halcyon traps are a great defense for offline players, however there are a few kinks i would like to discuss

1. halc traps provide only 2 hours of protection, (many players are offline for longer, as 4 hours are the minimum requirements for sleep of the average person.)

2. while under the effect of halc aura, you can neither be attacked or attack others, (how can you counterstrike?)

3. you cant set a trap unless you haven't been hostile for at least a day, (if I'm attacked first, wouldn't attacking back be seen as a defensive measure? and what if my planet is taken?)

in short the halcyon trap is sloppy, since you cant set one if you're at all hostile then why not just make a ship setting with the same effects and time restraints as the trap, without the negative effects such as it failing to protect you after 2 hours, and having your planets taken from you.

(ex.1) ship settings- passive mode: when this mode is activated player will be removed from the battle tab and will be unable to initiate any hostile acts within 24 hours of switching from passive to hostile or vise versa.
(ex.2) new halc trap: added counter attack measure (see below)

(also set in a counter attack measure, where if you attack or invade within the first hour or so of being attacked or having your planet taken you wont lose your halcyon trap status, that way being passive players wont mean pushover players.)

you sound like a troll and lack innersight about the game....

and i think this confirm you are a troll viewtopic.php?f=6&t=26301 ....

I think they're bad enough as it is, we really don't need to make them worse.

1. When you are attacked, you are removed from the Battle Tab. No other players will hit you before you sign on and reapply, unless you are regularly offline for extended periods of time

2. You can still attack any NPC, and by no means should you be given a free counter-attack when the attacker was not able to get a badge.

3. If you were attacked and your trap was tripped you don't have to retaliate, and if you do you know the consequences. There is no order of operations for halcyons.

In short, the traps were designed that way on purpose. Best to learn to live with them cause they aren't changing.

ok then, if you think im just being a troll, state the benefits of the current halcyon traps apposed to the cons of them, and also state how having a thousand 1 man legions is better than having 20 full legions?

they have changed, multiple times over the course of the past year, and they shouldnt stop changing until they are satisfactory

I believe them to only have changed once/twice. Most people consider them satisfactory and you don't dictate what and when Dan changes something, he does, the player base can only influence him and only if there's enough wanting it and he sees the benefits to do so will he change something. It has been changed because of mass complaints about it truecing the attacker, but I have never before seen a complaint against the way it is now. On to pros and cons.

Pros: Stops you from being disabled for 2 hours, the chances that someone will then see you again and disable you before you put up another is very slim.

That's about it. No cons no other pros by my reckoning. That is their function they work perfectly fine as they are, and I have no idea why you don't like it. In fact I'm beginning to wonder if your currently being pummeled either in a legion or personal war and can't take it like a man. I see no other reason why you'd want to see them changed. Even if you are unlucky enough for someone else to find you later, what's the most you lose? -1 to a stat, a couple of million credits AT THE MOST, chances are it's much lower and maybe 500 mineral or arti points if they decide to raid you, which is hardly a huge loss.

Agreed. They annoy me nearly as much as Quantum Firewall traps do. (I never seem to have any Null Fuses when I'm on a hacking spree.)
Better to simply leave the Halcyon traps as they are now.

Only thing i would change is the duration. 2 hours isn't enough. Make it 5 to 6 hours. People sleep, have jobs, etcv. And not everyone is on here all the time. I don't use them for anything other then the lab. Even now, I've been on my cell for 3 days unable to do combat and I'm still not going to put one on.

All of the above is excellent discourse and representative of the well-educated Galaxy Legion user community. We can all agree - something must be done to correct the ill-conceived Halcyon Trap. We've seen some suggestions such as extending the duration to at least cover a minimum 4-hour sleeping period. Now, that's a good suggestion, but in my ever-so-humble and oft under-represented opinion, that will only treat a symptom and not the underlying problem. What needs to happen in order to treat the condition itself is: cry babies who can't handle the psychologically taxing cycles of attack/disable/repair go play FREAKING FarmVille

FWIW, you can already get about 6 hours if you do things right. Put on a calming amp for 4 hours, then when your halc gets hit, you get another 2 hours adding up to 6 hours of protection.

I know people who get about 8-10 hours of protection that way as they don't get hit the minute their calming amp goes off. They often get an hour or more inbetween.

OK, in all seriousness, here is a suggested solution for the light weights who want "protection"...

In ship options, add a toggle for an "away" mode, during which:

* your ship won't even appear on the BT (news feed alerts, if any, still remain)
* all planetary production is frozen, rounded UP to the next hour. You lose production for the entire partial hour in which you toggled to "away" AND for the entire partial hour in which you toggled back
* ship upkeep continues
* other timers continue
* you are unable to receive shipments from other players (they can't send stuff to your cargo while you are "away")
* planet, player, and npc alerts from your legion do not make it to your news feed (they are missed entirely, not restored when you come back online)
* your planets, as always, are still open for invasion

In other words, that just punishes those who don't want to be part of the pvp element of the game. Maybe~ just maybe~ not everyone joined this game just to be a set of guns strapped to an engine? maybe some people joined for the economic side, or the production micromanagement side?

No one should be punished for their playstyle, least of all those who are FORCED into a game element that they don't want to be a part of.

-1 to any suggestion that involves some variation of punishment on behalf of those who don't want to pvp.
+1 to any suggestion that involves a rework of the halc to afford better protection of the user, and any suggestion that involves manual trap reordering~ just so I can annoy those who seek to damage my ship.

Tell me about it. I'm FORCED to use energy every time I do a mission. Let's get Dan to modify the game so that each person can create their own independent copy of the galaxy, offering everything they like and nothing they don't like.

Dan, in my galaxy, can I make nulls tradable? Oh and please force everyone to accept all my trade offers, no matter how ridiculous my prices are.

Edit: and replace every Crimson Flamehawk with a TO Troop Carrier.

Ryoko....im still stunned by how clueless you are....you whine about being forced into pvp.....who was that person who clicked the link to the game that says "dominate other players and control the galaxy" you dont like getting attacked while playing a game where its core is pvp?

Here is my advice to you......STOP PLAYING THEN! If your not willing to accept that by merely playing the game you agree to weather attacks all the time then you shouldn't be playing it then, you agreed to take part in some degree with pvp just from making your ship.


P.S. you wish to annoy those who attack you then why cant we annoy you with zeroing hacks?

I'm surprised at how utterly demented alot of people on this forum are. I'm clueless Huh? then why is it that I've argued for both sides of this utterly retarded arguement. most of the halc suggestions are designed to protect the attacker! suggest one that actually affords the defender more protection and we'll debate the pros and cons.

If you can't accept that Dan has given people the ability to defend themselves Via traps, then take your own damn advice.
Here's the thing Neo, those who use halcs aren't asking you to waste your time by attacking them, you're choosing to attack them despite the potential consequences.

as for Plurvious, your suggestion to freeze all of the planet production for anyone who doesn't want to pvp IS going to force them to leave the game as you've conveniently left upkeep active in your little plan, so they will be punished for not wanting to take part in a game element where it's "I've got the biggest ship and the most amount of debuff artifacts".

You choose to do the missions for the benefits the missions give, people choose not to pvp because the rewards aren't worth it in their eyes.

I never cared about the traps perhaps you missed the part where I out right admitted I was trolling over that. I just find it grating about how how your constantly whining about "being forced" into one of the parts of the game that is more or less the core that everything else branches from.

And that piece of advice everyone keeps spouting around about the count being 3,5,5 don't hit them would mean you would have to use more energy to find a target then disabling them. That and i find it rather amusing to poke you about how upset you get about getting attacked, you act like someone tried to steal your liver. If repairing is such a painful thing to your credit bank i cant help but ask how bad is your mining?

I just find your explaination that you didn't care to be utter #&$# as you clearly care because every time there's a halc thread, you always have to reply to my comments about said trap.

Does the Mission element branch from pvp? No. Does the Trade element branch from pvp? No. Planets? NO. legions in general? NO

I've never spouted the 3,5,5 advice, and I point out that you and many other pvpers whine and complain about how the halc user costs you energy and a null if they used a krio, I pointed out the obvious other side of the arguement. that the attacker costs the halc user considerably more.

the attackers get so anal about how the user is costing them a null, so why shouldn't they act as if someone's trying to steal their kidney? works both ways Neo, just most pvpers don't seem to understand that.

My mining is fine Neo, and I'd appreciate it if you don't mistake postulating an arguement against the suggestion as a sign of my current game condition.

Edit - as much as I enjoy arguing with fail trolls and degenerates, I have better things to do~ so I bid you good day and happy kidney stealing.

See its still fun to poke you over it thats why I do it halc threads are just way to easy to troll besides i mostly passive. And planets are another aspect of pvp you know attack invade ect. ect. same as legions the base is a target as well. Missions I will agree have little to nothing to do with pvp and trading well depends there are many things you can trade, and they are not just artifacts, so mehish there.

And truthfully it costs about the same on both sides of pvp the attacker has more then just energy and nulls that they have to use as well as they have the same repair costs the defender has. Just like the defender has arti's of there own that they use. In the end the only difference is that most of the time the defender is offline.

And before you get your knickers in a wad i will have you know outside planet attacks I do almost nothing but missions.

Truthfully, it doesn't matter how damaged the attacker's ship gets during the attack as it was their decision to initiate the attack.

As for planet and legion elements being a part of pvp, can you explain it without the generalisation of "They have the same action 'Attack'"? under your statement, npc is also pvp because it carries many of the same elements.

in the end yes, the majority of the time the defender is offline, and even with that huge advantage the pvpers still whine, complain and moan about how unfair the halc trap is.

Just like how the defenders whine about "being forced to pvp" or having to use traps and repair. There is no pleasing most members of both party's most passive players think they should be exempt from the fundamental heart of the game, And the pvpers whine cuz well to be fair after a point the defenders get a huge boost making attacking and disabling anyone a nightmare and just out right not worth the effort needed.

Pvp in this game is poorly out of whack and needs a huge over haul to fix some of the problems sadly getting everyone to agree on what needs to be changed is like trying to pull the teeth from a cranky bear.