Hiders

lexaal · Post by **lexaal** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 1:23 am

Being the allegiance conservative I vote for #2 because I don't want allegiance to change. It doesn't matter of other alternatives are making sense or not.
There is a good to have 2+ hiders because if booted you can join the other teams. But more hiders are not needed.

SP4WN · Post by **SP4WN** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 1:37 am

Jimen wrote:QUOTE (Jimen @ Aug 28 2010, 09:56 PM) The number of hiders that are actually funny is absolutely dwarfed by the number of hiders who THINK they're funny (not everyone can be a hider genius like me, after all), and in the week or so before their identity becomes common knowledge, no one worth flying with plays for them because they don't recognize the name so main becomes voob city

Jimen wrote:QUOTE (Jimen @ Aug 28 2010, 10:09 PM) Main is always voob city, you idiot

Best set of posts you have ever done.

lexaal · Post by **lexaal** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 1:43 am

SP4WN wrote:QUOTE (SP4WN @ Aug 29 2010, 03:37 AM)

Best set of posts you have ever done.

Some may think that this is self-irony, but I believe that happens when your "mode of forum reading" is: quote and insult.

Post by **zombywoof** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:35 am

New hider every day would probably be annoying from an administrative standpoint and I'm sure there was a good reason to go to the three hider system, but a 0 hider system is an awful idea. Even the one-day respite you can get for having a brand new hider can be a breather... and a lot of the time it's nice to put on a hider and simply not have to live up to a reputation you've built... especially if it's a negative one.

Jimen · Post by **Jimen** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 4:45 am

RedLion wrote:QUOTE (RedLion @ Aug 28 2010, 05:50 PM) I'm not particular fond of hiders; I almost never use them and I don't think I've seen more than a few truly funny ones around. However, used in moderate quantities I don't see what harm they could possibly do.
On the other hand, can those who think there should be no hiders explain to me what a player who's not in a squad (or similar group) would do if booted?

They could just suck it up and take the time to consider what they did wrong while they wait for the game to end (as opposed to the current behavior where someone gets booted and just instantly rejoins, madder and more incompetent than ever). They could always head over to the dev zone and code up a non-ridiculous boot behavior, as well.

Koczis · Post by **Koczis** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:25 am

Frankly I've never seen many reasons for hiders. "Fun" factor is questionable at best, i'd rather say it's unnecessary mess. Having just one nick IMO forces players to behave little bit more reasonable and mature since your actions will stick to your name forver.

Hellsyng · Post by **Hellsyng** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:49 am

Booting becomes a problem with only one nick...

Elzam_ · Post by **Elzam_** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:50 am

Not if it's squadded. It really punishes the newer guys with no squad though.

Post by **zombywoof** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 9:53 am

Hellsyng wrote:QUOTE (Hellsyng @ Aug 29 2010, 01:49 AM) Booting becomes a problem with only one nick...

Not at all. Retaliatory booting sucks, and maybe the boot rules need to be a bit tighter, but booting is still fine.

Koczis · Post by **Koczis** » Sun Aug 29, 2010 11:22 am

Hellsyng wrote:QUOTE (Hellsyng @ Aug 29 2010, 07:49 PM) Booting becomes a problem with only one nick...

Usually I'm far from such radical approach, this time I guess IB is correct. Again - knowing that boot means you probably will have to wait to play (at least in standard, big game) will force players to behave bit more responsible in game. Commanders may as well stop abusing boot too much.