Jump to content

Razorwire

Member
  • Content Count

    29
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Razorwire

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Lurking
  • backer_title
    Iron Founder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You also get a 500 error if you try and purchase a Supporter pack when you already have a Founder pack. Scout, you have a founder pack, and can't buy a Supporter pack without making a second account for it. The two accounts can't be merged, either. Express your disappointment here - I'm an Iron Founder looking to upgrade too, for what it's worth.
  2. I'm happy to buy the extra pack and have it applied to this account. It just won't let me. have spoken to support, they say it can't be done.
  3. I want to upgrade. I don't want to have to make a new account to do so and have seperate rewards on seperate accounts. I don't need a discount (though it would be nice). So some kind of upgrade path or a way of merging accounts would be fantastic.
  4. That link or quote is hidden. Is it from a Restricted forum area? Nope. Been talking to Support; the only way you can buy a supporter pack when you already own any founder pack is to make a seperate second account. The two accounts would be totally seperate, with each getting it's own rewards. Upgrades and merging accounts are not possible. I'm starting to get a little frustrated with it all, tbh. I wanted Ruby, but they closed upgrades before I could save the cash. Now I want Patron, but I lose what I currently have and have to make a new forum account if I buy Patron now.
  5. Then just stick a label on it, as in your two examples there. If I want to play 20 hours straight on a Saturday because I can't get on in the week due to work, why should I be punished? I shouldn't, is the answer. A warning on the initial load screen is enough. If an informed adult hurts themselves, that's on them; don't restrict my service because they might ignore the warning.
  6. That's why I didn't write "I will be surprised when...", I wrote "I'll be very surprised if...", which to me does not even imply a little hope. Just to be... exact: - I think there will be no life-subs available in the new packs. - I think there will be no pre-alpha access available in the new packs. - I'm truly disappointed that I didn't have the money back when I could have upgraded to Ruby for the life-sub. - I can afford Ruby twice-over now, which just makes it feel worse that I missed my only chance, just because my car blew up.
  7. I know, Lethys. I keep forgetting that these forums seem incapable of processing anything less than exact terms. Sadly, my normal mode of speech rarely uses absolutes. "Those kinds of offers are expensive for the devs over time; they effectively remove a player from the funding stream once their package cost is exceeded by whatever the subs would have cost to that point. They are a reward for very early backers with deep pockets who take a chance on an early concept. Once early backing is done, the life-sub offers always vanish, and never return. " - Me, on life-subs, late last year.
  8. I'm in the same situation; I wanted ruby for the life subscription but could only afford Iron at the time. I could buy Ruby now. Sadly, the new supporter packs will almost certainly be very weak compared to the kickstarter pledges, second-round crowd-funding always is. There might not even be any alpha-access, and I'll be very surprised if there are any life subs.
  9. Ok, I'll try again. I was offering counter-points to an artificial 7 day timer between knocking out a TU and being able to place a new one, if it's merely to stimulate a ground war. I don't think you need to, I think it'll happen anyway if both sides are prepared. It should take as long as it takes to take the ground. If one side is throwing heavy resources at the fight or is very clever about it and the other isn't, or if one side doesn't even show up, it should be over very quickly one way or the other. Remember that a TU is likely not the same as an area protection device; say knocking down the shield sets off a siege timer to give the owner time to respond, the TU is still inside the siege-shield. It'll all be settled only once both sides have been given time to muster, and that's when your war starts, mixed forces and complex ground defences and all. And *that* bit should take as long as it takes. I guess all I'm saying is that I don't want to knock down a shield, wait the 24hr (or whatever) siege-timer out, flatten the defences, kill all the defenders and destroy their spawn-room, blow up their TU and then *still* have to wait a long arbitrary time before I can drop my own TU. Nor do I want to destroy a TU only to have a hidden defender on the other side of the hex instantly drop another one. I'd go for a 5 min timer before you can place a TU on a territory that has recently lost one, and a 15 min timer on placing a TU where *you* have recently lost one. Gives both sides some reaction time and prevents ninja TU replacement. We'll see what we get, and we'll poke it until it breaks and they fix it. Then we'll poke it again. And don't worry about opportunist griefers, Devs have said that TUs are going to be expensive, and that there will be some kind of offline protection; greifers won't likely spend all that cash on a TU in the first place, and if they do, you'll get warning and time to react.
  10. Still don't see it. If me and mine can't take it in one battle, then the extra 6 days are likely worthless; if I threw everything at it, I have no reserves, and if I kept reserves wouldn't they have helped in the first push? And if I *can* take it on day one, I can wait and take it on day 6 to reduce the opportunity for reprisals. You want a proper ground war? You need to have layers of shielding that defenders can reinforce and attackers can knock down, turn it into a tug-of-war mechanic with a delay timer between each stage. And you need to provide defence vs air assault from either side. Anything less could be brute-forced or ninja'd. This would give you your week's worth of ground fighting, but at the expense of making it really hard to take territory without a huge effort, and more than a little game-y. I rather like the idea that if I'm clever, or part of a strong Org, I can take a territory fairly quickly. Lot of folk won't have the time in RL to commit to a multi-day assault.
  11. Isn't the optimal strategy at that point: drop the shield, go elsewhere for 6 and a bit days, come back, smash your way through whatever conflicts there are to a pre-scouted hiding spot, and start spamming your TU as the timer runs out? I mean, what's the point in fighting a ground war for a week if it makes no difference on the claim? I'd also worry about bot-claims if it was a simple timer.
  12. Love the idea It's have to be done in such a way that I couldn't claim an entire huge starship, or the mats to build one, by just tripping over some ex-player's stuff though. Would be pretty cool if it could be made into a long-ish project of refinishing, refurbishing and recommissioning a construct though.
  13. There is a difference between static and dynamic constructs, I believe, depending on the the initial placed core. Protection bubble generators therefore could only be deployable on static constructs. .
  14. JC did kinda hint at some material-properties-based soft limits when asked about space-elevators, so we could still see *some* limits...
  15. We can hope for both. Variants of baseline elements with the mods baked into the blueprint, all of which can be further 'rigged by those with the skills on an individual construct basis. My favourite kind of PVP is where I know what I'm doing but am undergeared vs a clueless but gucci snob
×
×
  • Create New...