pm
Location: USA
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
So, please answer my question.

If what Toxic/Traders did was run by multiple admins (as they claimed), how come they were given the go ahead when only days later the rules are changed to "prevent" what they did?

~BD

_________________
Life is like a shower, you never know when someone will flush the toilet.


Tue Jun 02, 2009 4:22 pm
Profile
User avatar
 

Team: Death Mental
Main: ashta the 2nd
Level: 2942
Class: Berserker

Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 3:00 pm
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
Primarily from reading this post and lots of recent posts were admins have fucked up, shown favouritism or just been too hasty in actions i think you need to start treating everyone the same, giving fair notice and i know this part is crazy but have u ever considered consulting playerbase? this is a small game you can get responses of a lot of us and it will still not be a lot as active forum users is low. Also to be honest this is just bullshit, essentially what you have done is you let one team exploit and you know it, then after they do it you go okay...it was an exploit.....it will be considered an exploit from now on so get over it and quit whining? I think there needs to be some sort of school ppl go to to learn how to deal with these easily resolved issues.

_________________
Clear all your cd rack wont get none of your cds back! TEEEEMPPPPPZZZ


Tue Jun 02, 2009 4:34 pm
Profile
User avatar
 

Team: Strawberry Pancakes
Main: Jiraque
Level: 3763
Class: Shield Monkey

Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 4:25 pm
Location: The Lyceum
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
Real men PvB. :wink:

_________________
Burning angel wings to dust


Tue Jun 02, 2009 4:37 pm
Profile
Site Admin / Dev Team
User avatar
 

Team: Eminence Front
Main: PhoenixSun2
Level: 1392
Class: Shield Monkey

Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:07 am
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
ashta1989 wrote:
giving fair notice and i know this part is crazy but have u ever considered consulting playerbase?


I'm meeting with the leaders of both sides of the complaint to address the issue.


Tue Jun 02, 2009 4:52 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:37 pm
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
Quote:
Exactly. To pull off a successful BvB attack some distance away will now require considerably more investment. You not only will have to lay an empty shell of HQ to lay siege kits in the adjacent enemy galaxy, but protect it for 24 hours as well, before initiating BvB. That will involve fortifying the HQ, laying bases and drones around it to get a good foothold next to your enemy and coordinating your team to protect it all for 24 hours.

Costly? Yes. Challenging? Yes. But the advantage of being able to lay an ada kit in your enemy's territory is worth it. Now you will have to choose between taking time and effort to set up heavy artillery to obliterate a galaxy, or stage some surprise PvB attacks, which would be less pricey but less effective as well.

We will consider implementing offensive outposts too.


First option: take down our teams outpost with 2 other bases... move them and all their gear across the uni..... lay it down next to the enemy team.. let them have 24 hours notice (so they can spam their gal with tech 0 level bases) and then attempt to put one or two bases in there gal with gear and war.....

Second option: my team to removes our HQ... thus letting all of our gals go unowned... move it to a different location, hold that location for 24 hours... while i might add the opposing team has notice..and time to spam with 0 level bases and then drop 2 more bases (that also must be hauled to that location) in there gal for a take over.....

Quote:
Costly? Yes. Challenging?


You have got to be kidding......... NO more costy.... Right!
Challenging.... more like ....DAMN NEAR IMPOSSIBLE.....and totally impractical.

the only BvB this game will have now is between neighbors... and thats it!
NO one is going to go thru the hastle of what the admins have proposed and made law.....

Step back and look at whole picture..... This is a rule change that was made to fix a problem that was never a problem in the first place... just a response to complainers.... and the decision has now become a problem of its own........


Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:11 pm
Profile
User avatar
 

Team: Strawberry Pancakes
Main: Trevor50
Level: 4503
Class: Shield Monkey

Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 10:01 pm
Location: Alabama
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
Quote:
You have got to be kidding......... NO more costy.... Right!
Challenging.... more like ....DAMN NEAR IMPOSSIBLE.....and totally impractical.



Good...Why? because bases shouldnt be killed in a few minutes(30) it should take hours....Its not impossible, your just lazy.

_________________
Ricoh wrote:
might sound hard 4 u...but learn reading?

Stay strong, live long, and walk humbly.

Strawberry Blueberry Pancakes


Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:19 pm
Profile E-mail
Content Dev
 

Team: None
Main: PaperTiger
Level: 0
Class: None

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:43 pm
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
Wolverine2000 wrote:
so they can spam their gal with tech 0 level bases.


I would imagine spamming t0 shells to prevent BvB from occurring is an exploit and we'll look for a way to put a stop to it.

Wolverine2000 wrote:
the only BvB this game will have now is between neighbors... and thats it!


That's the point! BvB will be much more practical if you fight over territories. If you want to destroy a team on the other side of the universe, it'll be considerably more difficult, as you won't be able to use bases as easily. That should actually prevent powerhouse teams from easily terrorizing the entire universe, only a portion they are adjacent to.

Wolverine2000 wrote:
Step back and look at whole picture..... This is a rule change that was made to fix a problem that was never a problem in the first place... just a response to complainers.... and the decision has now become a problem of its own........


We've looked at the entire picture and believe that this is a step in the right direction. BvB is not meant to be something routinely used. After reducing the defensive stats of bases, it's only fair to shield them more from BvB assaults. Additionally, I would imagine that after Traders used Toxic's HQ to stage a BvB attack on Cartwheel, such tactic would become commonplace. That's not something we want.


Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:47 pm
Profile E-mail
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:37 pm
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
54
Online
User avatar

Team: Strawberry Pancakes
Main: Trevor50
Level: 1942
Class: Shield Monkey

Quote:
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 10:01 pm
Location: In Your House

Reply with quote
New post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
Quote:
You have got to be kidding......... NO more costy.... Right!
Challenging.... more like ....DAMN NEAR IMPOSSIBLE.....and totally impractical.



Good...Why? because bases shouldnt be killed in a few minutes(30) it should take hours....Its not impossible, your just lazy.


I have a right to my opinion Trevor please keep your insults to yourself.
calling myself or my team lazy is just insulting.

Thank you


Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:25 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:37 pm
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
Quote:
That's not something we want.


Who is WE????????

it appears that several people on this forum dont agree... Im pretty sure they are all paying customers..... and it seems they arent part of (WE)

so who is WE....

I thought their tactic was sound... inventive and successful....

and step back....
you said the bases defences were reduced....... whos idea was that (admins)

so you have to protect against BVB .... whos idea.. admins

now we need advance warning for our enemies because there is another way....... advanced warning ....Admins..

have you stopped to consider your first idea may have been in error and the rules since then are just a way to keep from admitting you might have made an error in the first place.


Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:31 pm
Profile
User avatar
 

Team: Strawberry Pancakes
Main: Trevor50
Level: 4503
Class: Shield Monkey

Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 10:01 pm
Location: Alabama
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
how is calling you lazy that bad of an insult...Jesus whats wrong with people today.


Like to also add to your "who we"

We=people who dont agree with what traders did
Notwe=USA alliance or people who dont see it fit

_________________
Ricoh wrote:
might sound hard 4 u...but learn reading?

Stay strong, live long, and walk humbly.

Strawberry Blueberry Pancakes


Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:46 pm
Profile E-mail
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:37 pm
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
Quote:
how is calling you lazy that bad of an insult...Jesus whats wrong with people today.


Like to also add to your "who we"

We=people who dont agree with what traders did
Notwe=USA alliance or people who see it fit


"that bad of an insult" your right it wasnt that bad.... just uncalled for...

as for your response to "who WE"

I am NOT part of USA and I dont agree with their misguided ideas about fare play ... but I do agree with good tactics, and their ingenuity...

I dont have to like them or agree with them to give them credit for a job well done.....

I do object to rules put out on the spur of the moment to fix a preceved problem that dosnt really exisist.


Tue Jun 02, 2009 6:59 pm
Profile
Content Dev
 

Team: None
Main: PaperTiger
Level: 0
Class: None

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:43 pm
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
Wolverine2000 wrote:
PaperTiger wrote:
That's not something we want.


Who is WE????????

it appears that several people on this forum dont agree... Im pretty sure they are all paying customers..... and it seems they arent part of (WE)

so who is WE....


By "we" I meant us, the development crew :)

Wolverine2000 wrote:
I thought their tactic was sound... inventive and successful....


I would like to point out that HQs were never meant to be a means of attacking someone.

After all, if you can lay an HQ and 10 minutes later attack any of the neighbouring galaxies, what's the point of owning them? Before the rebalance you at least had to destroy the bases attached to colonies first. Now you just need 10 minutes and a thatchfull of base gear.

You might not like the sudden change now, while you are actively in a war, but I'm sure that in time you'll get used to it, and may be even like the extra safety net for your posessions. I understand that you want some more time to pummel your opponents, but we will only be wasting time by not putting this in as soon as it's coded.

Amberyl wrote:
And it is now being brought up again. Will it be ignored for another 3 weeks until it fades away.


This does look like a serious issue, I will make sure it will be discussed at the Monday meeting.


Tue Jun 02, 2009 7:54 pm
Profile E-mail
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:37 pm
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
Quote:
I would like to point out that HQs were never meant to be a means of attacking someone.

After all, if you can lay an HQ and 10 minutes later attack any of the neighbouring galaxies, what's the point of owning them? Before the rebalance you at least had to destroy the bases attached to colonies first. Now you just need 10 minutes and a thatchfull of base gear.

You might not like the sudden change now, while you are actively in a war, but I'm sure that in time you'll get used to it, and may be even like the extra safety net for your posessions. I understand that you want some more time to pummel your opponents, but we will only be wasting time by not putting this in as soon as it's coded.


I understand that HQ's were not intended for BVB

What your not getting is now that you have made it near impossible to BVB anyone outside your neighbor... you have OPENED the door for teams to use PVP to Harrass other teams endlessly.... just build far out and attack non pvp teams knowing they cant get to your bases.....

That is going to be endless fun if you happen to be a PVP team.

Why dont you the (WE) just end all of this once and for all and just stop all BVB... it is clear that is your intent... then you can have a PVP server just like all the ones that have slowly failed in the past.... the PVP/PVB/BVB are the three aspects that have drawn so many to this game and your slowly removing that which is unique to this game.

And while your at it..... why dont you consider checking with your player base and see what they want.. before you just start implementing changes that tick off your paying customers......


Tue Jun 02, 2009 8:14 pm
Profile
User avatar
 

Team: Strawberry Pancakes
Main: Jiraque
Level: 3763
Class: Shield Monkey

Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 4:25 pm
Location: The Lyceum
Post Re: June 1st, 2009 - Dev Update 16
Before this universe it was never possible to deploy kits in an owned galaxy. I don't know what the fuck you're on about :roll:

_________________
Burning angel wings to dust


Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:20 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 66 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.