Galileus

Thank you! This is all I ever wanted :3 Nevertheless, to build upon this argument, physically carrying gold on your ship is increasing risk of the game. And this is not necessarily a good thing. Loosing a ship, loosing a port where you stacked your crafting materials AND gold... you would be able to loose way too much at once, a hit that would most likely put you off of the game. Your gold being untouchable is a safety valve - you got it always, you can rebuild with it, you can rely on it. And you don't need to keep it all in your capital to do it. Another problem with it is... well... it's unrealistic. Banks did already exist for quite a time, and they did work more or less as they do now. Not as fast, but they did

At least read it before answering. I commented on the very way an argumentation should be presented and how a mechanic is justified to exist within a system. There was no extremes, no nonsense, no place for taking sides. I did not call your idea good or bad, I called it wrongly argumented. Your answer leaves it unlikely that one could expect a proper answer, though. The shear amount of loaded questions and begging the question you commit by itself is stunning. Please, rethink the way you try to debunk other's posts. "I bet you don't even lift" is always a number 1 way to make yourself a laughing stock.

Sigh. When will people learn this is never a valid argument? Keyboards and mouses just doesn't fit with the era of gameplay. For cryin out loud, the word gameplay just doesn't fit with the era of gameplay. Your post is not period viable either. Should forums be hard-modded, so that everyone who does not post according to ye oldie rules is banned? Should we switch to mailing lists, and I don't mean e-mailing? Would that be either fun or efficient? Something being or not being 100% history accurate is never an argument by itself. How this accuracy does or doesn't affect gameplay, fun, efficiency of the system and so on - these are arguments that are interesting. These, that you did not touch on.

Learn to read. I'm done. It's pointless to try and give you arguments, when in turn you "debunk" them with "it won't because it won't!". All this time you failed to answer to the first argument of my first post. In meantime, you created a super-idiotic strawman of monetary value - and now you even talk about "buying things in game with real world money". Your whole proces of argumentation relies on juxtaposition of words used by your opposition until you can debunk an iteration - nevermind it was never used in the argumentation. It's pointless. You keep arguing with things you imagined, while I cannot straighten them up faster than you create them. Mostly, because you blatantly ignore these and continue on your merry way imagining what I could've said. It's not my turn. My very first post still lacks an answer. My argument still stands. You failed to address it, and I will waste no more time with someone not capable of acknowledging it. Even less with a scoundrel who would rather try to blatantly lie and misrepresent his opponent arguments in vain hope of hiding his inability to debunk a fact. The end.

I never mentioned in-game prices. Try again. You managed to completely misread my whole argumentation yet again. I would think it was my fault explaining it, if not for the fact you used a comparison I made and pretend this was my argument in the first place. A mistake that I already pointed out for the other guy. In bold. BOLD! Seriously, this is getting stupid now. I'm reading your posts, even though it's pointless - as you seem to completely ignore mine and guesstimate what I wrote. If you want to take part in the discussion, reading other side's arguments is part of it you cannot skip. And if you have problems understanding, ask, don't guess. They say ignorance is bliss, but in a discussion arguments from ignorance won't take you far.

Then please, debunk what I wrote before. Be my guest. Go for it. "Na-ah!" does not work as an argument.

Sigh. I used that metaphor to make it easier to understand why non-linear increase in LH amount will cause a non-linear devaluation of said LH... NOT to say that LH = money in real world. I am staggered how you could even take it that way. Do you honestly, really believe I meant LH are equivalent of real world money? I specifically pointed that out. I have also never, ever mentioned anything that could mean my comment is about in-game money. And then you go out to say... ... even after I specifically pointed out that this is a bad idea because it punishes lower levels. Back to the drawing board. Read again. This time, please, take your time to actually understand instead of projecting who you think I am onto my post and pretending this is what was indeed written. I even pointed out exactly where your mistake is in your assumptions, and yet you went and repeated them again. Do you even read what I write, or do you just assume I wrote something about rebellion because I'm Polish, huh? ;_;

Because balancing. I wrote that already. You balance top down. Introduce a change that increases amount of LH for high level crafters = increase LH prices of everything to balance it out = high level crafters remain balanced = low level crafters remain with the same amount of LH as today, but the prices have risen = low level crafters can craft less. It's like real world. You say - "Hey, let's start printing all the money with 2x the value on them!" and then are surprised that prices went up. Your reasoning is - if the country prints 2x the money, everyone can buy 2x the stuff. But it does not include the devaluation of money - 2x the money gives you the same value, as devaluation meant it is going to be balanced out by the market's prices. The same with increasing the LH gain - but here, you make the obvious mistake of increasing it non-linearly. which means it will hit different level crafters differently. So - you print 2x the money, high level crafters get 2x the money, prices get 2x as high. Everything is in equilibrium - except for low level crafters who starve, because prices went up, and they got no money. Of course I assume your idea is NOT meant as a brilliant plan to secretly trick the devs to just flat out give you more LH, is it? I mean, bad idea it can be (for reasons mentioned - slowing down low level crafting), but at least I hope this is not just saying "I wanna moar LH!" under a false pretense of game improvement idea. Because you won't get more LH, you know, right?

I would say ability to group up and lynch people out of the game is way over the "votekick abuse" issue. With all due respect, what you propose is purely inept.

Sigh. There we go again. Since any balancing in a system is done top-down (according to max level, comp scene etc), adding more LH to high level player will have no effect on their ability to craft - i.e. the balancing will be adjusted to account for the fact. This means the change would be felt by the lower levels, as they would suddenly be able to craft less and - even though it can be adjusted too - level up slower. In effect, your idea leads to slowing down of low level crafting, while does not affect the high level one. And I don't think there is any reason to slow down crafting any more.

Don't play EA games. Ever. You report bugs for them to get fixed, not to get "please forgive us, here's cookies" e-mailes over each and every one. And if you cannot stand it - DON'T PLAY EA GAMES. You're acting like a child.

The only thing to stop people from deleting wrong outposts is to remove the ability to delete outposts. Chill out on the "warning upon warning upon warning". So yeah, you had 57 confirmation windows and you managed to fail anyway. Congratulations to you, please, don't request any more confirmation windows, you proved you don't read them anyway.

The only proof you can get is personal confirmation. At this point you report with right click on the name -> report and you're done. Reported as an attempt at witch hunt and public lynch. Nothing good can come from this.

How? "It's easy" doesn't really describe it too well.

You could as well forbid wearing jeans while playing. Good luck executing that rule.

With all due respect, what the h* is this? "You talk about my idea affecting balance, I talk about my idea, it's not the same, you missed the point" What kind of logic is this? You don't get to just brush a comment you don't like off. You get to be called out for trying to play dirty, that's what you get o_O And no, random images do not make it better.

LH system was put in place with the very intent of it being only obtainable through regen, not through grinding. Any idea that asks for more LH is in straight line against the very reason LH were implemented as they are.

So wait... you play it bad and you blame devs for that?

Or just have fun playing the game.

In other words the current system is, therefore it is perfect? You sure you're not mistaking Devs for Gods? At any rate, this is a beta, and many things are still buggy or flawed, or even sloppily coded (GASP!). You cannot say anything that happens is intended because it happened in a released game, much less in a beta. Your reasoning is laughable.

Don't you remember? Real Gamers do not need breaks and they have all the privileges in gaming word! They ARE games after all! No TP, no breaks, no life, no fun is allowed when gaming. I hear Real Gamers are pushing an incentive to forbid by law anything that could cause pleasure during gaming - including bathing, tasty food, socially acceptable forms of defecation and lack of physical pain. No, seriously... I get there is a hardcore crowd out there, but there is also the "hardcorer" one, that - no doubt - would be the first to leave if the game followed their demands. Would call them "elitist" but "cavemanist" sits better with the imagination.

The drama though...

This is the first time im in NN since before the closure. First thing I see? "French white flag joke!" Like... seriously... there is milking something dry... then there is beating a dead horse... that was before I even left... what are we even at now...?

... and there goes my ignorance. That long? That would actually leave an impact and diversify smaller ships from bigger ones a lot. I withdraw my concerns. Out of curiosity, because that part of physics is not my strong suit - how about turning deceleration? How does that work? Would you be forced to leave the rudder in neutral or even turn it to opposite side to realign faster? What would be - in your knowledge or guess - the time to realign from steady phase in a corvette and in a sol with and without countering with rudder?

Add a new crew shock and tie it to morale system. Make your crew-mates unhappy with you ramming another vessel - to a point where you can get crew shocked "for days" if you stack too many morale debuffs. As for balancing rams through damage - there is always going to be the bad, there is no good choice. Either you end up with ram'n'grab fest for boarding or you end up with gray torpedoes of ships.