Best Of

Re: Cosmpiercers: Problems and an Ambitious Proposal

Cubey said:

I'm fed up with the whole "if we're on top then all's a-ok but if we're getting our collective ass kicked then the system is unfun and needs changing" attitude that permeates this whole thread. No, let me fix that: it permeates every cosmpiercer discussion we had on the forums. IC tribalism should be kept IC instead of leaking into out of character discussion.
If me calling people out on this is personal attacks then I don't know what to tell you.

If you honestly consider you oocly claiming tribalism when you basically are the one who has habitually brought it up in every thread that anyone from Song has decided to contribute to and or be involved with, then I don't know what to tell you.

We have from start to finish on the forums and on discord been against the way Cosmpiercers have operated, and it can be seen in almost every thread about it. So I'm not sure why you are intentionally trying to spin a fictional narrative, but perhaps you should keep that in character rather than letting it leak into out of character discussion.

I try not to go out of my way to fight with people over stupid shit, but you have literally gone out of your way to do this every single thread, you need to chill.

Vega

Re: Cosmpiercers: Problems and an Ambitious Proposal

Cubey said:

Matlkael said:

I dunno what to tell you; we (Song players with certain exceptions) have been against the PVE aspect of cosmpiercers since the time of Sythiorn when we had 0 cosmpiercers.

This isn't a matter of "if we're on top then all's a-ok but if we're getting our collective ass kicked then the system is unfun and needs changing", it's more of "this system is so terrible that our stance hasn't changed whether we're on top or at the bottom".

edit/ This whole thread is a receipt. It was started in January by Syhtiorn/BeepBop himself, back when we had all of the cosmpiercers (IIRC). Then we lost them to Scatterhome, and we were still against the PVE-centric theme of cosmpiercers. And even after we took over the Scatterhome cosmpiercers with CA, we're still against PVE. And now, with the cosmpiercer conflict revolving around CA vs Song, we're still (consistently) against the PVE feature.

Yeah sure, only it's funny how when song has most piercers the criticism focuses on how hard it's to defend them and how they should give more rewards in general, and when song is trying to take over more piercers then suddenly it all flips into piercers being too annoying and costly to attack. Also criticism of zerging as a piercer strategy was floating around only when scatterhome was the one with most active players. Now that the tables have turned suddenly no one criticizes zerging anymore.
But sure, no tribalism going on. Me being unable to call it out without being dogpiled and memed on by a bunch of song players is definitely proof of that.

You're being very aggressive. I hope you don't see my affiliation and immediately sort me into the biased folder, but I don't think Song behaves in such a way that warrants this kind vitriol.

Balthazar

Re: Cosmpiercers: Problems and an Ambitious Proposal

Kitrana said:

Zhulkarn said:

Or you can have a naval blockade. It is not like you lacked the number of ships.

I am still puzzled why leaving a watcher is neglected at such scenarios.

Deltron you forgot the part of *except you two engineers. you get to sit either in a room or on a ship and make wormholes* like Zhulkarn said, not every part of the raid is a group activity. When i am not making wormholes for a raid i am playing APC which involves long stretches of waiting for the assaulters to die so i can ferry people back in with minimal risk to the factions ships. ti's a group activity but it isn't the kind of group activity where everyone involved does everything together.

The point was that that its boring and counter-intuitive, and Zhulkarn was seemingly confused why people didn't do it so I tried to point it out. The bolded words distracted him though so he breezed right past the exploiting part, so I'll have to cut that back in the future. Is leaving a watcher a legit strat? Absolutely, and apparently effective. If people want to do it, who am I to stop them? Just like what you're doing. THAT isn't game-breaking.. If thats how you want or like to contribute to piercers then great, more power to ya

, and its still part of the teamwork! I've always said that logistics and support is crucial, but I would never force someone unwilling into doing something not fun. I actually do like to see different tactics and approaches to various situations besides the ones we do (or do not) come up with!

I'm excited to see what the dev team comes up with for the future!

Deltrion

Re: Tweets!

I was expecting this to be a post about a cool new social media mechanic in Starmourn. Regardless, this is a good idea, thanks for making the thread!

Vega

Re: Cosmpiercers: Problems and an Ambitious Proposal

Cubey said:

This is a game, you are allowed to do that, even tho I suspect losing most of their piercers was another nail in scatters' inactivity (it's hard not to get discouraged if you see most of your faction income and influence stripped away and can't do anything about it).

This particular line I especially take issue with for a few reasons. The 'another nail' comment shows a really defeatist attitude which isn't good for player morale. It's also, I think, inaccurate for... just so many reasons. Cosmpiercers don't generate a ton of marks, we made way more with that one raffle. There's also the fact that Scatterhome not being heavy into PvP scene doesn't mean that we're generally inactive. Some of the most active recent PvPers are/were Scatterhome - one hasn't been active because their computer went down, the other left Scatterhome because of IC actions and consequences.
As for tribalism, I dunno. I'm pretty much with Vega despite our characters having, at best, a business relationship. So I dunno if it's still dogpiling when I say, as one of the most active members of Scatterhome, that it'd be nice if you'd be less antagonistic generally.

Slander

Re: Cosmpiercers: Problems and an Ambitious Proposal

I dunno what to tell you; we (Song players with certain exceptions) have been against the PVE aspect of cosmpiercers since the time of Sythiorn when we had 0 cosmpiercers.

This isn't a matter of "if we're on top then all's a-ok but if we're getting our collective ass kicked then the system is unfun and needs changing", it's more of "this system is so terrible that our stance hasn't changed whether we're on top or at the bottom".

edit/ This whole thread is a receipt. It was started in January by Syhtiorn/BeepBop himself, back when we had all of the cosmpiercers (IIRC). Then we lost them to Scatterhome, and we were still against the PVE-centric theme of cosmpiercers. And even after we took over the Scatterhome cosmpiercers with CA, we're still against PVE. And now, with the cosmpiercer conflict revolving around CA vs Song, we're still (consistently) against the PVE feature.

Matlkael

Re: Cosmpiercers: Problems and an Ambitious Proposal

Will you stop with the personal attacks? You continually spreading misinformation and acting like we are paying so much attention to what is going on and what times work so well for others is annoying but pop off, whatever. But you need to seriously cool it with personally attacking people like you get paid per insult, it is getting old.

Vega

Re: Cosmpiercers: Problems and an Ambitious Proposal

Zhulkarn said:

Or you can have a naval blockade. It is not like you lacked the number of ships.

I am still puzzled why leaving a watcher is neglected at such scenarios.

"Hey! You guys wanna go participate in some good ol' fashioned group endgame content together? Cosmpiercers! There's generators to kill together, guards to kill together, terminals to hack together, and maybe even some bad guys to fight off together! And if we succeed, we'll even claim a little bit of the sector for our faction. Should be fun and engaging for everyone!"

"Great, your job is to not do any of that, sit in your ship outside, and spam beacon. Someone might show up to move guards around. We'll go do all the group stuff."

"Oh"

Good tactic. Counter-intuitive to the activity though. That doesn't even stop the problem, just -might- prevent others from abusing it. Leaving watchers is not a solution, just a dollar-store band-aid to an unrelated problem. Defenders getting to a piercer to defend is not a problem, its awesome. This particular manner of defense is the problem, because its not even defense. Its re-organizing.

Guards are the non-captaincy, non-hacking part of the equation check when determining difficulty of a piercer. A max of X guards are spawned per room for a rank 3 piercer, and Y guards are likewise spawned for a rank 6 piercer. Advantage to the attackers for choosing the battleground: If they want to fight on a rank 5 piercer, then that's the limit/difficulty of guards they bid for, defending faction not factored.
Guards don't patrol. Probably for more than one reason, but most likely to to keep each room proportionate to the max number of guards allowed per room for that rank of piercer.

So when a rank 3 piercer suddenly has a room stacked with enough guards (at the docks even, or a control point, or a choke point) that turn the piercer rank up from 3 to 7+ it stops being a "clever tactic" and turns into "well, its clearly not intended but its also not fixed so I'm gonna keep doing it". If the presence of defending players increases the difficulty of assaulting a piercer to a point where the attackers cant succeed that's one thing, but its got to be the players doing the defending not the guards.

Cubey said:

"We can't steamroll piercers effortlessly while all enemy combatants are asleep anymore, please nerf."
BTW I bugged movable guards being a potential problem months ago, so if they get changed only now because a Song player complained about it? I'll be fucking cross. Don't think they should be changed though, instead cosmpiercers need rehauling or just outright replacing with a scheduled pvp system. What we have now is a game of "everyone's asleep, let's raid". That's not fun.

Defending is even more effortless. You even get a notification telling you exactly where to go, so you don't have to look around. Just fly there, move some guards around, use outburst/pull/etc to disrupt, if you need to. You don't even need to pvp to defend a pvp objective if you get a big enough stack of guards in the right place. And I'm sorry the powers-that-be seemingly didn't act on your bug from months ago, but more voices equals more awareness historically. Shouldn't matter what faction those voices come from since we're all players here and its only by pure happenstance and incredibly good fortune that we are in different ones.

Deltrion

Re: Announcements post #52: Ship Customizations and May Promotion!

Ilyos said:

Kirin said:

A couple of observations and suggestions

1) Can there please be a trade-in option for promotion items.

2) Experience buffs are effective immediately. instead can they please be triggered effects to be used when convenient

These are both good suggestions. We've implemented number 2), I'm going to need a bit of time to make number 1) work though, most promo items aren't exactly regular artifacts.

I agree most are just vanity stuff. in which case, can they be made transferable to other players? Right now, we cannot do that even except for the first batch of pets

Kirin

Re: Announcements post #52: Ship Customizations and May Promotion!

A couple of observations and suggestions

1) Can there please be a trade-in option for promotion items.

2) Experience buffs are effective immediately. instead can they please be triggered effects to be used when convenient

Kirin