LOL at “hyperspace exploit”… I guess jumping docked strike craft is also an exploit.
Let’s just take everything out of the game. Building frigates is an exploit because they’re more powerful than corvettes, and some players only want to build corvettes. Building DDs is just a cheat altogether, I mean they can kill frigates!!!
It’s not about the strategies you discovered using this mechanic or the strategies you can use to defeat it, the problem is it makes zero sense to allow these behaviors. Why not just allow the ship to keep everything docked if you value this strategy? Instead we have this fiddly mechanic praised as depth.
You guys instantly set up strawmen expecting innociv to defend every theoretical situation you can think of.
The exploit is the RU saving and spewing out a fleet of capitals. Docked strike craft may fall into that, but they have a legitimate mechanic for staying docked. All you’re doing is trying to waste my time.
Look, we’re trying to adapt to HW1. They have a big leg up on this particular topic over HW2. Do you see any complaining about HW1?
Like I said, at least you can see the mods and count collectors in HW2. Play the game, you’ll be able to spot these strats no problem.
Well put together Ursa.
I can see why people may be concerned about build stack launching but pulling it off successfully is a very involved process which needs a lot of careful monitoring and takes your attention off what is happening in the rest of the game. Decreased overall awareness can cost you dearly.
It also requires a substantial RU investment to build large numbers of units up to near-completion and then to have them held up inside a vessel, which is itself, a risky playstyle as it decreases your overall presence in the battlespace. Once you commit a trojan to an area you will often be leaving the back door open to your rear RU ops.
Personally I think the amount of risk a player is taking by using this strategy justifies it being allowed.
So get the developers to allow capitals to stay docked in a normal fashion. Why keep this exploit?
Oh really, and what exactly makes queue stacking “illegitimate” in this game? Your personal inability to manage a build queue? There’s no difference between the two, you’re simply using your opinion as the “ultimate truth”.
No, you’re the one wasting everyone’s time (devs time too) with these “plz remove everything from the game” statements.
Oh, AOHNH. Could I have your forgiveness for unleashing my “ultimate truth”?
I’m not going to dignify you with any responses this time around, because answering strawman after strawman is fairly tiresome. I’m sure Ursa_Major wouldn’t appreciate it either.
Is the strategy really a risk? It gives you the opportunity to cancel construction with 100% RU return if your plan changes based on what you see the other doing.
If units are coming to attack, you have time in seeing them coming into attack range or seeing their slow jump animation to finish your units and let them out to defend.
It seems the risk is low and reward is high. It’s more a matter of it taking a lot of micromanagement to pull off right.
If you had more control over the way your ships behaved, and things like being able to orientate them pointing up/down or on their sides like Cata had, would you really miss this extra bit of (yes, skillful, but also nonsensical) micromanagement?
Btw, it’d be extremely easy to make a hack that steamguard or anything else couldn’t detect which would auto-pause things at 99.9% better than a human can, which is another reason to remove it since then you take out all the skill.
Needless to say all you have is your opinions, which you back up with more of your opinions while deflecting everything else with “strawman” balloney.
We could also go back to having no build queues at all; so you have to manage it all yourself! Think of all the strategy. 
So start making stuff after you see that frigate is better than at least giving you a clue with a mod earlier?
I don’t care if a ship has 3 modules to hide their build. I can see that he’s slow at building and that’s all I need to know.
In fact if I spot 3 or more build modules I consider that player a newb as he’s unneccesarily being slow and choking on ru.
Try it in a skilled game, see how it goes for you.
While also potentially leaving you AGES behind because you have no standing fleet.
Ok, he built attacking fleet, he forced you to build a defending fleet. I don’t see a problem here.
Theory. All theory. We have way way way too much theory on these forums.
To my knowledge this have never been done. I have serious doubts it can be accomplished properly.
I was highlighting the full extent and limitations of the bug, I didn’t imply that it was practical that a player could have a whole second fleet stored in his shipyard. But even if it was only a small amount of games that involved teams turtling long enough be able to have multiple cruisers ready to replace lost ones within seconds, it is still imbalanced.
There is virtually no risk after the jump. The subsystem must be destroyed before they complete construction. Go back and look at the carrier piñata video again - 12 frigates finish in less than 5 seconds. Do you believe this is a reasonable reaction time?
Even if you were to be generous and add an extra 5 seconds more because the construction progress was offset by 2-3 build ticks (note that it is very easy to get ship progress close to 99%, almost no practice needed) and a couple of extra seconds for the time that your subsystem is targettable during hyperspace exit, this still isn’t reasonable.
Remember that players would be using this strategy to its greatest effect too which would typically involve jumping the carrier where you have little defense.
Also because HW1 carriers lack subsystems, they are also immune to this counter-tactic.
Not to be pedantic here, (this is an FYI not a “SCREW U, UR WRONG!” statement) but despite the lack of tech sharing you can actually capture any enemy mothership (including Kushan/Taiidan’s) provided your current one is destroyed (by scuttling or otherwise) before successful capture. Obviously this is only useful if you capture motherships that are the same race as yours in order to build from them. It is also harder for HW1 races to do so since they would need control of marine/infiltrator frigates.
Most players do not know about this or the full extent of its potential. “Strategy” is one way to describe it, “uninteded metagaming” is more apt. Even if it was intended, which it arguably wasn’t, you can still avoid significant hyperspacing costs in practical uses of the build shuffle which is more than enough grounds for nerfing.
This is irrelevant. There are plenty of games where a player loses a carrier or other production ship without losing the game. Even if the total fraction of games where players lost a carrier with multiple strikecraft docked, but were saved due to the ejection bug, numbered 1% it still doesn’t change the fact that it’s a cheap, imbalanced mechanic.
I just can’t help but laugh at all the “imbalanced” remarks from players that NEVER actually TRIED it in a skilled game. It is used in frig/dd hyper strats, both of which are risky. All the other player has to do is use the first frig/dd he gets offensively to slow it down or stop it altogether.
Stop wasting post count and go try it in the game. And not against some rookie team.
'cause no one really cares to do it. This isn’t SC, or Dota, or whatever. It has a pretty small MP community.
Dota2 has tons of hacks like these that aren’t detectable and simply use information that is normally available to the player but is hard for a player to manage, and this has a bigger impact than any of those.
Well, then you can also “script” the perfect fighter docking micro, the perfectly timed hypertorp, or a perfect way to optimally harvest each RU patch with minimal collector count. Should all that also be removed from the game because a script can make any one of those OP?
filler text for minimum post length.
Highly subjective. I would consider fighter/corvette/EMP dock micro much much much more important.
I have tried it against skilled opponents and it works effectively, even for the small measures that it is practical to do against them.
Being able to hyperspace on to an enemy’s secondary or tertiary RU patch, instantly build a Grawell Gen. and start popping out a few assault frigates for only the cost of hyperspacing the carrier itself is imbalanced, regardless of your attempts to dismiss player opinion here as inexperienced.
That’s a HW1 problem, not HW2. That is a reason why I get forward inhibitor as soon as I spot a controller and try to have an option to send a ship or two to the enemy base if HW1 guy does jump.
I’m actually all for disallowing HW1 use this particular mechanic - but only because I can’t see their tech choice. Either that or mark the research ship with the signs of which tech has been completed.
But do not touch those single build queues in HW2 races.