Choose Profile

Why is this even a close vote? The only argument for keeping them around is from the players who don't want to lose their overpowered edge. Obviously the customization in HS makes it unique and appealing, but when the discrepancies between different setups become so large, balance becomes a major issue. There's no doubt that these 3m tech items are the deciding factor.

I'm all for a more level playing field. As long as everyone with alien tech's get full refunds I don't see an issue with this. The better players and teams will still be better without overpowered junk.

I don't see how giving captains temp powers in the league arena would be a problem, unless it's physically just not capable to give them temporary powers in one arena, which I have no idea of. I also don't see how specials will be that big of a problem. They add an extra dimension to the duels which we're all familiar with in public settings anyways. Sure, the 1v1 "unofficial" rules have taken root in the would-be dueling community of HS, but that preferred method of single person duels shouldn't have a bearing in league duels. Staff also isn't capable of making the changes necessary to ensure fair play in regards to item usage, and seeing as how every single person who will be dueling has specials on their duel ships anyways, they should be allowed. If every captain elects to not use specials and they can enforce their players to also not use specials, then that's fine with me, but expecting HS staff to get involved is a bit silly. I'm glad to see you guys are passionate about this league and it's potential success, but angrily ranting on these forums about it will not change the fact that staff isn't really going to have a hand in this particular matter. If all the captains can come to an agreement, then sure, let's all elect to not use specials. If this does turn out to be the case, there needs to be a.) punishment for those who do use items, if even on accident, and b.) expectations that not everyone will be caught by a ref(s) using items, and you'll just have to deal with it if it happens to occur to your disadvantage. -CP/El Diablo

I've played 6 or so prac matches and the map is good.

Username: El Diablo Captain: No Ref: No

Honestly? who cares about that guy.

Just ban anyone who is caught runwinning if that's the only reason why priv freqs larger than one aren't allowed. It's re!@#$%^&*ed to take one of the best functions of this zone away because staff can't handle the issue of runwinning. We can make 'fully customizable' ships but I'm not allowed to just fight side by side with 2 other people that I actually don't hate rather than all the schmucks in public freqs.

Privs can't flag anymore so they should be able to runwin. Privs can't do 3 vs much larger pubs so wtf do you expect them to do. You guys cry about privs being allowed 6 players until its chopped in half, and then when you get what you want you comlain because you never actually thought about what you wanted in the first place. Go kill yourself please.

i play on pokerstars and occasionally bodog, and Im not looking to throwing money at fulltilt, but if this was on stars I would definately be down for something similair

because wasting a signature spot for armour is a joke. thats why i assume no one uses it.

If you call competing one team holding all the flags and holding off the other until the JP gets high enough, yeah they're competing. Because having no chance of winning isn't fun. Most vets probably like flagging now because they win and make a tidy profit off of it. I'm *not* trying to make flagging make any less money. I'm trying to open the doors for the newbies. What "vets" still play? These recent changes have only caused dissinterest in HS, and pretty much all of the old-time players have "quit" or just have stopped coming back. Just look at our forums for the past week, public hasnt even gotten a post in 4 days, and the general population of players who float in and out is beginning to thin out again. I definately see how there are serious problems with flagging right now, but I think you're changes are not going to fix anything. And as far as flag games lasting so long, I don't think people would play for HOURS if they weren't fun. 2+ months after a reset, money and exp do not hold much importance, and flagging for the fun of it comes into the picture. I do not see how flag games lasting for hours on end is an indication that they are not fun. Yes, you are very correct that ONE TEAM holding all of the flags the entire team is not much fun, but this issue has nothing to do with the lenght of the flag game. The one sidedness of flag games has everything to do with imbalance, and your changes will do nothing to correct those imbalances. Instead of 3 hour long one sided matches, there will just be 9 20-minute long one sided matches.

If the flag game is lasting for HOURS, obviously both teams are still competing with one another. Seeing as you very rarely flag, how do you know that long lasting flag games arent fun? I think they are. I believe the "flagging problem" in basing games has more to do with settings imbalance rather than how flag games are structured. Why not work on balancing teams and item usage during flag games isntead of just changing how the flag game operates. You're going to have the same problems that flaggers dislike now, even if you change how long the flag games last.

Brain, since your goal is to get players to win as soon as they get all flags, then your proposal will probaly work. On the other hand, I dont see this proposal as actually getting anyone to want to flag. You're suggestions remove the fun out of flagging, I really dont see the point in trying to make games last as short as possible. Why not just remove basing altogether? Personally if your proposal is fully implemented, I would see no reason to bother flagging. I'm not sure about others, but i play HS, and flag in hs, because i like to. As far as I can tell, your proposal will make flagging nothing more than a way to make a little bit of money, while eliminating the possibility to make more so. So if your goal is to "fix" the "broken" flagging system, your ideas should work. But I do not see anyone wanting to play this "fixed" version.

jesus christ thank you for "We've changed the ammo bounty reset to remove 50 bounty per buy (I highly suggest a good buy macro to avoid multiple removals). This is in contrast to a straight bounty reset. This should make bountying hard, but not impossible. For those that are curious, the original change was made to try to speed flag games up." ^that pretty much has saved me from quitting entirely, and hopefully may draw back in the 10 or so people who have claimed to quit within the last week or so.

I agree with you. Unfortunately the dev team (arnk dylie) thinks the ammo system is godly, and unfortunately he also thinks making bounty reset when you buy ammo is awesome as well. BTW the bounty reset upon buying ammo idea was implemented after the ammo system was implemented. I've tried to talk to him (arnk) several times about what any good this does, but ive been given no satisfactory answer, and basically if you dont agree with him, he will call you immature and will refuse to explain his purpose (which he lacks) for implementing this crap. I would expect the same if I were you, Exiili.

hyperspace is not and has never been about the players.

^^^^^

I really dont care about any conspiracy theories, but why the !@#$%^&* was this change made. I can understand the implementation of ammo to hinder bountyers, but to reset all bounty just because a player runs out of ammo is ridiculous. I really see no sensible reason why this was implemented. This not only effects 'vets' who like to have uber-high bounty, but every little noob out there who is just starting off, cant afford to buy 10 packs of ammo at a time, and tries to get an okay bounty. Now not only does he have to afford the ammo and outplay his opponents, but on top of it he has no choice except to lose his bounty very quickly. I really dont understand all the hate against bountyers from the dev team when the dev team put a system in place based on money. It is only natural to want to make as much money as possible, and bountying is the best way to do this. Just get rid of the more money per kill as your bounty rises, because effectively thats what this stupid ridiculous ammo cap is doing.

LOL rootbear, you post in almost every complaint/rant thread about how the OP should basically 'stfu and not complain because nothing will be changed,' yet you make an extremely similair type of topic.

rootbear, shut the !@#$%^&* up already. Yes, there is a good deal of rant threads around here, but you !@#$%^&* in every single one of them. I know you have absolutely nothing better to do with your time, but please, get the !@#$%^&* out. The HS community is at least thankful that you no longer actually play. And lastly, the only way to make change is to discuss the topics at hand. If changes were made and people quit without disputing them simply because they did not agree with those changes, then HS (and almost everyone zone, online game, business, and countless other en!@#$%^&*ies) would simply fall apart. Change is constant, but negative change can sometimes and needs to be disputed and fixed. Because you failed to initiate change yourself, you simply gave up on the zone and are now a useless POS as far as these forums go. That is All.

shut up hamm

That's the thing. It's quite easy to run away from a plasma-spam terrier, but you shouldn't be expected to do that. Ships are supposed to have their own pros and cons, and at no time should there be a situation where one ship can in no way take out another and would be forced to run away. WAT manivo? Each ship has its own purpose and capabilities, and some ships definately SHOULD be expected to outperform others in certain situations. For instance i would expect a spider to beat a javelin inside a base. The unique design of hyperspace allows players to build their own ship to a degree, and this gives the player the oppurtunity to build a ship better at certain role(s) than his opponent. You're statement tells me that you must not be too familiar with the zone. In this particular case, a warbird or pulse-terrier vs a plasma-terrier, each setup has its inherited strenghts and weaknesses. As i stated pulse terr vs plasma terr, its rather easy to beat the plasma terr this way, but while using a warbird it takes a bit of manuevering. If you know anything about the roles of hyperspace ships (which you should if you are going to make such an ignorant post as you have) then you should know that a warbird is a LIGHT FIGHTER while a terrier is a larger, medium based fighter. In this matchup, a warbird SHOULD have to use its manueverability to outperform the terrier, and the warbird should not be expected in anyway to simply win in a straight on spray fest towards the terrier. The terrier, being heavier fighter with higher energy and less manueverability, would not be expected to outmanuever the warbird, but instead attempt to hit it with a few well placed shots with its high-energy plasma cannon. If this were DSB or TW, your post MIGHT make sense. But just as well, even those uncustomizable and less differentiated ships present in those DSB and TW still posses traits to outperform an opposing ship in specific settings. EDIT: Just to be more specific, the customization present in this zone allows players to create ships very skill oriented. For instance I could build a warbird with high volume non bounce bullets (m!@#$%^&* driver) and a high-energy, low-recharge reactor (esper system) to create a powerful 1v1 dueling ship. On the other hand, put this warbird in a base, and it will have a harder time vs a ship with a high-recharge reactor possessing bouncing bullets.

I do not agree with the terrier-plasma set up being too strong. I am extremely able to simply outgun and kill a terrier-plasma set up vs my terrier-pulse set up. Terriers with plasma are pretty strong against a warbird, but slow speed and horrid rotation make it easy for a warbird to manuever around and/or away from the terrier and its bullets.

Neptune, if you want smaller teams and bigger jackpots, play on a priv team.

Xun, it does not help your "cause" at all if you make more topics basically stating the same !@#$%^&* thing. If you wanted to thank Unix for her help, then PM her, but don't make more topics about the same crap with the only exception being an added players name. I'll give no credence or time to anyone who creates multiple complaint topics with lack of ANY suggestions other than "plz players, even things up." It is not the players responsibility to want to make more money than their opponents in a zone which is fueled by a monetary economy. Stop making these threads until you have something to say of any worth.