Forums » Suggestions
On the subject of factions and reputation as it regards to.. well everything. (incredibly long post)
12»At present the faction system of vendetta is functional, but has some significant flaws. Reputation with the various factions is quite easy to get, and with the introduction of capital class vessels things that were a minor difficulty have the potential to become a major problem. I’ve been working on this post for quite some time, and wish to present in it several additions/modifications to the current faction/reputation system with the intent of accomplishing the following:
-Make reputation somewhat harder to gain while not granting the hardcore players a significant advantage over the casual gamers.
-Modify the amount of reputation needed to gain rewards/penalties to add more diversity in the game.
-Change the way player actions within monitored space and NFZ’s affect reputation with the intent of adding a less arbitrary “feel” to the way the game interprets interaction between players.
-Allow for recovery of reputations with all factions no matter how low your reputation has become, but make having a low reputation much more of a penalty.
-Change the way (NPC) capital ships, stations, convoys, and their defenders percieve the actions of players.
Obviously this requires a fairly large amount of effort on the part of the developers, and in no way am I expecting or demanding that anything I suggest be acted on immediately. I post merely because I feel that this is an area where the game could use some enhancements, and am presenting my ideas on the subject and soliciting comments and criticisims. As usual if the developers find anything worthy of their interest I am glad to be of assistance. I was going to try to withold commenting on this until after the development wiki goes live, but with that coming at an unknown date in the future, I’ve decided to go ahead and post this.
=========================================
(((( 1 ))))
For my first point I feel that reputation is too easy to gain, making it feel less like a challengeing task with an approriate reward and more like “something to do in the 45 minutes between capital ship battles/CtC convoys, etc etc” While the old system was far too slow, IMO the current trading guild missions are too fast. The corrolary to this however is that if we slow down the progression too much then the hardcore gamers have a distinct advantage over the casual gamer in that they can gain access to far more equipment because they have more time to spend getting the neccesary reputations.
To bring a measure of balance to this I would alter the way that the trade missions, (and any other missions we gain as time passes) to present different rewards for different missions. For instance with the current trade guild missions I could assign the following breakdown. 1,000 credits have the same value as 100 trade XP and 10 reputation points, thus these numbers are all equal to 1 reward “point”. (The numbers are arbitrary and mainly just to provide a formula) If for each system a mission requires you to pass through you want to give 6 reward “points” you can create different rewards for each mission type by altering the number of “points” you assign to each othe the three categories.
For Example you could have a delivery mission give a balanced reward, assigning reward “points” in the manner of 2c / 2xp / 2rep for each system.
A procure mission could provide better XP gain at the expence of cash reward by making the assignment 1c / 3xp / 2rep
Retrieve missions might allow more cash at the expence of XP using a 3c / 1xp / 2rep
Special Delivery missions would give reputation at the expence of XP using 2c / 1xp / 3rep.
Mining missions might give lots of cash at the expence of both XP and rep. maybe 4c / 1xp / 1rep
The important thing is that each mission give the same amount of reward, but vary in what type of reward you gain. Add to this a change in when the different missions become availible and you can reduce reputation gain AND give players the option to customize what they are trying to get from the missions. For example the special delivery missions isnt availible until you have a reputation of at least +400.
All of the above missions would be limited to a distance of 4 system jumps or less. (Meaning that a procure/retrieve would never be more than 2 systems away since you have to go both there and back) At a suitable trade level (trade 7 perhaps) a Long distance version (6+ system jumps) of each mission (except mining) would become availible that gives out 8 reward “points” per system, with the additional 2 points placed in XP and Cash, allowing faster progression to the players at high levels of trade without making it significantly easier for them to gain reputation.
The final method of changing the reputation gain to keep the hardcore gamers from having an advantage over the casual gamers would be to give each faction both “allies” and “competitors”
Any pair of factions that are “competitors” would have a maximum value (or cap) that the combined reputations could not exceed. For example serco and itani might have a “cap” of +500. Allowing a player to have +250 with each faction, +500 with one and 0 with the other, etc etc. This would prevent players from having access to every ship in the game, and instead make the choices a player makes have a visible result. Choosing to gain reputation with one faction would mean that you would be unable to increase reputation with another faction later on.
To prevent the “accidental” removal of reputation the cap would function by preventing reputation gain with either faction once the cap is reached. Players would have to intentionally “lower” standing with one of the opposed factions to be able to increase the other one at a later time.
Allied factions would reflect a percentage of any changes in standing with a faction they are allied with. Each ally would increase/decrease in a set percent. For example TPG and Orion might be allied at 10%, a 100-point increase in reputation with one would result in a 10-point increase with the other one. By the same token loosing 100 points with one would result in a 10-point loss with the other.
For allied factions even if you were unable to gain additional reputation with the faction you are working for (due to a competitor cap or because you have +1000) you would still gain with the allied factions as if you had gained the total reputation. This would allow players to do missions for a faction that is allied with one that they have lost docking privledges at, thereby regaining some of their standing, something I will cover more later on.
All of the corporate factions with a presence inside UIT space are considered ‘allied” with UIT and have a special provision making it impossible to dock (but not making you KOS) with their stations if you are KOS with UIT. (More on that in the next section)
====================================================
(((( 2 ))))
The second point is fairly simple; I don’t really like the ‘all or nothing’ approach that the factions have to docking. You are either KOS or you can dock. Seems kinda silly to me.
I would change the point values and their results as follows:
-1000 to –901 = KOS. Defbots and strikeforces are dispatced the minute you enter monitored space. All sectors in the systems claimed by serco and itani nations become “monitored” All sectors in UIT claimed nation space become UIT monitored except the corporation stations. Some corporation stations (such as TPG) that have strong ties to the UIT also have UIT monitored space when inside UIT claimed systems. This cuts down on the piracy in nation space and makes avoiding defbots and strike forces much harder for the casual intruder.
-900 to –600 = Hated. You are not allowed to dock under normal circumstances. While no strikeforces are dispatched when you enter monitored space, if you venture within the NFZ area around the station you will be fired on by the station defbots, and station turrets if any are ever added. By messaging one of the defbots you can choose to pay a “bribe” to have your reputation temporarily increased to “strong dislike” until you leave the sector.
The bribe would be calculated by what your current reputation with the faction is, being larger the worse your faction standing has become. I’m thinking maybe 10,000c at –600 with it increasing by 1000 credits for every 10 reputation points, to a maximum of 40,000c per docking if you are –900.
-599 to -550 = Strong Dislike. You can dock, gain access to limited missions such as ”scrapyard”, “procure”, “mining”, or any other newer missions that don’t require the station to give you access to cargo but instead require you to complete a task at your own expense. at "Strong Dislike" you cannot home or buy any equipment at this station.
-549 to –200 = Dislike.You can dock, take some missions, and have access to some equipment.
-200 to +200 = neutral. Same as it is now.
+201 to +599 = Like. Same as it is now
+600 to +800 = Strong Like. You have access to some special equipment, and get a small (3%?) discount on purchases
+801 to +999 = Admire You have access to more special equipment, and get a slightly better discount (6%?) on purchases.
+1000 = Pillar of Society. Access to all equipment, 10% discount on purchases (have to make sure none of the discounts allow you to buy a cargo and then sell it for a profit in the station)
=================================================
(((( 3 ))))
My third point is a change in the way the NFZ penalizes violators, and possibly a change in what parts of NFZ policy are applied at different stations, along with an alteration of how monitored space handles reputation.
To begin we break NFZ rules down into 5 levels, defining what happens when the following actions occur inside NFZ space.
1 firing a weapon results in a temporary ban on docking, you must leave the sector and return to have it lifted.
2 damaging a player who has a reputation of –599 or higher results in a temporary change to “HATED” (see above) and a permanent loss of 5 reputation points. This level obeys all current restrictions, eg you have to do X amount of damage from a bump, etc etc. this only is applied the first time you damage a player during your stay in the sector.
3 damaging a player who has a reputation of +201 or higher results in a temporart change to “KOS” and a permanent loss of 20 reputation points. This level obeys all current restrictions, eg you have to do X amount of damage from a bump, etc etc. this only is applied the first time you damage a player during your stay in the sector.
4 destroying a player who has a reputation of –599 or higher results in a temporary change to “KOS” and a permanent loss of 50 reputation points.
5 destroying a player who has a reputation of +201 or higher results in a temporary change to “KOS” and a permanent loss of 100 reputation points.
Different stations could start the NFZ rules at different levels. For instance Corvus stations might choose to only apply rules 3,4, and 5.
Monitored space would have a similar set of rules that would be applied to attacks on players with a reputation of +600 or more.
As a baseline I would apply the following 4 rules…
1 damaging a player who has a reputation of +600 or higher results in a permanent loss of 25 reputation points for each 10% of total damage done.
2 damaging a player who has a reputation of +800 or higher results in a permanent loss of 50 reputation points for each 10% of total damage done.
3 destroying a player who has a reputation of +600 or higher results in a 5-minute change to “KOS” and a permanent loss of 350 reputation points.
4 destroying a player who has a reputation of +800 or higher results in a 5-minute change to “KOS” and a permanent loss of 700 reputation points.
Additionally I would alter the reputation loss from the above penalties to be relative to the reputation of the players involved.
For every 100 points of reputation MORE than the target that the attacker has, I would reduce the penalty by 15%. Thus if a person with +1000 detroys a person with +700 than the attacker would only loose 55% of the basic reputation loss.
For every 100 points of reputation LESS than the target that the attacker has, I would add a 5% increase to the penalty, thus a player with a reputation of +700 who kills a player who has +1000 would take a 115% penalty.
The penalties for NFZ and Monitored space would be separate, meaning that violating NFZ regulations by destroying someone who is +900 or more with that faction would result in both penalties.
===========================================
(((( 4 ))))
Because of the changes in points #1 and #2, It would be easier to recover standing that has been lost, and you would need to loose a significant amount more standing in order to be subject to the strike forces, the strike forces need to become much more powerful. Tangling with a strike force should result in almost instant death.
I propose that the strike forces be given a top speed of 260m/s, and have their armor increased significantly. At the same time however, to make group raids more possible, I would limit the total number of strike forces that can spawn to 10 per system, get rid of the damn seekers, and have a 5 minute respawn time if destroyed. This way a large group could concevably overpower the strike forces for a limited time.
By taking missions for an ally of the faction you lost standing with, you could bring it back up to the point where docking (even if you had to bribe your way in) became an option again. Serco and Itani would start at –950 with each other, and jumping into enemy territory to bot up reputation would only work AFTER you had increased your reputation by doing missions for an allied faction, due to the modified strike forces.
On a related note, Deneb would become a grey system, with each nation having a station inside their wormhole, and maybe a corvus station hidden in a large roid somewhere in the system (ala old sector 10), additionally since both Giera and Eo would have every sector as a “monitored’ sector, it helps to prevent easy incursions by the enemy while still allowing a "warzone" between the two nations that both have easy access to.
===========================================================
(((( 5 ))))
Capital ships are the main reason I’m revisiting the subject of factions, reputation and the like… With the introduction of the heavy cruisers we’ve seen problems with the way reputation is handled… players killing people from the nation that owns the cap ship by shooting them from turret, people killing turrets then docking with the same ship to repair, etc.
Capital ships would act something like roving stations, any sector a NATION or FACTION owned (read as major NPC) capital ship was in would be considered monitored by that nation within 5000 meters of the capital ship. The capital ships with docking bays would have a NFZ around them that followed ONLY rules 3 and 5, regarding the damaging or killing of players with a ‘liked” or better reputation.
Capital ships would only allow players with +200 or better reputation to dock as they do now.
They would no longer stop for players to dock, instead they would slow to 20m/s for players with a reputation of +600 or more, everyone else is on their own.
Firing on a capital ship would have its own set of rules and penalties.
1. Doing up to 7500 points of damage to a capital ship during the time it is in a sector would result in a warning. (this allows for a few stray shots to hit the ship if you are trying to defend it)
2. Damaging a capital ship beyond the warning stage would result in a permanent loss of 5 reputation points for each 1000 points of damage done, you would also have your reputation altered to 0 on a temporary basis, (until you leave the sector and return)
3. Destroying a turret, regardless of how much damage you have done to the ship itself will result in a permanent loss of 50 reputation points and a temporary change to KOS. This KOS status would last until the CAPITAL SHIP leaves the sector. (to prevent people from hopping in, killing a turret, hopping back out to clear the KOS and repeating)
4 Destroying a capital ship would result in an immediate change of reputation to –1000 with the appropriate nation.
5 Inside nation monitored space, all turrets would count as a +800 character with the nation involved.
==========================================================
One last note, the XP penalty for killing new players needs to be removed if they are outside their nation space. The game can check to see if they are doing the begginner combat mission inside the space claimed by their nation… it should be able to identify if they are being destroyed outside of their nation space or not.
Players under a total level of 4 should get a nice big warning each time they leave their home nation space letting them know that the area they are venturing into is dangerous and they are without protection there. If they log out outside of nation space… when they log back in the warning should flash when they undock or when they load if they logged off in space.
REGARDLESS of level, the first time a player leaves his or her nation claimed space the same warning should appear.
Instead of the just the XP penalty, I would also impose a nice large additional reputation hit of –500 for damaging a player with less than 4 total levels if he/she is inside the area claimed by his/her nation.
As usual I welcome any constructive criticism, and applaud anyone who waded through that mass of text. :)
Spellcast
[spellcast faction post 1]
-Make reputation somewhat harder to gain while not granting the hardcore players a significant advantage over the casual gamers.
-Modify the amount of reputation needed to gain rewards/penalties to add more diversity in the game.
-Change the way player actions within monitored space and NFZ’s affect reputation with the intent of adding a less arbitrary “feel” to the way the game interprets interaction between players.
-Allow for recovery of reputations with all factions no matter how low your reputation has become, but make having a low reputation much more of a penalty.
-Change the way (NPC) capital ships, stations, convoys, and their defenders percieve the actions of players.
Obviously this requires a fairly large amount of effort on the part of the developers, and in no way am I expecting or demanding that anything I suggest be acted on immediately. I post merely because I feel that this is an area where the game could use some enhancements, and am presenting my ideas on the subject and soliciting comments and criticisims. As usual if the developers find anything worthy of their interest I am glad to be of assistance. I was going to try to withold commenting on this until after the development wiki goes live, but with that coming at an unknown date in the future, I’ve decided to go ahead and post this.
=========================================
(((( 1 ))))
For my first point I feel that reputation is too easy to gain, making it feel less like a challengeing task with an approriate reward and more like “something to do in the 45 minutes between capital ship battles/CtC convoys, etc etc” While the old system was far too slow, IMO the current trading guild missions are too fast. The corrolary to this however is that if we slow down the progression too much then the hardcore gamers have a distinct advantage over the casual gamer in that they can gain access to far more equipment because they have more time to spend getting the neccesary reputations.
To bring a measure of balance to this I would alter the way that the trade missions, (and any other missions we gain as time passes) to present different rewards for different missions. For instance with the current trade guild missions I could assign the following breakdown. 1,000 credits have the same value as 100 trade XP and 10 reputation points, thus these numbers are all equal to 1 reward “point”. (The numbers are arbitrary and mainly just to provide a formula) If for each system a mission requires you to pass through you want to give 6 reward “points” you can create different rewards for each mission type by altering the number of “points” you assign to each othe the three categories.
For Example you could have a delivery mission give a balanced reward, assigning reward “points” in the manner of 2c / 2xp / 2rep for each system.
A procure mission could provide better XP gain at the expence of cash reward by making the assignment 1c / 3xp / 2rep
Retrieve missions might allow more cash at the expence of XP using a 3c / 1xp / 2rep
Special Delivery missions would give reputation at the expence of XP using 2c / 1xp / 3rep.
Mining missions might give lots of cash at the expence of both XP and rep. maybe 4c / 1xp / 1rep
The important thing is that each mission give the same amount of reward, but vary in what type of reward you gain. Add to this a change in when the different missions become availible and you can reduce reputation gain AND give players the option to customize what they are trying to get from the missions. For example the special delivery missions isnt availible until you have a reputation of at least +400.
All of the above missions would be limited to a distance of 4 system jumps or less. (Meaning that a procure/retrieve would never be more than 2 systems away since you have to go both there and back) At a suitable trade level (trade 7 perhaps) a Long distance version (6+ system jumps) of each mission (except mining) would become availible that gives out 8 reward “points” per system, with the additional 2 points placed in XP and Cash, allowing faster progression to the players at high levels of trade without making it significantly easier for them to gain reputation.
The final method of changing the reputation gain to keep the hardcore gamers from having an advantage over the casual gamers would be to give each faction both “allies” and “competitors”
Any pair of factions that are “competitors” would have a maximum value (or cap) that the combined reputations could not exceed. For example serco and itani might have a “cap” of +500. Allowing a player to have +250 with each faction, +500 with one and 0 with the other, etc etc. This would prevent players from having access to every ship in the game, and instead make the choices a player makes have a visible result. Choosing to gain reputation with one faction would mean that you would be unable to increase reputation with another faction later on.
To prevent the “accidental” removal of reputation the cap would function by preventing reputation gain with either faction once the cap is reached. Players would have to intentionally “lower” standing with one of the opposed factions to be able to increase the other one at a later time.
Allied factions would reflect a percentage of any changes in standing with a faction they are allied with. Each ally would increase/decrease in a set percent. For example TPG and Orion might be allied at 10%, a 100-point increase in reputation with one would result in a 10-point increase with the other one. By the same token loosing 100 points with one would result in a 10-point loss with the other.
For allied factions even if you were unable to gain additional reputation with the faction you are working for (due to a competitor cap or because you have +1000) you would still gain with the allied factions as if you had gained the total reputation. This would allow players to do missions for a faction that is allied with one that they have lost docking privledges at, thereby regaining some of their standing, something I will cover more later on.
All of the corporate factions with a presence inside UIT space are considered ‘allied” with UIT and have a special provision making it impossible to dock (but not making you KOS) with their stations if you are KOS with UIT. (More on that in the next section)
====================================================
(((( 2 ))))
The second point is fairly simple; I don’t really like the ‘all or nothing’ approach that the factions have to docking. You are either KOS or you can dock. Seems kinda silly to me.
I would change the point values and their results as follows:
-1000 to –901 = KOS. Defbots and strikeforces are dispatced the minute you enter monitored space. All sectors in the systems claimed by serco and itani nations become “monitored” All sectors in UIT claimed nation space become UIT monitored except the corporation stations. Some corporation stations (such as TPG) that have strong ties to the UIT also have UIT monitored space when inside UIT claimed systems. This cuts down on the piracy in nation space and makes avoiding defbots and strike forces much harder for the casual intruder.
-900 to –600 = Hated. You are not allowed to dock under normal circumstances. While no strikeforces are dispatched when you enter monitored space, if you venture within the NFZ area around the station you will be fired on by the station defbots, and station turrets if any are ever added. By messaging one of the defbots you can choose to pay a “bribe” to have your reputation temporarily increased to “strong dislike” until you leave the sector.
The bribe would be calculated by what your current reputation with the faction is, being larger the worse your faction standing has become. I’m thinking maybe 10,000c at –600 with it increasing by 1000 credits for every 10 reputation points, to a maximum of 40,000c per docking if you are –900.
-599 to -550 = Strong Dislike. You can dock, gain access to limited missions such as ”scrapyard”, “procure”, “mining”, or any other newer missions that don’t require the station to give you access to cargo but instead require you to complete a task at your own expense. at "Strong Dislike" you cannot home or buy any equipment at this station.
-549 to –200 = Dislike.You can dock, take some missions, and have access to some equipment.
-200 to +200 = neutral. Same as it is now.
+201 to +599 = Like. Same as it is now
+600 to +800 = Strong Like. You have access to some special equipment, and get a small (3%?) discount on purchases
+801 to +999 = Admire You have access to more special equipment, and get a slightly better discount (6%?) on purchases.
+1000 = Pillar of Society. Access to all equipment, 10% discount on purchases (have to make sure none of the discounts allow you to buy a cargo and then sell it for a profit in the station)
=================================================
(((( 3 ))))
My third point is a change in the way the NFZ penalizes violators, and possibly a change in what parts of NFZ policy are applied at different stations, along with an alteration of how monitored space handles reputation.
To begin we break NFZ rules down into 5 levels, defining what happens when the following actions occur inside NFZ space.
1 firing a weapon results in a temporary ban on docking, you must leave the sector and return to have it lifted.
2 damaging a player who has a reputation of –599 or higher results in a temporary change to “HATED” (see above) and a permanent loss of 5 reputation points. This level obeys all current restrictions, eg you have to do X amount of damage from a bump, etc etc. this only is applied the first time you damage a player during your stay in the sector.
3 damaging a player who has a reputation of +201 or higher results in a temporart change to “KOS” and a permanent loss of 20 reputation points. This level obeys all current restrictions, eg you have to do X amount of damage from a bump, etc etc. this only is applied the first time you damage a player during your stay in the sector.
4 destroying a player who has a reputation of –599 or higher results in a temporary change to “KOS” and a permanent loss of 50 reputation points.
5 destroying a player who has a reputation of +201 or higher results in a temporary change to “KOS” and a permanent loss of 100 reputation points.
Different stations could start the NFZ rules at different levels. For instance Corvus stations might choose to only apply rules 3,4, and 5.
Monitored space would have a similar set of rules that would be applied to attacks on players with a reputation of +600 or more.
As a baseline I would apply the following 4 rules…
1 damaging a player who has a reputation of +600 or higher results in a permanent loss of 25 reputation points for each 10% of total damage done.
2 damaging a player who has a reputation of +800 or higher results in a permanent loss of 50 reputation points for each 10% of total damage done.
3 destroying a player who has a reputation of +600 or higher results in a 5-minute change to “KOS” and a permanent loss of 350 reputation points.
4 destroying a player who has a reputation of +800 or higher results in a 5-minute change to “KOS” and a permanent loss of 700 reputation points.
Additionally I would alter the reputation loss from the above penalties to be relative to the reputation of the players involved.
For every 100 points of reputation MORE than the target that the attacker has, I would reduce the penalty by 15%. Thus if a person with +1000 detroys a person with +700 than the attacker would only loose 55% of the basic reputation loss.
For every 100 points of reputation LESS than the target that the attacker has, I would add a 5% increase to the penalty, thus a player with a reputation of +700 who kills a player who has +1000 would take a 115% penalty.
The penalties for NFZ and Monitored space would be separate, meaning that violating NFZ regulations by destroying someone who is +900 or more with that faction would result in both penalties.
===========================================
(((( 4 ))))
Because of the changes in points #1 and #2, It would be easier to recover standing that has been lost, and you would need to loose a significant amount more standing in order to be subject to the strike forces, the strike forces need to become much more powerful. Tangling with a strike force should result in almost instant death.
I propose that the strike forces be given a top speed of 260m/s, and have their armor increased significantly. At the same time however, to make group raids more possible, I would limit the total number of strike forces that can spawn to 10 per system, get rid of the damn seekers, and have a 5 minute respawn time if destroyed. This way a large group could concevably overpower the strike forces for a limited time.
By taking missions for an ally of the faction you lost standing with, you could bring it back up to the point where docking (even if you had to bribe your way in) became an option again. Serco and Itani would start at –950 with each other, and jumping into enemy territory to bot up reputation would only work AFTER you had increased your reputation by doing missions for an allied faction, due to the modified strike forces.
On a related note, Deneb would become a grey system, with each nation having a station inside their wormhole, and maybe a corvus station hidden in a large roid somewhere in the system (ala old sector 10), additionally since both Giera and Eo would have every sector as a “monitored’ sector, it helps to prevent easy incursions by the enemy while still allowing a "warzone" between the two nations that both have easy access to.
===========================================================
(((( 5 ))))
Capital ships are the main reason I’m revisiting the subject of factions, reputation and the like… With the introduction of the heavy cruisers we’ve seen problems with the way reputation is handled… players killing people from the nation that owns the cap ship by shooting them from turret, people killing turrets then docking with the same ship to repair, etc.
Capital ships would act something like roving stations, any sector a NATION or FACTION owned (read as major NPC) capital ship was in would be considered monitored by that nation within 5000 meters of the capital ship. The capital ships with docking bays would have a NFZ around them that followed ONLY rules 3 and 5, regarding the damaging or killing of players with a ‘liked” or better reputation.
Capital ships would only allow players with +200 or better reputation to dock as they do now.
They would no longer stop for players to dock, instead they would slow to 20m/s for players with a reputation of +600 or more, everyone else is on their own.
Firing on a capital ship would have its own set of rules and penalties.
1. Doing up to 7500 points of damage to a capital ship during the time it is in a sector would result in a warning. (this allows for a few stray shots to hit the ship if you are trying to defend it)
2. Damaging a capital ship beyond the warning stage would result in a permanent loss of 5 reputation points for each 1000 points of damage done, you would also have your reputation altered to 0 on a temporary basis, (until you leave the sector and return)
3. Destroying a turret, regardless of how much damage you have done to the ship itself will result in a permanent loss of 50 reputation points and a temporary change to KOS. This KOS status would last until the CAPITAL SHIP leaves the sector. (to prevent people from hopping in, killing a turret, hopping back out to clear the KOS and repeating)
4 Destroying a capital ship would result in an immediate change of reputation to –1000 with the appropriate nation.
5 Inside nation monitored space, all turrets would count as a +800 character with the nation involved.
==========================================================
One last note, the XP penalty for killing new players needs to be removed if they are outside their nation space. The game can check to see if they are doing the begginner combat mission inside the space claimed by their nation… it should be able to identify if they are being destroyed outside of their nation space or not.
Players under a total level of 4 should get a nice big warning each time they leave their home nation space letting them know that the area they are venturing into is dangerous and they are without protection there. If they log out outside of nation space… when they log back in the warning should flash when they undock or when they load if they logged off in space.
REGARDLESS of level, the first time a player leaves his or her nation claimed space the same warning should appear.
Instead of the just the XP penalty, I would also impose a nice large additional reputation hit of –500 for damaging a player with less than 4 total levels if he/she is inside the area claimed by his/her nation.
As usual I welcome any constructive criticism, and applaud anyone who waded through that mass of text. :)
Spellcast
[spellcast faction post 1]
I see you are going for the PhD In Vendettaology and this is the 1st part of your dissertation.
/me looks around for a research grant to fund spellcast's proposal.
/me looks around for a research grant to fund spellcast's proposal.
you should go back and look at some of my older posts sarah... when i say a post is gonna be long i'm not kidding.
Anyhow the ideas are merely my thoughts on what a reputation system SHOULD accomplish for the game. I dont actually expect any of this to be added because I understand the total amount of code that would be needed. :)
Anyhow the ideas are merely my thoughts on what a reputation system SHOULD accomplish for the game. I dont actually expect any of this to be added because I understand the total amount of code that would be needed. :)
I just want to comment on one thing ...
> To begin we break NFZ rules down into 5 levels, defining what
> happens when the following actions occur inside NFZ space.
> 1 firing a weapon results in a temporary change of reputation to
> “HATED” (see above)
Uh .. didn't we have something like that before? As a result players testing their weapons got raped by strike forces or in your case guards/turrets. We already have newbies getting blown up for shooting at the "red dot".
Maybe this rule should only apply to players with higher levels .. combat 2+ or something.
> To begin we break NFZ rules down into 5 levels, defining what
> happens when the following actions occur inside NFZ space.
> 1 firing a weapon results in a temporary change of reputation to
> “HATED” (see above)
Uh .. didn't we have something like that before? As a result players testing their weapons got raped by strike forces or in your case guards/turrets. We already have newbies getting blown up for shooting at the "red dot".
Maybe this rule should only apply to players with higher levels .. combat 2+ or something.
since no SF spawns.. all the newbie has to do is get outside of the NFZ to avoid the defbots, which are probably not directly on top of him right away. then he can figure out what he did and leave the sector/return.
small edit to the main post however, changed to just removing docking ability. My intent was just to deny docking privledges, i dont usually consider the regular defbots much of a threat because they dont leave the NFZ area, but i guess it could be a bit of trouble for a new player.
small edit to the main post however, changed to just removing docking ability. My intent was just to deny docking privledges, i dont usually consider the regular defbots much of a threat because they dont leave the NFZ area, but i guess it could be a bit of trouble for a new player.
I agree on all counts. I think. It was a long read.
I think that for this game to stay away from an arcade feel that NO itani should be able to gain more than dislike by Serco and vice versa. It just seems cheap that any itani can fly a prom or that any Serco can fly a Valk, I mean where's the RP in that? If you really want a prom, create a serco alt... Itani and Serco are supposed to be at war.
An idea on protecting the n00bs in nation space is great except I don't like the idea that someone can create an alt at lvl 0/0/0/0/0 and attack another nation's cap ship and everyone that attacks that person receives a combat penalty. I say if you pull the trigger, pay the price. When I was a noob I new better than to shoot anything that crossed my HUD. Instead, what about a 1000m weapons lock rule. Make triggers non-functional around stations, that way it would be easy to get away from pirates and opposing factions cannot ingage near a station. The defbots can be reserved for those players who enter the sector under KOS. And you could flash a cool warning at 1000m "Weapons Hot".
For everything else, Spellcast, you hit the nail on the head. Especially with trade, that would give the game a better ROLE play feel. If someone is just looking for some quick cash or if someone is working just for standing, there's a special way to achieve that. I love it!
kernel.panic
I think that for this game to stay away from an arcade feel that NO itani should be able to gain more than dislike by Serco and vice versa. It just seems cheap that any itani can fly a prom or that any Serco can fly a Valk, I mean where's the RP in that? If you really want a prom, create a serco alt... Itani and Serco are supposed to be at war.
An idea on protecting the n00bs in nation space is great except I don't like the idea that someone can create an alt at lvl 0/0/0/0/0 and attack another nation's cap ship and everyone that attacks that person receives a combat penalty. I say if you pull the trigger, pay the price. When I was a noob I new better than to shoot anything that crossed my HUD. Instead, what about a 1000m weapons lock rule. Make triggers non-functional around stations, that way it would be easy to get away from pirates and opposing factions cannot ingage near a station. The defbots can be reserved for those players who enter the sector under KOS. And you could flash a cool warning at 1000m "Weapons Hot".
For everything else, Spellcast, you hit the nail on the head. Especially with trade, that would give the game a better ROLE play feel. If someone is just looking for some quick cash or if someone is working just for standing, there's a special way to achieve that. I love it!
kernel.panic
Re: I think that for this game to stay away from an arcade feel that NO itani should be able to gain more than dislike by Serco and vice versa
I rather disagree with this, IMO should be possible for a character to become well respected by both nations. As an example, in the American Civil War, Robert E. Lee was exceedingly well respected by both the North and the South, and was offered command in the armies of both sides. He actually opposed secession, but his loyalty to Virginia was enough that he joined the confederacy.
But, I think it should be extremely difficult for a Serco or Itani to gain good standing with both nations, and very easy to lose their standing if they make any aggressive action.
I rather disagree with this, IMO should be possible for a character to become well respected by both nations. As an example, in the American Civil War, Robert E. Lee was exceedingly well respected by both the North and the South, and was offered command in the armies of both sides. He actually opposed secession, but his loyalty to Virginia was enough that he joined the confederacy.
But, I think it should be extremely difficult for a Serco or Itani to gain good standing with both nations, and very easy to lose their standing if they make any aggressive action.
@Beolach: Your example is interesting, and actually makes good sense in our case. Someone can be respected by both sides in a conflict, but respected or not, once they choose a side, they now have an enemy in the other. This could actually apply to our situation very well.
---Begin suggestion here---
A new player starting out in Itani or Serco space has the usual starting setup (respect from home nation, hated from the other, yes?). They can work up their standing with either side as usual, following whichever set of rules are in place. However, they do not gain certain advantages (Valks, Proms, N3s etc) unless they register as a part of a nation's military. The requirements for this registration could be the same as the current ones for nation ships and the N3, and handled in a manner similar to a bounty hunting license. The result of this is that a player could potentially be respected or even admired by Serco and Itani, but could only gain access to controlled technology for one side. A military registration could be resigned or revoked, and granted again only if the player meets certain conditions (To be determined later). Obviously, if a Serco gets a military registration in Itani space to buy Valks, then procedes to use them to attack the Itani cap ship, the ink on his certificate won't be dry before the government tears it up.
The registration system could serve many purposes. National cap ships might require military registrations in order for a player to man a turret, though respected players could still dock for repairs/free rides. UIT players could be allowed to get a Serco or Itani registration, but with stricter requirements for application, and harsher penalties for rules violations. Corvus, everyone's favorite purveyors of all things illicit, would probably offer forged registrations which could allow someone access to multiple nation's ships, but at the risk of detection, which result in immediate revoking of any military registration and a major loss of standing, probably to hated or KOS on the spot.
---Begin suggestion here---
A new player starting out in Itani or Serco space has the usual starting setup (respect from home nation, hated from the other, yes?). They can work up their standing with either side as usual, following whichever set of rules are in place. However, they do not gain certain advantages (Valks, Proms, N3s etc) unless they register as a part of a nation's military. The requirements for this registration could be the same as the current ones for nation ships and the N3, and handled in a manner similar to a bounty hunting license. The result of this is that a player could potentially be respected or even admired by Serco and Itani, but could only gain access to controlled technology for one side. A military registration could be resigned or revoked, and granted again only if the player meets certain conditions (To be determined later). Obviously, if a Serco gets a military registration in Itani space to buy Valks, then procedes to use them to attack the Itani cap ship, the ink on his certificate won't be dry before the government tears it up.
The registration system could serve many purposes. National cap ships might require military registrations in order for a player to man a turret, though respected players could still dock for repairs/free rides. UIT players could be allowed to get a Serco or Itani registration, but with stricter requirements for application, and harsher penalties for rules violations. Corvus, everyone's favorite purveyors of all things illicit, would probably offer forged registrations which could allow someone access to multiple nation's ships, but at the risk of detection, which result in immediate revoking of any military registration and a major loss of standing, probably to hated or KOS on the spot.
Beolach: that's not a teriffic example, because while Robert E. Lee was respected as a war leader, that didn't mean that after he had chosen to side with the South, he could just enlist the help of the nearest Northern battalion to fill out his Southern troops, and that didn't mean that he could just waltz into Northern territory, meet with Lincoln and sail around in the newest Monitor class ship off the line.
So sure, maybe you could get respected by both nations, but once you buy a nation specific ship, that's where your loyalties are going to lie (with the exception of the UIT, maybe). Or greengeek's idea is better.
So sure, maybe you could get respected by both nations, but once you buy a nation specific ship, that's where your loyalties are going to lie (with the exception of the UIT, maybe). Or greengeek's idea is better.
<<--An idea on protecting the n00bs in nation space is great except I don't like the idea that someone can create an alt at lvl 0/0/0/0/0 and attack another nation's cap ship and everyone that attacks that person receives a combat penalty-->>
This is what happens now-
my solution would eliminate this by removing the combat penalty if you are outside of your nations space. Since it is highly unlikely that capital ships are going to make it close enough to noobs inside the noobs territory to be a danger, this shouldnt be a problem.
Oh and Robert E. Lee was respected by both sides, however he gained that respect (as did most other commanders and generals in the civil war) BEFORE the country split.
It is possible to respect an enemy, that doesnt mean you are going to let him wander around sensitive areas unopposed.
I actually kind of like greengeek's idea about joining the military to gain access to the special ships.
This is what happens now-
my solution would eliminate this by removing the combat penalty if you are outside of your nations space. Since it is highly unlikely that capital ships are going to make it close enough to noobs inside the noobs territory to be a danger, this shouldnt be a problem.
Oh and Robert E. Lee was respected by both sides, however he gained that respect (as did most other commanders and generals in the civil war) BEFORE the country split.
It is possible to respect an enemy, that doesnt mean you are going to let him wander around sensitive areas unopposed.
I actually kind of like greengeek's idea about joining the military to gain access to the special ships.
OK, I wasn't meaning to say that players should have unlimited simultaneous access to both Itani and Serco military equipment, I just meant to say that it is possible for someone to have good standing by both sides in a war, and VO shouldn't make it impossible for an Itani to have good Serco standing, or vice-versa.
And actually, in the case of Robert E. Lee, after the war was over, he applied for, but was not granted amnesty. His wife's family home (where he had lived prior to the war) was confiscated by Union forces, and it wasn't until 1975, 105 years after his death, that Lee was granted a posthumous pardon and Congress restored his citizenship.
Personally, I think he should have been granted the amnesty, and it being denied him is just a prime example of how F'ed up things were after the war & Lincoln's assassination.
And actually, in the case of Robert E. Lee, after the war was over, he applied for, but was not granted amnesty. His wife's family home (where he had lived prior to the war) was confiscated by Union forces, and it wasn't until 1975, 105 years after his death, that Lee was granted a posthumous pardon and Congress restored his citizenship.
Personally, I think he should have been granted the amnesty, and it being denied him is just a prime example of how F'ed up things were after the war & Lincoln's assassination.
Maybe your previous actions should be taken into account when calculating standing.
You have to standing-counters per faction, one for positive standing, one for negative standing.
If you do something good, your positive-standing counter goes up. If you do something bad, your negative-standing counter goes up.
Your actual standing is (pos-neg)/(pos+neg)*1000
When you create a character, you start with something like 100 standing total, distributed over pos and neg to make your standing with that faction something sensible.
This means that initially it is very easy to get positive (or negative) standing, because your total standing points start very low. Any standing added to either pos or neg will have a big relative inpact.
Example, if you start with 50pos, 50neg serco, you have a standing of 0. If you gain 50 pos from a trade mission, you go to 333.
The more you have done in history, the less easy it is to change your standing, because if your total standing points are very high, a change will have much less relative inpact.
Example, after a lot of fighting for and against serco, you have 500pos, 500neg, making your actual standing 0. If you now take that same trade mission for 50 pos standing, your actual standing will only go to 47.
This also means you could implement missions that give positive standing to one faction and negative standing to another. As long as you only do things for Serco that do not give negative Itani standing, you could get high standing for both Serco and Itani. But acts of war against Itani would give positive Serco standing, and negative Itani standing.
You have to standing-counters per faction, one for positive standing, one for negative standing.
If you do something good, your positive-standing counter goes up. If you do something bad, your negative-standing counter goes up.
Your actual standing is (pos-neg)/(pos+neg)*1000
When you create a character, you start with something like 100 standing total, distributed over pos and neg to make your standing with that faction something sensible.
This means that initially it is very easy to get positive (or negative) standing, because your total standing points start very low. Any standing added to either pos or neg will have a big relative inpact.
Example, if you start with 50pos, 50neg serco, you have a standing of 0. If you gain 50 pos from a trade mission, you go to 333.
The more you have done in history, the less easy it is to change your standing, because if your total standing points are very high, a change will have much less relative inpact.
Example, after a lot of fighting for and against serco, you have 500pos, 500neg, making your actual standing 0. If you now take that same trade mission for 50 pos standing, your actual standing will only go to 47.
This also means you could implement missions that give positive standing to one faction and negative standing to another. As long as you only do things for Serco that do not give negative Itani standing, you could get high standing for both Serco and Itani. But acts of war against Itani would give positive Serco standing, and negative Itani standing.
hmmmm, I think i like that idea noid.
Actually I really like it, with a possible alteration that i'll have to think about before i post.
That would actually add very nicely to the rest of the changes and tweaks i've outlined to make a very fair and complete system for reputation.
Actually I really like it, with a possible alteration that i'll have to think about before i post.
That would actually add very nicely to the rest of the changes and tweaks i've outlined to make a very fair and complete system for reputation.
yes, very nice Noid, Spell... as for greengeek's idea, I'd call it "militia", rather than "military", seeing as how players are still free agents across the galaxy. Maybe if missions get a LOT more attention, a more rigid "we own every second of your time" formal military hierachy could be created..
Some other examples of what becomes possible with this system:
Axia has a really nice Positron Blaster, but they're not gonna sell it to just everybody. You not only have to have good standing with them, but you also have to show yer not a one-day fly. So you need a standing of +700 and at least 1000 positive standing points.
So if you start with 50pos/50neg. Now it's not enough just to get another 234 positive points. That would give you +700 standing, but that would also be way to easy and they still wouldn't know if you where trustworthy. you'll need to get the full 950 positive points for them to really trust you.
As for the Serco/Itani:
A serco could start with 1000pos 2000neg Itani standing, making his actual Itani standing -333, but very hard to get higher. (the Itani are not gonna trust him easily, he's gonna have to work for it!)
His Corvus standing could start at 100/200. Also -333 but a lot easier to change at the beginning.
Axia has a really nice Positron Blaster, but they're not gonna sell it to just everybody. You not only have to have good standing with them, but you also have to show yer not a one-day fly. So you need a standing of +700 and at least 1000 positive standing points.
So if you start with 50pos/50neg. Now it's not enough just to get another 234 positive points. That would give you +700 standing, but that would also be way to easy and they still wouldn't know if you where trustworthy. you'll need to get the full 950 positive points for them to really trust you.
As for the Serco/Itani:
A serco could start with 1000pos 2000neg Itani standing, making his actual Itani standing -333, but very hard to get higher. (the Itani are not gonna trust him easily, he's gonna have to work for it!)
His Corvus standing could start at 100/200. Also -333 but a lot easier to change at the beginning.
added point #5 to the capital ship section. Turrets count as +800 characters inside of nation space to prevent people with extra high standing from killing them while the capships are in "safe" space.
Like your faction idea noid,
but take away my axia posis and I'll...I'll... well I guess I won't have anything to blow you up with, but I'll find SOMETHING DAMNIT!
@Spellcast- Yeah, it all makes sense, except for Corvus Obeying the 3,4,5. Weren't you for removal of the NFZ for corvus?
but take away my axia posis and I'll...I'll... well I guess I won't have anything to blow you up with, but I'll find SOMETHING DAMNIT!
@Spellcast- Yeah, it all makes sense, except for Corvus Obeying the 3,4,5. Weren't you for removal of the NFZ for corvus?
corvus obeys nothing! other than that i agree with this entire post.
well, I think even corvus would object to the destroying of a pilot that they are very fond of. On the other hand corvus might just have a reverse system inside thier NFZ, where killing another player temporarily raises your corvus standing... :P
Perhaps corvus would only enforce #5 then. Besides the whole point about corvus was just an asided to show that different stations would be able to apply different levels of NFZ.
EDIT : Actually the more i think about it the more i like what i thought was a joke on my part.
Perhaps corvus really would think more highly of you if you killed a player that they thought well of. This is all kind of off the cuff at the moment, so bear with me.
Since corvus is technically a pirate faction, they value strength most of all. Therefore the more respected you are by corvus, the stronger they expect you to be.
How about a corvus reputation "transfer" between players when one player kills another in corvus space.
The player that died is disgraced, and looses 5% of his/her corvus reputation. The player that does the killing gains HALF of the reputation that was lost.
All other reputation / NFZ rules are ignored by corvus.
That ought to make docking at corvus stations more interesting. :)
Perhaps corvus would only enforce #5 then. Besides the whole point about corvus was just an asided to show that different stations would be able to apply different levels of NFZ.
EDIT : Actually the more i think about it the more i like what i thought was a joke on my part.
Perhaps corvus really would think more highly of you if you killed a player that they thought well of. This is all kind of off the cuff at the moment, so bear with me.
Since corvus is technically a pirate faction, they value strength most of all. Therefore the more respected you are by corvus, the stronger they expect you to be.
How about a corvus reputation "transfer" between players when one player kills another in corvus space.
The player that died is disgraced, and looses 5% of his/her corvus reputation. The player that does the killing gains HALF of the reputation that was lost.
All other reputation / NFZ rules are ignored by corvus.
That ought to make docking at corvus stations more interesting. :)
EH, I like it, but its exploitable, make it zerosum.
What would be REALLY neat, is if Corvus started you out at -600 (unable to dock), but no strikeforces would attack you.
In order to land and get your first mission, you'd have to kill someone else in the general vicinity.
What would be REALLY neat, is if Corvus started you out at -600 (unable to dock), but no strikeforces would attack you.
In order to land and get your first mission, you'd have to kill someone else in the general vicinity.