Forums » Suggestions
Factions - PvP Checks & Balances & Long-term Effects
Understanding that there are continued design plans for factions, after some thought a suggestion occurred for a fairly simple system of interacting factions in a player vs. player context with the purpose of establishing a cause / effect relationship when destroying a well received member of a faction.
Nation Player A / Player B
Itani Nation: 929 / -695
Serco Dominion: -695 / 900
UIT: 982 / 251
TGP Corporation: 983 / 849
BioCom Industries: -216 / 921
Valent Robotics: 0 / 111
Orion Heavy Ind: 986 / 785
Axia Techn Corp: 807 / 645
Corvus Prime: 248 / 195
Tunguska: 203 / 312
Aeolus Trading Perf: 657 / 514
Ineubis Defense: 230 / 358
Xang Xi Systems: 672 / 720
Player A & B engage in a battle which (thru treachery <Itani humor>) player B wins, player B's faction is affected by player A's destruction by taking the value of each faction and dividing by negative one hundred (rounded to the nearest whole number), thus:
Itani Nation: -9
Serco Dominion: 7
UIT: -10
TGP Corporation: -10
BioCom Industries: 2
Valent Robotics: -0
Orion Heavy Ind: -10
Axia Techn Corp: -8
Corvus Prime: -2
Tunguska: -2
Aeolus Trading Perf: -7
Ineubis Defense: -2
Xang Xi Systems: -7
The Serco, without any factor other than what faction the defeated player had, has his standings modified by the above results at the conclusion of the battle. Other considerations including bounties could be factored in after this basic faction check.
This system would provide the following benefits:
1) An additional reward for PvP combat.
2) An additional reward for Traders whom are often preyed upon.
3) A penalty system for pirates whom work without a writ (historically verified for even the blackest names, note below).
As noted in history many of the blackest, most despised pirates actually worked with a writ of local government that gave said pirate the rights to attack any ship that wasn't beneficial to that government provided they donate a share. Although it is not the intent of this system to "make" a pirate work for anyone it does clearly illustrate what will happen should a pirate continuously attack those that the local government favors. This self imposed gradual decline of status will result in the pirate either having to curry favor or being forced out of the controlled area, effectively black listing them whereas working within a governments goals (like a Serco, whom is a pirate, destroying an Itani) is rewarded by that government.
My apologies for the long nature of this suggestion but I felt it needed to clearly communicate it's intent least it be considered pirate bashing or, worse yet, misunderstood. Please feel free to pick it apart or add to it and thank you.
Eo Salis
Nation Player A / Player B
Itani Nation: 929 / -695
Serco Dominion: -695 / 900
UIT: 982 / 251
TGP Corporation: 983 / 849
BioCom Industries: -216 / 921
Valent Robotics: 0 / 111
Orion Heavy Ind: 986 / 785
Axia Techn Corp: 807 / 645
Corvus Prime: 248 / 195
Tunguska: 203 / 312
Aeolus Trading Perf: 657 / 514
Ineubis Defense: 230 / 358
Xang Xi Systems: 672 / 720
Player A & B engage in a battle which (thru treachery <Itani humor>) player B wins, player B's faction is affected by player A's destruction by taking the value of each faction and dividing by negative one hundred (rounded to the nearest whole number), thus:
Itani Nation: -9
Serco Dominion: 7
UIT: -10
TGP Corporation: -10
BioCom Industries: 2
Valent Robotics: -0
Orion Heavy Ind: -10
Axia Techn Corp: -8
Corvus Prime: -2
Tunguska: -2
Aeolus Trading Perf: -7
Ineubis Defense: -2
Xang Xi Systems: -7
The Serco, without any factor other than what faction the defeated player had, has his standings modified by the above results at the conclusion of the battle. Other considerations including bounties could be factored in after this basic faction check.
This system would provide the following benefits:
1) An additional reward for PvP combat.
2) An additional reward for Traders whom are often preyed upon.
3) A penalty system for pirates whom work without a writ (historically verified for even the blackest names, note below).
As noted in history many of the blackest, most despised pirates actually worked with a writ of local government that gave said pirate the rights to attack any ship that wasn't beneficial to that government provided they donate a share. Although it is not the intent of this system to "make" a pirate work for anyone it does clearly illustrate what will happen should a pirate continuously attack those that the local government favors. This self imposed gradual decline of status will result in the pirate either having to curry favor or being forced out of the controlled area, effectively black listing them whereas working within a governments goals (like a Serco, whom is a pirate, destroying an Itani) is rewarded by that government.
My apologies for the long nature of this suggestion but I felt it needed to clearly communicate it's intent least it be considered pirate bashing or, worse yet, misunderstood. Please feel free to pick it apart or add to it and thank you.
Eo Salis
One question after briefly looking at the suggested numbers:
Why, if a Serco kills an Itani (through vastly superior skill, it goes without saying), why would he suffer more faction loss with UIT and TPG, who weren't even involved?
It looks like your system is kind of like chess rankings (which are beyond my comprehension, as is the income tax). I like the idea of having a ranking similar to chess rankings for PvP standings, and have it independent of nation. For faction standing, you should lose much more if you are experienced for killing a newbie than if you are inexperienced and kill a veteran.
Why, if a Serco kills an Itani (through vastly superior skill, it goes without saying), why would he suffer more faction loss with UIT and TPG, who weren't even involved?
It looks like your system is kind of like chess rankings (which are beyond my comprehension, as is the income tax). I like the idea of having a ranking similar to chess rankings for PvP standings, and have it independent of nation. For faction standing, you should lose much more if you are experienced for killing a newbie than if you are inexperienced and kill a veteran.
That doesn't hold up, Professor Chaos, not from a realistically political point of view:
A veteran of a nation/faction, who possibly defended the nation's/faction's interest in numerous battles would be much better known to and higher valued by the nation/faction. Whereas a new player would be hardly known, and just have the standard standing amounts.
You can only explain it if the nation/faction isntituted a rigorous protection plan for their 'young', and I just don't see Corvus doing that. Or TPG, for that matter (come on, tons of venture captial in times of war? You've got to be kidding me).
A veteran of a nation/faction, who possibly defended the nation's/faction's interest in numerous battles would be much better known to and higher valued by the nation/faction. Whereas a new player would be hardly known, and just have the standard standing amounts.
You can only explain it if the nation/faction isntituted a rigorous protection plan for their 'young', and I just don't see Corvus doing that. Or TPG, for that matter (come on, tons of venture captial in times of war? You've got to be kidding me).