rifle87654
|
|
« on: June 26, 2010, 01:01:11 am » |
|
Last time I remember someone changed all pool cost by three times.
But if I go to oversupply.
I'll spend three times of PP.
And It's hardly enough for me to get enough PP to keep that kind of company structure.
In the end.
Not balanced for anyone.
So fix it soon.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahaha hahahahah
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahaha hahahahah
Does he have a problem? Anyway he's hilarious. |
|
|
Killer344
The Inquisitor
 Posts: 6904
|
|
« Reply #1 on: June 26, 2010, 01:02:29 am » |
|
Everything was multiplied by 3x, absolutely nothing changed; there is nothing to fix.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If I get shot and it's a gay medic fixing me up, he's not gonna be fondling my balls while he does it. You can't patch a chest wound and suck a cock at the same time.
|
|
|
Mysthalin
Tired King of Stats
 Posts: 9028
|
|
« Reply #2 on: June 26, 2010, 01:40:27 am » |
|
PP gains weren't multiplied by 3, killer.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
CafeMilani
Aloha
 Posts: 2994
|
|
« Reply #3 on: June 26, 2010, 02:21:47 am » |
|
pp gain should be multiplied by 1.5 or 2
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Killer344
The Inquisitor
Posts: 6904
|
|
« Reply #4 on: June 26, 2010, 05:01:52 am » |
|
PP gains weren't multiplied by 3, killer.
I was talking about the pool costs. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| rifle87654
|
|
« Reply #5 on: June 26, 2010, 05:11:20 am » |
|
So PP has to be multiplied
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
LeoPhone
Honoured Member
Posts: 0
|
|
« Reply #6 on: June 26, 2010, 05:14:13 am » |
|
actually the pool costs should all be divided by 3 again.
it might give more room to balance things out, but only PE was a problem and these big numbers are waaay too confusing.
and something did change: oversupplying costs 3x more PP than before.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mysthalin
Tired King of Stats
Posts: 9028
|
|
« Reply #7 on: June 26, 2010, 07:28:37 am » |
|
Leophone expressed my point exactly.
Since PP gains WEREN'T tripled - oversupply is now 3 times more expensive than before.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Malevolence
Donator
Posts: 1871
|
|
« Reply #8 on: June 26, 2010, 11:03:33 am » |
|
Excepting the oversupply problem, I like this. Bigger numbers provide more leeway for balance purposes. You can make a gren take 9 instead of 10, for example, but if a gren is 2 and 2 is too much, what are you going to do? Lower it to 1? That's too much and 1.8 is too confusing, so good initiative by the devs.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Akranadas' Greatest Hits, Volume 1: Vet has nothing to do with unit preformance. We are serious about enforcing this, and I am sure you all want to be able to have your balance thought considered by the development team with some biased, sensationalist coming into your thread and ruining it. |
|
|
LeoPhone
Honoured Member
Posts: 0
|
|
« Reply #9 on: June 26, 2010, 11:09:35 am » |
|
still... these huge numbers, you dont got a clue yourself anymore what costs what.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
deadbolt
Probably Banned
EIR Veteran Posts: 4410
|
|
« Reply #10 on: June 26, 2010, 11:16:05 am » |
|
Leophone expressed my point exactly.
Since PP gains WEREN'T tripled - oversupply is now 3 times more expensive than before.
Isn't that the idea - to reduce spamfag companies? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 DERDBERTLike Jesus, Keeps died for us
He made a funny thread for bear, and got banned.
Now bear makes his own funny thread. It's unsurprisingly not funny.
Keeps died for our funny threads.
|
|
|
Mysthalin
Tired King of Stats
Posts: 9028
|
|
« Reply #11 on: June 26, 2010, 01:15:03 pm » |
|
Leophone expressed my point exactly.
Since PP gains WEREN'T tripled - oversupply is now 3 times more expensive than before.
Isn't that the idea - to reduce spamfag companies? In my entire history of playing EiR I've never made a lasting spamfag company that would require me to pay PPs. In other words - I can build spamfag companies even with the current availability system just as well - since I don't oversupply when I make them ;p. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| CrazyWR
|
|
« Reply #12 on: June 26, 2010, 01:26:03 pm » |
|
same here. It's not hard.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
1. New tactics? it's like JAWS, first one in the water dies
RCA-land where shells fall like raindrops and the Captain is an invincible god
|
|
|
bbsmith
The Brain and Muscle
Posts: 2778
|
|
« Reply #13 on: June 27, 2010, 12:39:28 am » |
|
PP gains don't have to go up PP costs went down.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
prove it and you'll win
I win.
k u win.
|
|
|
| CrazyWR
|
|
« Reply #14 on: June 27, 2010, 02:21:00 am » |
|
err, what?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mysthalin
Tired King of Stats
Posts: 9028
|
|
« Reply #15 on: June 27, 2010, 03:06:54 am » |
|
Bob, either you're confused, or you've invented time travel and in fact are talking to us from the future.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Baine
Steven Spielberg
 Posts: 3713
|
|
« Reply #16 on: June 27, 2010, 03:11:58 am » |
|
He is talking about the PP cost reduction fron long ago, ala T1 only 15 pp etc.
But yes, you gain not enough pp at the moment, i made 3 levels just in order to get my T3.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Mysthalin
Tired King of Stats
Posts: 9028
|
|
« Reply #17 on: June 27, 2010, 04:05:38 am » |
|
I'm personally lacking 140 PPs on my terror in relation to my rank. And I've not oversupplied once on it, lol.
And the PP cost reduction is like, super duper mega old - not even worth bringing up for discussion. And even if it WERE relevant - it still wouldn't offset the 3x price of oversupply, as the PP costs weren't tripple of what they are now.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ImmanioEiR
Donator
Posts: 247
|
|
« Reply #18 on: June 28, 2010, 03:58:37 am » |
|
Well, it was explicitly stated when pool values were tripled that it was for 2 reasons: To make balance tweaking easier, and to make oversupplying more expensive. Seems to be working as intended to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
LeoPhone
Honoured Member
Posts: 0
|
|
« Reply #19 on: June 28, 2010, 07:20:26 am » |
|
Well, it was explicitly stated when pool values were tripled that it was for 2 reasons: To make balance tweaking easier, and to make oversupplying more expensive. Seems to be working as intended to me.
where was that stated? edit: For the record, multiplying ALL pool values by 3 (including unit pool costs) gives us a lot more leeway to balance them properly, particularly for factions that have proven to be problematic like the PE. A side-effect of this change is that oversupplying will be a lot more expensive too.
The ratio's haven't changed at all.
so it is a side effect, obviously an unwanted side-effect. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: June 28, 2010, 07:23:55 am by LeoPhone »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
