Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Peter

Pages: [1] 2 3
1
EVE Online / Re: Tech 3
« on: March 29, 2009, 07:56:23 PM »
now why would you take a T3 into militia warfare, and then cry that you crashed :)
To be fair, he isn't crying about it (at least in that first kill thread) - he's blaming a crash for the loss and we can believe that or not as we like, but he is not crying.

2
EVE Online / Re: Bob is back and so is Keanu
« on: March 25, 2009, 11:28:10 PM »
That seems extraordinarily wimpy on the part of the authorities.

3
EVE Online / Re: Boxed Edition and Shuttle....
« on: March 25, 2009, 07:09:48 PM »
WTS: One "Shuttle of Death" for 10,000,000,000 isk. One previous owner, never used. Comes with custom "target circle" paint job.

4
Join Us / Re: Eiwen Dehn: Eve: Maadi
« on: February 16, 2009, 02:40:57 PM »
Nope. As stated previously, you will be informed when the timing fits me.

5
Join Us / Re: Eiwen Dehn: Eve: Maadi
« on: February 16, 2009, 02:04:44 PM »
It is much easier for me to imagine you'd be flying some combat ship that gets up close and personal, tanking what ever damage is throwing at you or making yourself a nuisance that can not be ignored by the enemy.
Well, he did choose Amarr. Any moment now Dehn will strap on a cruiser, load it up with armour, repair systems, as many high damage short range lasers as he can fit, and a can of sticky glue to prevent enemies from disengaging once he reaches melee range.

6
Warhammer Online / Re: Interesting Stats: Population Balance
« on: November 09, 2008, 02:55:22 PM »
I think he states that the guilded players in T4 & T3 are greater and therefore have less variance vs unguilded players.
Yep, but that is again based on overall numbers (he states an approximately 5% difference between guilded and unguilded). For a single server, given the numbers who currently have characters in T3 and T4, there may be much larger local variations (example: due to something as choices by individual guilds as to how to deal with people dropping out after the first month)

Quote
I would imagine that the ratio of mains/alts is generally the same - esp at T4/T3 - getting there takes grind.
Whereas I would imagine that T2 and T3 are the great dumping ground for "I'm bloody well fed up with this class" as well as "first month casualties". :)

So many possible assumptions and interpretations of the numbers are possible at the moment that it does not seem to make much sense to attempt to do so now unless one want to a) have fun with numbers, or b) deliberately choose numbers that can be argued to support one's position by ignoring alternative interpretations and use it in a forum discussion (I am sure that WHA forums will love this. "The numbers clearly show that <I AM RIGHT>" usage is a classic. :D

7
Warhammer Online / Re: Interesting Stats: Population Balance
« on: November 09, 2008, 01:04:47 PM »
Hmm, not sure how useful the numbers are right now given the methodology that is used to collect it.

  • It generates data by scanning guilds for members so non-guilded players are not counted. Given that there is no particular reason to assume that the proportion of players non-guilded differs significantly from order to chaos or between classes, this is probably not going to significantly affect the percentage figures in the long run, but early in the game's lifetime it could result in a significant variance to the degree that even a single high-level guild choosing as a policy to kick everybody inactive while another high level guild did not would result in drastically different total numbers in the T4 and Rank40 data entries. It will likely need another two or three months to become truly informative. In either case, it makes the T1 entries mostly useless.  [Not that I am critical of the approach they have chosen - you have to choose something that is actually doable, after all]
  • Since they count all players in a guild, mains as well as alts, actives as way as inactives, the absolute numbers are completely unreliable for talking about how many players might be active within each tier and for talking about future developments from tier to tier. As an example (our server), does 27% healers in T4 and 31% healers in T3 for order indicate that there's going to be a likely increase in the proportion of healers in T4 over the next few weeks? Does it mean that there is currently a huge amount of healers actively playing T3? Does it mean that there are a lot of abandoned healers in T3 (e.g. people giving up on WARs solo PvE in the early 20ies where they truly start sucking compared to nonhealers?) Does the 21% (rank 40) < 27% (T4) < 31% (T3) > 30% (T2) ~ 30% (T1) for healers show that, for whatever reason, healers are in a dire state after T3 (completely opposite to Envicta's interpretation :D)? What about RPDS order having a 33% (rank 40) < 34% (T4) > 32% (T3) > 30% (T2) < 32% (T1) - can we conclude that RPDS is a good place to be where people do not drop their class? Might it simply be a side effect of an early case of FotM syndrome? There's no way to know - all or some of them could be right
Don't get me wrong, I love numbers, but given the way they are collected and the timespan involved, it is very hard to conclude anything from those numbers except for the most generic of trends - the things that most players can rationalize even without having numbers on hand.

8
Warhammer Online / Re: Reopening Recruitment
« on: October 30, 2008, 09:18:26 PM »
That sounds like a great idea, Beosvir.

I am one of those who, currently*, do not intend to continue for the next few months - as I feared, the playstyle did not grab me, but it was fun to try out the game and I have had a good time in the guild insofar as it is possible when not in the main "leveling up together" field (for which the guild certainly is not to blame, my schedule is) - and I am probably not the only one. As such, making sure that those of you, for whom the game is rocking, can continue having a great time has got to be the first priority, and I wish you great success and glorious victories. :)

9
The Dog & Duck / Re: What I have been doing the past week
« on: October 28, 2008, 03:04:52 PM »
Dominions 3 and its "Conceptual Balance Mod". I like the game a lot (even though I suck at it), and the CB mod has opened up lots of strategies and tactics I've never before thought of :)
You need to take your turns in our Hinnom/C'tis and T'ien Ch'i games (and I need to take mine in the Hinnom game). :)

10
Warhammer Online / Re: Quick Apology
« on: October 28, 2008, 12:19:39 PM »
As one of the protagonists I also have to apologise - I was having a major sense of humour loss from too much scenario playing.
A quick suggestion? Play less. :)

An honest evaluation of the game (don't shoot the messenger, please :D) is that WAR is currently not a great game overall. It is overall a decent game, slightly above average when compared to the competition, with a few parts that are awesome and significantly above the competition (and when evaluated solely on the basis of those parts, it is a great game indeed) and a lot of parts that are worse than the competition, and that it falls far short of many major design goals. Ambitious goals to fall short of for sure, but it is nevertheless something that it is hard not to notice and it aids in creating frustration.

The latter is something that time will to a great degree address via future patches, the former may or may not - it will surely be attempted for some areas, but there's a lot of work and time needed.

The result is that it is a game that it is very, very, easy to become passionate about on both the "it sucks" and "it rules" sides (depending on what you feel is important in the game or what you have just been experiencing in the last few hours of gameplay). And it adds up.

So, if you feel that you are getting too emotional on a regular basis (and let's face it, there are excellent reasons for that), do yourself the favour of playing less per week; you'll extend your enjoyment in calendar weeks while minimizing the risk of cardiac arrest. :)

11
Warhammer Online / Re: Surnames
« on: October 27, 2008, 07:42:12 PM »
Gunnarr, if it wasn't impossible to do in two names, the right name would of course be "Sven Bendt, Born To Rune". If numbers are allowed in names (which they probably aren't), I guess you could be Sven Born2rune.

Lacking that option, some names indicative of purpose would be:
  • Sven Galdr or Sven Galdrar (Galdrer) or variants thereof (Gjalder, Galdor, &etc)
  • Sven Rocksong, Rockbirth, Rockmender &etc
  • Sven Runesmith, Runecaster, Runedriven &etc
  • Sven Futhark (or Futhorc if you prefer Anglo-Saxon), for those few literate people out there, or how about "Futharksen" or "Futhorcson" mixing old and new into something that remains pronouncable?
  • Sven Grudgemender - hey, why not? :D That would be one ambitious dwarf!
  • Sven Anklesmiter - just because you can.


-----

As for Debaser or Omyi, it is going to be hard to challenge Jarkko's suggestions, but since the names are silly anyhow, how about...
  • Debaser Instinct, Debaser Deygo, or Debaser Iamdebedder
  • Omyi Potent, Omyi Scient, or how about Omyi Directional?
I'll leave out the various variants of "Oh my heart, arse, back, balls, god, lord" &etc by which an alternative pronounciation makes obvious silly alternatives. :D

12
Warhammer Online / Re: Surnames
« on: October 27, 2008, 10:51:12 AM »
Deliberation Mathematicus is what I ended up choosing.


I actually chose it at level 13 or so but had to delay pressing accept and having it work for another seven levels. I had seen the name registrar when examining Altdorf and the bloody idiot allowed me to use the interface to choose a name but didn't give me one when I pressed accept; (PET PEEVE) Like many other things in this not-quite-polished game, there was no sensible error message when trying to do something before you are supposed to (how bloody hard is it to give him an "you must be level 20 to use this option" error message or to prevent you from accessing the option at all until you are allowed to use it?). Same issue with some of the librarians (on the top floor of the library) that allow you to select items, highlight them as if they are purchasable, highlight the buying button - and do nothing when you press it because you do not have a precondition that they do not list. At least the one on the bottom floor selling tactics tell you that you need a tome unlock.

Sorry, letting my inner developer rant again - getting the user interface right is so important for any game intended for a large audience that it annoys me greatly when there are obvious errors or oversights in the easy parts. That reminds me, where's the bloody name completion to the guild/friend list when sending mail? :D

13
Warhammer Online / Re: Uniting Order
« on: October 23, 2008, 02:20:56 PM »
Silly question, perhaps, since I'm not up to date on this stuff, but how would going deliberately after the keeps lock down zones completely if the opposition chose the counter strategy of doing mass PQs? Or is the intention of this strategy solely to control keeps, not zones?

14
Warhammer Online / Re: one too many CTDs
« on: October 22, 2008, 09:23:53 PM »
These things happen.

CTDs have been awfully common since the last patch, have they not? I used to have none, zero, nada, but I have had four since the patch. Not enough data to be statistically significant, but it sure is annoying. :D

15
Warhammer Online / Re: Standard Tactics
« on: October 21, 2008, 07:07:33 PM »
+2% crit heal certainly looks like an obvious candidate for third choice if the goal is to build around a "tough as nails" ethos. All order healing classes have access to several crit-based talents and some of them are decent.

Pages: [1] 2 3