Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

    25.00 USD 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About Calatin

  • Rank

Live ENB Information

  • Server
  • Race
  • Profession
  1. A further note for Win7-64 users...it's not just picking a lower resolution.  I've found that sometimes I get into the back-to-Megan mode, but I can get out of it by using EBConfig to change my resolution to a new setting (as administrator) -- pick one, any one; then run it again and change it back to my preferred setting (again, as administrator).   I've no idea why, but that seems to get me out of the back-to-Megan loop.  This seems to pop up almost every time I get a game-patch.
  2. What I have found is that the game continually sends me back to the login screen, never allowing me to enter that first sector, if my resolution is set too high.   1920x1050 fails every time; 1600x900 is fine.   I'm running Windows 7 64-bit.   Hopefully this will help someone else...if you're hitting the "back to login screen" problem, try adjusting your resolution with ebconfig (as admin).
  3. I think it's naive to believe you can have a strong PvP track that's "separate but equal" without affecting PvE. Why? Suddenly every decision has to made with the effect on PvP as a consideration. Want to create a new device that helps spot cloaked MOBs? Wait...how will that affect Jenquai combat balance in PvP? Want to create some cross-class interaction of skills to encourage PvE class mixing? Wait... will that create some unbalanced two-man team combination in PvP? Want to give away a nice piece of equipment from some uber-boss? Wait...will that make the owner unstoppable in PvP? You devs will have a lot less latitude to try anything new when you have to also ensure that [i]every[/i] decision doesn't upset the PvP balance. If you haven't seen this at play in other games, you haven't been watching closely. PvP can be a lot of fun, and human opponents will pull tricks that even the best AI will never try. But be wary of the handcuffs that come with it.
  4. I always thought that buffs should add "multiplicatively" rather than linearly, e.g. two 50% bufs would give you 75% resistance rather than 100%. Basically, each buff reduces your [i]remaining vulnerability[/i] by its percentage. Mathematically: 1-product(1-buffAmount) over all the devices. The nice thing is that there's never "too much" or any need for an arbitrary cap -- diminishing returns is built in. You'll never hear someone say, "thanks, don't need your buff, I'm already at the cap." But it'd be a change, and it might make the mathematically challenged scratch their heads. ("How come 30%+40% is 58% and not 70%?") :-) (1-(1-.3)(1-.4))
  5. [quote name='Crichton' timestamp='1323465230' post='49449'] There is no class in the game that has all positives and no negatives. It is a balance. As such at no point should explorers ever be allowed to make ammo. If they can then I want my warriors to be able to mine. However since this is an MMO there are two choice available: Group with other players that can assist you with making ammo/carrying ammo or make a secondary toon that can do this for you. In either case this is the basic design of the game. Learn to love it.....or you know.....find another game that doesn't require players to accept (and have to deal with) tradeoffs based on class decisions. [/quote] Crichton, while I agree half your post, allowing TS and PS to make their own ammo doesn't suddenly turn them into a war machine or give them "all positives and no negatives". They'd still be the weakest at combat. They'd still be unable to build components or repair shields. They'd still be rarely needed on raids. Do you really think that, given the ability to make their own ammo, everyone would abandon all the other classes to jump to TS/PS, as they would have no weaknesses? This is not one of those tradeoffs you make such as, "if I play an explorer, I'm not going to be very good at combat". Instead, it's just an annoying, non-fun part of the game. "If I play an TS/PS, I sign myself up for a big PITA logistical problem." A good designer doesn't level the classes by making them less fun to play. (And I think the original designers even realized that they made a mistake with the PS, given the Archos ammo device.) My original main is a PS, and I gave up on leveling combat once I hit 135. It just wasn't worth flying halfway across the galaxy every time I needed ammo. There's probably a lot of L135 PS out there.
  6. Thanks, Talcon. 25 was a real stretch for me when I started this (I was CL16), so I probably only killed one or two Infinitcorp Bruisers before assuming that wasn't the right thing to do. Does it give you a clue when the first power coupling drops, or do you need to collect a batch of them before you even know you're on the right track? (I don't remember seeing a popup.)
  7. I'm stumped. I've killed everything I can handle in Aganju (up to 25). I've carried around Grain & Reactor Waste. I've visited all the nav points there. I should have gotten screenshots of all the dialog, since I don't see any clues in the mission log. "Is there anything else in Aganju that she likes?" Not that I can tell.
  8. The ironic thing about this discussion is that one of the things that made E&B stand out was that it [b]was[/b] very dynamic, especially compared to MMOs of today. Sectors would get taken over by the V'rix. Major characters would move around. Gates would open or threaten to open or close. The story moved. (And there was a fair amount of story there, though it didn't hit you in the head with it.) In other words, it wasn't a static thing frozen in amber. So there isn't a E&B to recreate, per se. You could recreate the September 2002 version of the game, or the January 2003 version, or the September 2004 version; but if you wanted to recreate the real E&B feel, it would have to be dynamic. ____ (Not to dismiss the amazing, volunteer job done so far. I just challenge the idea that there is one golden paragon vision to recreate.)
  9. Of course the best way to solve this would be to change the signs on their kiosks, but that involves new graphics assets so becomes difficult. If we want to talk realism, it would be more likely that a vendor would represent a particular company rather than a level of item. So you'd have to see the Evolver vendor for Evolver parts. Not that I'm suggesting that as a change.
  10. [quote name='Sharlot' timestamp='1304802783' post='40359'] Where is the level 75 bonus mission Crossdock Beta Technician? [/quote] Nostrand Vor southwest nav.
  11. 1) PS Repulsor Field seems to work mechanically as a self-buf, but if you ever apply it while it's still up (or fading out), it removes the buf icon and the visual effect, even though it's still active. Once that happens, it's really hard to tell whether it's running or has faded away. (Unless you watch enemy damage numbers very closely.) 2) I've had a hard time applying Repulsor to others (upper levels). Does it only work for group members? 3) Nit: The Psi Shield's sound effect is constant and annoying. I know you can hack a file to make it go away, but I bet your community wouldn't mind if it were permanently turned down to almost-inaudible (except during start-up and fade-away). Thanks!
  12. Calatin

    200% Ores

    [quote name='Jarod' timestamp='1300331044' post='36715'] Who is getting the better deal here? [/quote] If you feel warriors are getting a raw deal, please feel free to make a proposal that might improve the situation. Nothing says we can only consider ideas on one front at a time. [quote name='Jarod' timestamp='1300331044' post='36715'] I don't see what is driving this thread. What is it that's broken that these proposals intend to fix? [/quote] A fair question. [list=1] [*]Interaction between players is good. [*]Other than a handful of ammo-related ores, miners and component builders don't interact much. For a healthy and dynamic economy, one might expect a food chain of ore providers -> component builders -> item builders -> item users (everyone). (Not unlike the real world: mined iron ore -> bulk steel -> auto chassis -> finished car -> consumers.) [*]One reason for this lack of interaction is that ripped or vendor-purchased ores are every bit as good as mined ores. [*]Hence a proposal to make miner-provided ores provide an extra bonus, increasing demand (i.e. a reason to interact) without creating an annoying absolute dependency. [/list] Now, given that components and ammo are always 200%, I'm not sure what that bonus should be. But there are some ideas being kicked around in this thread.
  13. Calatin

    200% Ores

    [quote name='Yuritau' timestamp='1300240328' post='36632'] Component building automatically produces 200% components, so upscale ores can't have any effect on component quality. (and you can't remove the auto 200% from component building without upsetting every trader) [/quote] Hmm, I didn't know that 200% was automatic..I figured it worked just like every other build skill. (My personal style doesn't favor Trader classes, so I don't generally play them.) :-( Hmmmmm.
  14. Calatin

    200% Ores

    You can buy an engine from a vendor, but it will never be as good as one you get from a Engine Builder (e.g. 100% vs. 200%). You can buy a component from a vendor, but it will never be as good as one you get from a Component Builder. If you rip an shield down to its components, they'll be 100% quality, not as good as a builder could provide. So why is it that the ore you buy from a vendor by ripping a component down is every bit as good as the best miner in the game could provide? 100% Why not...let the prospector's effective Prospect value determine the quality of the ore mined -- 100% to 200% (no random effect, though...If I mine 30 level 7 ores with an effective level 8 prospect skill, I would get, say, 30 170% ores). Let the prospector's effective Prospect Value and the ore value determine the quality of refined ores (with no random adder). And let the quality of the ores and refined ores involved in a component build add to the quality of the component? It seems to already be built into the game: if you look at any ore, it's just always 100%. And stack-combining? Easy. If you combine stacks of different percentages, just do a weighted average, e.g. 30@100% + 10@200% = 40@125%. Seems easy to me, and it would increase the demand for miner-provided ores, without forcing anyone to go down that route. Something to consider.
  15. Everyone's familiar with the calls on Market channel for weapons, engines, devices, shields, and reactors. But in the weeks I've been playing I have only twice seen a message like: WTB <someOre> There really is no open-market interchange of ores between players. 1) Why is this true? Where are the component makers getting their materials? 2) Is it indicative of a problem in the game economy, or is everything working as expected?
  • Create New...