PTE build 85104-pte is now live!

Discussion in 'Planetary Annihilation General Discussion' started by jables, July 16, 2015.

  1. jables

    jables Uber Employee

    Messages:
    812
    Likes Received:
    5,537
  2. ViolentMind

    ViolentMind Active Member

    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    186
    Then play more ranked games! :p

    Seriously though, I get what you are saying, and I don't mean to imply harshly punishing people for inactivity. However, an inactive players' rank can't be accurately assessed over time, so a penalty makes sense for that reason. Your skills do erode if you don't play. I was thinking serious inactivity here as well, something like a month, not just one week.
    cptconundrum and cdrkf like this.
  3. sevmek

    sevmek Active Member

    Messages:
    114
    Likes Received:
    59
    Well, It has been some days I'm trying to get crashes under Linux using stable (wich I report in the support/Linux section of the forum now). So far I've only see this one in PTE. My bet is it is specific to PTE. But I'm not 100% sure.
    cdrkf likes this.
  4. Quitch

    Quitch Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,885
    Likes Received:
    6,045
    Nope, but I'm going to make use of that now, thanks!
    cdrkf likes this.
  5. xanoxis

    xanoxis Active Member

    Messages:
    459
    Likes Received:
    238
    Well, maybe just lower place in CURRENT rank overall. But still better (inactive) players will be higher than those weaker.

    But does it even matter? Inactive players are not shown on ladder, and by forcing people to play just to not fall to the hell, you are not encouraging people. IF you lost skill, and go back play some ranked, you will lose to better players anyway, and go out of your rank. It sorts itself, you dont need punishment for that.

    You rather need reward for playing all the time, not punishment for not playing.
    cdrkf likes this.
  6. ViolentMind

    ViolentMind Active Member

    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    186
    I guess I could agree with you, but how could you reward players to provide enough incentive for them to play ranked games? Maybe their level of activity could qualify them for some tournament where a prize was awarded randomly for participating (that way not just the best players would win something all the time)? That could work.

    Anyway, one of the main points that I was trying to make there was that I don't like the fact that my rank improves just because other players are inactive. That just seems like a weak way to increase my standing. As I understand it, the ranking system is based on a formula (Glicko?) that is relative and independent of activity. If that is true, then activity should not be a factor, and a deadbeat player would not hinder your advancement. I could be wrong about that part though. However, removing inactive players doesn't seem to be a good mechanic. I guess Blizzard addressed this with the introduction of ranking "Seasons" (where ranks get reset from time to time)? I guess that could work too?
    Remy561 likes this.
  7. cola_colin

    cola_colin Moderator Alumni

    Messages:
    12,074
    Likes Received:
    16,221
    Points. Everyone plays for points. Make it so that when you play a lot you get a lot of points.
    Pointless points. Everyone loves them.
    cdrkf, MrTBSC and Quitch like this.
  8. ViolentMind

    ViolentMind Active Member

    Messages:
    394
    Likes Received:
    186
    FRP = "Frequent Ranked Play" points? Maybe you could redeem FRP points for tournament entries or put them toward the purchase of a Commander in the Armory?
    killerkiwijuice likes this.
  9. kayonsmit101

    kayonsmit101 Active Member

    Messages:
    197
    Likes Received:
    128
    No mods, up to date everything.

    Arrow keys kept disabling mid game.

    When a group of fabricators are selected to build something and shift keyed to build something else they leave current building in progress to start next quid building. All types and combinations of fabricators had this issue.

    will keep testing.
  10. cola_colin

    cola_colin Moderator Alumni

    Messages:
    12,074
    Likes Received:
    16,221
    If you even can get more than "nothing" for them that would be even better ofc.
  11. xanoxis

    xanoxis Active Member

    Messages:
    459
    Likes Received:
    238
    Or "monthly commander reward", custom commander for being the best the longest.
  12. cola_colin

    cola_colin Moderator Alumni

    Messages:
    12,074
    Likes Received:
    16,221
    I wonder if @godde would notice if his beast commander is repurposed ;)
    xanoxis and stuart98 like this.
  13. Quitch

    Quitch Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,885
    Likes Received:
    6,045
    Shameless self-promotion.
    sevmek and cola_colin like this.
  14. mkrater

    mkrater Uber Alumni

    Messages:
    1,349
    Likes Received:
    1,830
    Build 85104-pte - 7/31/15

    This is a release candidate. Please test as much as possible and let us know if you see any issues.

    Bugfix/polish:
    Fix for client crash when hovering over a celestial unit while another unit is selected
    Fix for missing csg biomes
    Fix to allow selection of commander in GW
    doud, jtibble, Remy561 and 3 others like this.
  15. mered4

    mered4 Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,083
    Likes Received:
    3,149
    Been running the PTE on Windows 10 Pro 64 bit for 6 months. No issues.

    >:)
    stuart98 likes this.
  16. daxnitro

    daxnitro New Member

    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    4
    Could the avatar factory be fixed soon? Orbital units coming out of it don't rise to the orbital layer.
  17. wondible

    wondible Post Master General

    Messages:
    3,315
    Likes Received:
    2,089
  18. cola_colin

    cola_colin Moderator Alumni

    Messages:
    12,074
    Likes Received:
    16,221
    @pinbender
    okay it does snap when I test a position close to the planet surface. However there is a second bug that prevents the snapped location from being returned, I always get the position back I put in. So I can see the result of the test changes, but the returned position is always just the position I put in.
    maxpowerz likes this.
  19. cola_colin

    cola_colin Moderator Alumni

    Messages:
    12,074
    Likes Received:
    16,221
    Is there any chance the calls will be fixed within a week or two?
    The snapping issue results in wrong results even when I use the planet radius for planets that have a heightmap that isn't pretty flat. For example on amplus I can't correctly find water because the water has a height of ~680 there. Trying to place a land-only thing on a height 700, so 20 above water surface, already yields an "okay".

    If it can be fixed short term I'll wait. If it cant I'll probably go the slow way of using puppets first to query the terrain height, I had the hope that I can circumvent that for water, as water is pretty flat.
    It would be really cool if the buildplacement test API could always return the snapped position it used for the test, even in case the test said "cant place".
    That would cut down the time I need to gather data for a map by a factor of 3 to 5.
    Last edited: August 4, 2015
    cdrkf likes this.
  20. pinbender

    pinbender Active Member

    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    137
    I found a bug that would cause this. It should be fixed in an upcoming update.
    cdrkf and cola_colin like this.

Share This Page