Return double $/exp

[Unix]

To be fair, this zone is far more newbie friendly than ever in the history of Hyperspace. If you know what you're doing and you're not concerned about your record, it's incredibly easy to climb up the experience ladder quickly and easily when there are flag games consistently.

 

That said, at the same time with the current population the way it is, it's not possible to climb up the ladder when it's 1v1 and you are up against a near complete ship. When there are semi consistent flag games, it's easy to earn experience, but when there are few and sparatic flag games, it's much harder.

 

Given the circumstances, doing away with some of the experience/money requirements for some items, especially since we're so far into this reset, might do some good.

 

As for "fair and balanced" games. Not possible given the players. It's not that players dont want a fair game, but they just dont want to be on teams where they have to do all the work to even have a chance of winning. Dead weight is the cause of the problems. It's not who is an impact player, but more about which team has less dead weight.

 

Realistically, what player wants to be on a team where they have to do more work because other players are either just bad or useless? Players dont get an option to play with their friends and are forced to be on a team which they dont want to be on. How can you not expect these kinds of situations from happening?

[omnomnom]

One way to bring population back might be private teams. But I would put these changes:

 

1)

a. freq 90 and 91 can now be switched freely up until an amount of players equal to the highest amount of people in any private freq

or if you want privs to not comeback in the same way;

b. freq 90 and 91 can now be switched freely up until an amount of players equal to the total amount of people in private freqs

-The reasoning behind option a is to allow pub to keep up with a priv while giving privs a fighting chance. However private team flanks can easily spell a pub team's demise.

-Option b, on the other hand, allow pub to effectively thwart all privates and their flanks by giving them a member limit equal to all of them. The only way to outnumber them now is to use pub.

 

2) When there are more than 2 teams, any existing limit to a public freq is doubled

- Since the limit only raises/exists due to the number of people in private teams anyways, this is a handicap for pubs to deal with any flanks that occur. Effectively, it allows a pub team to get enough members to equal the number of two teams, for instance the defending team and the flanking team combined, balancing the odds for the (possibly squashed in) public freq. The worst case is two full public teams and a private team however, you get a chance to run the defending team down when one of the public freqs lanc(s) dies.

- If this happens with option b from point 1 instead of doubling everything you could use option a only for the purpose of doubling, then on top of it add the other private freqs besides the one that was used. So if there were 2 private freqs with 8 ppl each, the limit to 1 public freq is 24. It is unnecessary to double the entire thing when you could only be flanked by 2 freqs at a time, making a case where several privs exists have pointlessly high doubling.

 

3) Make privs adhere to "flagging team" rules

- So basically they got to flag too. Otherwise. how do these balancing idea work if they're not trying to flag? You don't need additional players on your pub if all the privs are omnomnoming in center or something...

 

EDIT: Wait a minute, I see a problem with Point 2... make it increase by a ratio scaling higher as a 3rd team gets more people instead, up to double once the team has an amount equal to the amount in the highest member priv (then doesn't go higher than double after that). Or else the 1 man switches happen, and that should only 1 time at most before the 3rd team is forced to get additional people to hop again.

EDIT2: Also if point 1 's option b is used, only count the highest two priv freqs.

EDIT3: Moar Ideas!

 

Bases with 2 openings

Make them have 2 openings, but compensate by having small paths/rigged bomblines/rigged gunlines/etc.

 

Afk money

Every minute, gain $1 by gracing your presence. And every 20 min., gain 1 exp!!!! =D

 

More Powerballs

Add more powerballs when people in-game hit certain thresholds, like 5, 10, etc. This could increase the amount of powerballing, meaning HIGHER JACKPOTS!!!! ~____~

 

Add something with "Omnomnom" in its name

Its sure to attract more people. Omnomnom approved

 

Reduce cost of thors

More thors = more fun! $50 cost thors pls.

 

Add a rechargable "Thor Cannon"

It would allow you to get 1 thor by charging a recharge gauge to full. And as we know; "More thors = more fun!"

 

Finally, add a sublight called "Race Light"

+10 maxspeed, 10 speed, good for HS racing

Edited October 6, 2012 by omnomnom

[spittnacid]

i like all the suggestions esp. giving new people a fighting chance with beginning exp and money. Once pop is back up than make all new ppl or ppl that reset have a newbie bonus. After so many clocked hours, this is removed and they will have to fend for themselves.almost like a more powerful starter kit but that expires and is only available with their first ship. Also each kit is tailored to the kind of ship. If they purchase any upgrades (minus consumables) the bonus automatically is removed. This will allow them to have a fighting chance to earn the exp and money they need when they lose the bonus. Also it will encourage ppl to PLAY because they will want to use this trial period to gain as much money and exp as possible to be ready for when they lose their bonus.

[spidernl]

I'll likely be making a new item set based on a new idea, which this time around won't be as much of an unnecessary overcomplication as 'mass'. Plus I'll have more time to churn out the set.

 

Part of that new set's philosophy is to have a greater selection of potent items available at low experience levels.

[Cheese]

I'll likely be making a new item set based on a new idea

 

 

loooool

just like the other one amirite

[spittnacid]

I'll likely be making a new item set based on a new idea

 

 

loooool

just like the other one amirite

 

Negative Nancy

[spidernl]

Cheese is just hatin' on everyone related to Hyperspace, let him be.

 

Plus he's mad that his damage.c module "improvements" turned it into a mess.

[Cheese]

yes, im quite mad that spidernl's judgement of quality is terrible

 

btw nice new item set you got there bro

[cxc]

[And remove the part that a substantial number of HS players (as far as I'm aware, anyhow) find most enjoyable: the climb up the ladder, rather than being at the top.

 

Climbing the ladder was fun the first time, after that it is not.

[Arry]

Cheese is so full of it, he doesn't even remember all the crap he said to you a year later..... like that he told me he works for hidden street/maple story.... he's like "how'd you know".....

[Arry]

Climbing the ladder was fun the first time, after that it is not.

 

truths..... but given you did climb the ladder.... you should be known in the zone..... and you can use that to make friends.... and start helping contribute to the developement of the zone yourself.... so that after next reset (which are necessary due to programming changes)..... the ladder won't be the same....

 

However, since spider is the only kid programming this zone.... u might want 2 try climbing the ladder moar better....

[spidernl]

New item set = climb ladder all over again = fun.

 

Yes, I know I've worked on 'sets before and they didn't get finished. Usually because they ended up using mechanics that were overcomplications of the existing system, with very little to gain.

 

Going to not make that mistake this time around.

[Dr Brain]

Yes, I know I've worked on 'sets before and they didn't get finished. Usually because they ended up using mechanics that were overcomplications of the existing system, with very little to gain.

 

Going to not make that mistake this time around.

 

Word of advice: the sooner you can get a bare bones item set in (of say... 20-30 items) the happier everyone will be. Even if it's not completed, people will still enjoy it. And that'll help keep you involved in finishing it.

[spidernl]

Fair point. I was planning to do that. It's another mistake I made - get a giant load of items in, develop new mechanics for them, but give none but a specific few real stats. Since that meant nothing was playable, motivation was gone sooner or later.

[spittnacid]

Yeah why not have a base set, not like you cant add items later to it. Also if you slowly roll it out than when you see server pop is getting low throw some more items at them to work towards buying and trying.

[Arry]

spittnacids idea is the whole concept is highly practiced in the gaming world.... they actually plan expansion packs to games when they are developing.... so they get you to spend $25 more..... in addition to the $40-$50 you shelled out for the game in the first place...... with subspace being free, expansion packs = population boosters.....

[Unix]

Climbing the ladder is fun the first time because it's fresh and new, however, after the second or third time it becomes redundant and rather annoying.

 

No matter the item set, it'll be like this.

 

Why not base an item set around paths? In which you choose a particular path (item) to start off with, and you work around that item? In that case, once you finish, you can either restart your name or restart a new name. It would be nice to see a reset in which you dont have to reset it over again, but instead can simply restart your own name, and actually want to because it's a new way of playing. Of course there would be benefits to starting over yourself vs starting on a new name, such as unlocking a key item for the new path (item) you're working around.

 

Developing a ship rather than building would be the key to this concept.

 

I know the concept is very vague, but I cant really get into exacts seeing as how this hasnt really been done or suggested and I just thought of it.

[Arry]

I need a new thread called "Why SpiderNL should listen to UNIX" and not just blow UNIX off after thinking about UNIX's idea for 5 minutes and coming up with reasons why it won't work.....

 

Basically it comes down to this, SpiderNL has specific things he finds fun, so first off, before suggesting your idea and why it's fun, you probably want to learn what spider things is fun in a game...... and try to work your idea into that concept of fun. But to be honest, Spider is pretty young, and his view of what makes a game fun is pretty limited.....

 

Also, I'm not discounting brain here.... of course Brain has the last say on what he wants the zone to look like and what he thinks is fun, but he seems to have given a lot of trust over to spider as in spider seems to be doing stuff Brain, for the most part, also agrees is fun..... So that's why I say, learn what spider thinks is fun in a game..... then try to work your own idea of fun into his..... kinda have a meeting of the minds....

[spidernl]

I'm sorry, but Unix's ideas I have always rejected using arguments that to myself held greater value than his/hers. That's how opinions work. I disagree with Unix's view on the zone, and how it should cater to the top players and let them rip apart newbies in private frequencies. Same deal with the 'make a subarena to split up our already thin-spread population because that will make newbies want to get better' twisted logic.

 

My opinion is that this zone should cater to everyone. The whole 'dead weight' story in flaggames I disagree with. Yes, it can be annoying, but if the evener were better it would have very little effect. The evener, however, isn't better. You don't fix that issue by letting "pros" reign supreme (or giving them their own private playground so the most active players will be in arenas other than pub - in case you've ever paid attention to what happens when an event draws all players from pub : it causes new players who enter pub to go 'oh, nobody is here' and leave again; doesn't sound like a good way to stimulate population growth/stability to me) and letting newbies bite the dust.

 

In other words, I respectfully disagree with Unix's views of how the zone should be.

 

I also have no idea which things suggested by Unix would require workarounds at all. 'far as I know they were mostly "let pros band together in privs because public freqs are full of dead weight" and "let pros have private flaggames in a subarena because they're too elite to work together with 'dead weight'.". Both are very feasible ideas, but also ideas that conflict heavily with my own.

 

Not that I'm against private frequencies, mind you, but I don't think letting them reign supreme in flaggames is the solution. If I'll ever let privs flag, their size will be heavily dependent on the public flagging frequencies'. For example, if freqs 90 and 91 both had 9 players, privs would be capped at - at most - four.

 

A 'second pub' for a select few would only happen if we had enough population to have good (~7v7 and up) flaggames in two pubs at once*. We only rarely have that much population, and odds are that when we do, that's because a large portion of the players playing at that time enjoy even larger flaggames, and wouldn't be there for just 6v6.

 

*) 'least, the ideal is that flaggames of that size are good. If not, bases or items need changing.

 

As for Dr Brain, in all fairness I doubt he has enough time to really judge the zone as it is right now and consider whether or not he supports what I'm doing. That's not his fault, and I'd rather he did have time, but that's not the case.

 

I do, however, think that both Dr Brain and I are fond of experimenting with new things. Which is what I usually do with my development time.

Edit: That's probably also something I can improve to make HS' development seem more.. professional: introduce items a bit more slowly so I don't have to remove items mid-reset because I changed my mind, which has happened a couple times now. Right now I do have a tendency to treat HS' pub as an experiment from time to time.

Edited October 10, 2012 by spidernl

[Unix]

I've personally given up on suggesting things, it's rather pointless and in the end no matter how good or reasonable the idea, we all know that in the end spidernl will just do whatever he wants. Whether or not it's good or bad for the zone.

[spidernl]

I do indeed do whatever I want, but one of my wants is to see Hyperspace stay alive, well-populated and most importantly, fun, for as long as I possibly can. Since I'm only one person, that often involves taking feedback and suggestions from others, as I can only come up with so many things. Edited October 10, 2012 by spidernl

[Unix]

If you truly want Hyperspace to stay alive, then take the feedback and suggestions then run with it. Channel it, dont simply dismiss it.

 

I get that you're the lone developer and you can only do so much, but let's try to maximize efficiency rather than work without direction. Your last item set is a prime example, how much work did you put into it and in the end, will anything come from it? Your "mass" for ships from a while back, same thing. I'm not saying you're not working, and I'm not saying you're not overloaded, but you're a developer that's trying to be a manager at the same time and doing poorly on the latter.

 

Hyperspace hasnt been well populated for quite some time now. Obviously your view, your wants arent what the populous want. I know there's some mantra out there along the lines of not developing for the people, but for yourself, but realistically you need to consider the population because the people and keeping the people in here is what matters.

 

You understand that there's a problem, try to fix it before adding more variables to make the balance even worse. Dead weight is here, and it's not going anywhere anytime soon given the current environment. I get you want to make Hyperspace fun for everyone, but you're not making it fun for everyone by letting the team with the least dead weight being the winner. That is the state of Hyperspace at this point in time, even if you have a perfect evener, in the end it's about which team has the least dead weight. This zone now fosters dead weight, this is what Republicans in America have feared, this almost makes my liberal view points want to switch to conservative view points.

 

First, find the problem - Second, try to fix the problem quickly and effectively.

 

Point Defense was a problem for how long before you "finally" came to your senses after Death's Embrace non-center pd wzl was dominating you in your center WB in the duel arena. Even then you wouldnt openly admit it was overpowered, you made minor tweaks to it. Point defense (especially in center) didnt need a wooden gavel to dent it, it needed a sledge hammer to fix it. I agree that you shouldnt use that approach all the time, but come on, look at what you did to buff PD, even without calibration chip, it's aim was far superior than it ever was.

 

Right now the main problems concerning Hyperspace:

1. Radiating Lancs

2. Mass lancs (This goes in with part 1 slightly)

3. Certain items still just arent worth the sig spot

4. Runners in center

5. Bombs/Guns discrepancy (just weaken both and make it harder to simply run away)

6. Dead weight players

Edited October 10, 2012 by Unix

[spidernl]

Right now the main problems concerning Hyperspace:

1. Radiating Lancs

2. Mass lancs (This goes in with part 1 slightly)

3. Certain items still just arent worth the sig spot

4. Runners in center

5. Bombs/Guns discrepancy (just weaken both and make it harder to simply run away)

6. Dead weight players

 

Let's discuss these points in a constructive way, shall we?

 

1: You're very much right in saying that, right now, Radiating Coils is probably the best Signature for any basing Lancaster. Yup. I admitted it. However, consider that it was considered a useless piece of tech for many resets. Yes, things have changed, but players have also figured out just how good the item is. Letting the metagame go on for a while is the only way to balance properly. You can't hammer down the most popular item the week it's considered 'really good'. Gotta give people time to really settle on a new metagame. Find new ways to deal with things. Yanno. I think Radiating isn't significantly overpowered. It's likely to be too good with Kinetic, though, I'll give you that. If I deem it necessary, I could reduce the item's effectiveness slightly. But for now, it's not going to be anything major.

 

2: I believe mass lancs have been quite effectively brought down to a less ridiculous level. Having multiple lancs is still advantageous, but the days of 11 lancs on a 12-man team are over.

 

3: True. That's mostly not because of the items, but because the most effective builds don't need those specific items, though. At least, that's what I've come to believe. Improving them might work, but might also make other setups obsolete. Perfect balance is rather hard to achieve, after all.

 

4: I'm probably going to try and make running a little less effective next item set by increasing the weaponspeed-to-speed ratio. Can do this by either reducing speed, or increasing weaponspeed (or both, of course). It'll likely remain somewhat viable, though. It's a tactic, after all, and it should be an option. It shouldn't be so easy to avoid death entirely by just being faster, though.

 

5: Bombs should remain heavy hitters, with guns remaining superior in the "you'll always manage to at least do some damage by shooting a lot of bullets" department. Bombs doing significantly more or less damage depending on positioning is unfortunate, but does add an element of skill. Makes running away with them a bit problematic, maybe.

 

6: My solution to this problem - if I had the time to implement everything I'd want to - would be to reward non-dead weight rather than punish dead weight. Differing opinions, and all that. Just how I'd do that I don't know. Monetary rewards seem to be popular.

Edited October 10, 2012 by spidernl

[Arry]

I'm gonna see if JoWie can comment on fixes for those things......

 

Also, from what I know about UNIX, he/she is very much into the professional world, and his/her message read to me very professionally as if he/she was already dicussing the ideas in a constructive way.

 

Therefore, comments like "Let's discuss these points in a constructive way, shall we?" just kinda throw water on the fire of getting things done. 1) he/she was already doing it. 2)It simply escalates the antogonistic atmosphere for people who have trouble reading things online in a "tone-deaf" manner.

Edited October 10, 2012 by Arry

[spidernl]

JoWie? Exactly what would you need him for? It's not like any of those points are impossible/possible due to ASSS limitations

 

Edit: Maybe my wording was a bit unfortunate. I never meant to imply Unix wasn't discussing things constructively. It mostly referred to me, myself, trying to use the discussion to both explain my point of view and maybe figure out new solutions to problems.

Edited October 10, 2012 by spidernl