Forums » Suggestions
+1 for flaming USMC. Damn jarhead. :)
When I was a noob, I got killed by Peytros in Bractus after defeating that NPC pirate in Difficult Choices mission tree. He shot me in the NFZ, the bastard. But I learned a valuable lesson: don't let your guard down. And the fun quotient of the game went up like two notches. So I struck out on a vendetta to hunt pey-pey down and kill him. Except he left the game for like a year. So I took my anger against pirates out on Maxx Metal instead. Except he did the okie-doke on my faction standing and I learned another valuable lesson: careful who you kill and where you kill them. And the fun-quotient went up another notch.
So... when care-bears start complaining that a game named "Vendetta" is too violent to the newbs, I say, "pfft."
One of the pirates I know chases newbs in UIT, demands payment or cargo, shoots them to a fraction of their health, and lets them think they got away. You think those newbs aren't having fun? If they aren't, they SHOULD quit.
When I was a noob, I got killed by Peytros in Bractus after defeating that NPC pirate in Difficult Choices mission tree. He shot me in the NFZ, the bastard. But I learned a valuable lesson: don't let your guard down. And the fun quotient of the game went up like two notches. So I struck out on a vendetta to hunt pey-pey down and kill him. Except he left the game for like a year. So I took my anger against pirates out on Maxx Metal instead. Except he did the okie-doke on my faction standing and I learned another valuable lesson: careful who you kill and where you kill them. And the fun-quotient went up another notch.
So... when care-bears start complaining that a game named "Vendetta" is too violent to the newbs, I say, "pfft."
One of the pirates I know chases newbs in UIT, demands payment or cargo, shoots them to a fraction of their health, and lets them think they got away. You think those newbs aren't having fun? If they aren't, they SHOULD quit.
Yeah I have the same story really. When I was a real newb the first time I started playing I ran into Blood Thirsty. The second time I started playing I got away from Savet with swarms in an ion storm on 1% and thought I was top shit. I also thought his hail was pretentious.. but now we're like best VO buddies hahahaha.
Good times.
Good times.
all good answers, TBF was the first rat i ran into in grey and he killed me a lot, then maxx joined VO sometime after that and got me a couple of times and i also got him a couple. Yes the game did change now we cant go to the training center to kills playes of drop beams ect. I just think we should take it easy in capital systems on them in grey they are open season, after 4 days shoot them , they should be up to at least combat 4 by then. ok flame continure lol
Well, we already do take it easy on them in capital systems, or at least I do. I don't quite sit down for tea and discuss the finer points of lace-making, but I do try not to kill the same newb multiple times in a capitol during the same day unless he's done something to deserve it. And I only spend like three hours a month in Dau when I play actively, if that. I can't really speak for other pirates, but anyone who says it happens frequently is overreacting.
And as for our motivation in doing this: simple desire to be where we don't belong, and to run from the cops while doing naughty things and evading punishment.
When we do invade nation space, people should come up and try to stop us instead of running to the forums and campaigning to decrease the game's already scarce player-to-player interaction. After all, I hear way more newbs complaining that they haven't seen any other players than I hear complaining about getting killed in nation space. I mean, they practically invite us to come up there :)
And as for our motivation in doing this: simple desire to be where we don't belong, and to run from the cops while doing naughty things and evading punishment.
When we do invade nation space, people should come up and try to stop us instead of running to the forums and campaigning to decrease the game's already scarce player-to-player interaction. After all, I hear way more newbs complaining that they haven't seen any other players than I hear complaining about getting killed in nation space. I mean, they practically invite us to come up there :)
Oh my gardener, piwates nerfed 'emselves : ]
We really don't need a whole lot more safety in game. That said, the defense forces are laughable, even in capitol station sectors, and could really use some improvement in those cases. I might suggest station-mounted turrets or something to that effect to deter attacks closer to the station and in the NFZ. Something like railguns or capitol gauss, but with a much higher velocity and harder to avoid at those ranges to it presents a much greater threat to aggressors.
As for the "certain pilots" OP mentions, I have a pretty good idea who they are, and I have seen them routinely exploiting the faction system to greif other players, especially noobs outside Dau L-10. The majority of them have Admire UIT standing so players can't shoot back without taking an enormous faction hit, and they often work in teams with one player that has hated standing blowing up the newbies outside the capitol station, and trying to instigate fights in the NFZ, or goad the players into killing their UIT-admire wingmen in protected space so they can tank people's standing.
This is an exploit that needs to get fixed. We need to have a better mechanism by which pirates, griefers, and other repeat offenders get and keep their hated faction standing, and be prevented from punishing other players so they can't abuse the system. I find it abhorrent that almost every 'pirate' encounter I've had since I rejoined the game a month or so ago has been with someone that had Admire standing in all three major nations, and they have found or followed me into protected space and tried to ram themselves to death on the hull of my moth outside the station to tank my standing if I failed to escape them before that. This isn't piracy, it's griefing, plain and simple. I lost my XX standing to a hull-rammer already, and had to earn it back.
The game needs to be smarter about figuring out who is a 'pirate' and who is not, and treating them accordingly when it comes to faction standings. I unfortunately don't have a lot of good suggestions for how to implement this, but perhaps we could have an 'infamy' standing bar that goes up with 'piracy' and related activities, exclusive with all major factions beyond a point, and more difficult to get rid of. The trick would be making sure it's hard to earn infamy with the occasional accidental shooting, consensual pvp, or self-defense killings, but easy enough to earn it by being a dick. That way, the pirates can have their grey standing for their internal dick-waving competitions, and everyone else can stop worrying about people gaming the faction system against them.
If nothing else, the game needs to be able to identify the instigators and not let them punish the victims if they lose the fight, intentionally or otherwise. Enforcing a 'don't shoot first doctrine" would go a long way toward solving this, especially if the only exemptions are prox or conc mines, since you really can't get killed by those unless you're intentionally following someone who doesn't want to be followed.
As for the "certain pilots" OP mentions, I have a pretty good idea who they are, and I have seen them routinely exploiting the faction system to greif other players, especially noobs outside Dau L-10. The majority of them have Admire UIT standing so players can't shoot back without taking an enormous faction hit, and they often work in teams with one player that has hated standing blowing up the newbies outside the capitol station, and trying to instigate fights in the NFZ, or goad the players into killing their UIT-admire wingmen in protected space so they can tank people's standing.
This is an exploit that needs to get fixed. We need to have a better mechanism by which pirates, griefers, and other repeat offenders get and keep their hated faction standing, and be prevented from punishing other players so they can't abuse the system. I find it abhorrent that almost every 'pirate' encounter I've had since I rejoined the game a month or so ago has been with someone that had Admire standing in all three major nations, and they have found or followed me into protected space and tried to ram themselves to death on the hull of my moth outside the station to tank my standing if I failed to escape them before that. This isn't piracy, it's griefing, plain and simple. I lost my XX standing to a hull-rammer already, and had to earn it back.
The game needs to be smarter about figuring out who is a 'pirate' and who is not, and treating them accordingly when it comes to faction standings. I unfortunately don't have a lot of good suggestions for how to implement this, but perhaps we could have an 'infamy' standing bar that goes up with 'piracy' and related activities, exclusive with all major factions beyond a point, and more difficult to get rid of. The trick would be making sure it's hard to earn infamy with the occasional accidental shooting, consensual pvp, or self-defense killings, but easy enough to earn it by being a dick. That way, the pirates can have their grey standing for their internal dick-waving competitions, and everyone else can stop worrying about people gaming the faction system against them.
If nothing else, the game needs to be able to identify the instigators and not let them punish the victims if they lose the fight, intentionally or otherwise. Enforcing a 'don't shoot first doctrine" would go a long way toward solving this, especially if the only exemptions are prox or conc mines, since you really can't get killed by those unless you're intentionally following someone who doesn't want to be followed.
"and they have found or followed me into protected space and tried to ram themselves to death on the hull of my moth"
Gotta call BS on that one. Ship to ship collision damage was already nerfed to hell ages ago, so that doesn't work anymore.
"especially if the only exemptions are prox or conc mines, since you really can't get killed by those unless you're intentionally following someone who doesn't want to be followed."
Good idea. That way I can get in my hog, dart ahead of you, and drop mines in your face!
As for first-shot detection in general, the problem there is that you need to also detect shots that don't quite hit. Otherwise I could fire at you (but intentionally miss), causing you to panic and shoot back, hitting me first.
"I might suggest station-mounted turrets or something to that effect to deter attacks closer to the station and in the NFZ. Something like railguns or capitol gauss, but with a much higher velocity and harder to avoid at those ranges to it presents a much greater threat to aggressors."
No, neither of those would be appropriate. For close-range defenses, you want something more along the lines of a gat turret. They're good at what they do while still being evadable enough to be fun.
"If nothing else, the game needs to be able to identify the instigators and not let them punish the victims"
Yes. The problem is that it can be very hard to do that in a way that can't be exploited. Besides, there should be some amount of ability to punish the victims - after all, being bound by the law is the cost of being a "good guy". But yeah, it's not good enough yet.
I think the main problem is that currently there are no repercussions for damaging people (other than in the NFZ). There should be. The penalties should be significantly lower than for killing of course, but there should be consequences. And Inc has said that he does want to add stuff like that, as well as escalating punishments for repeat offenders.
Gotta call BS on that one. Ship to ship collision damage was already nerfed to hell ages ago, so that doesn't work anymore.
"especially if the only exemptions are prox or conc mines, since you really can't get killed by those unless you're intentionally following someone who doesn't want to be followed."
Good idea. That way I can get in my hog, dart ahead of you, and drop mines in your face!
As for first-shot detection in general, the problem there is that you need to also detect shots that don't quite hit. Otherwise I could fire at you (but intentionally miss), causing you to panic and shoot back, hitting me first.
"I might suggest station-mounted turrets or something to that effect to deter attacks closer to the station and in the NFZ. Something like railguns or capitol gauss, but with a much higher velocity and harder to avoid at those ranges to it presents a much greater threat to aggressors."
No, neither of those would be appropriate. For close-range defenses, you want something more along the lines of a gat turret. They're good at what they do while still being evadable enough to be fun.
"If nothing else, the game needs to be able to identify the instigators and not let them punish the victims"
Yes. The problem is that it can be very hard to do that in a way that can't be exploited. Besides, there should be some amount of ability to punish the victims - after all, being bound by the law is the cost of being a "good guy". But yeah, it's not good enough yet.
I think the main problem is that currently there are no repercussions for damaging people (other than in the NFZ). There should be. The penalties should be significantly lower than for killing of course, but there should be consequences. And Inc has said that he does want to add stuff like that, as well as escalating punishments for repeat offenders.
"Gotta call BS on that one. Ship to ship collision damage was already nerfed to hell ages ago, so that doesn't work anymore."
It's not as difficult as you think, especially considering how fragile greyhounds are, and the fact that they are frequently already heavily damaged by mines from the chase if it started in unprotected space. Although they have only succeeded in tanking my standing once in that manner, I have had *many* pirates try it in the last few weeks. I also think I have yet to have one not intentionally hit my conc mines in protected space in hopes that I made the mistake of dropping prox there. The bottom line is that pretty much *all* of the self-proclaimed 'pirates' I've run into since I returned would go out of their way to get killed by you in protected space so they can tank your standing, and the little slap on the wrist they get in return in case they accidentally finish you off in a monitored sector isn't enough deterrent when they can get back to admire again in an hour. This is a very one-sided battle stacked against the traders, who actually care about having their standings maxed, and the 'pirates', who only need them just high enough to grief the traders.
"Good idea. That way I can get in my hog, dart ahead of you, and drop mines in your face!"
I don't think that's as easy as you think. It's hard enough for most hogs to catch up to my moth enough to shoot me from behind, but to get ahead of me while carrying heavy mines, and do it with enough energy and speed left for fine control, and to drop them from a sufficient distance ahead to get around their safeties... I don't think it can be done.
If you think so though, we can always make the exemption only for nonlethal ordnance, like concs.
"As for first-shot detection in general, the problem there is that you need to also detect shots that don't quite hit. Otherwise I could fire at you (but intentionally miss), causing you to panic and shoot back, hitting me first."
I disagree. Any pilot should be expected to be able to maintain trigger discipline well enough when being shot at, to not return fire until they start taking damage. The bigger issue here is that at present, you can't fight back or defend yourself with lethal force *at all* in protected space.
"No, neither of those would be appropriate. For close-range defenses, you want something more along the lines of a gat turret. They're good at what they do while still being evadable enough to be fun."
I don't think evadable should be part of the plan. If you're intentionally shooting other players from within that close of a range of the station, you should expect to die, not to be able to finish them off quickly before turboing out of the sector without a scratch. The NFZ is only 1000m, and outside of that range all bets are off anyway. The point of the NFZ is to prevent exactly the sort of station killing and griefing that is currently going on, with newbies getting shot at as soon as they undock. If rats are really that desperate for a kill, they can wait until they can hit them from outside the range of the station guns.
"Yes. The problem is that it can be very hard to do that in a way that can't be exploited. Besides, there should be some amount of ability to punish the victims - after all, being bound by the law is the cost of being a "good guy". But yeah, it's not good enough yet.
I think the main problem is that currently there are no repercussions for damaging people (other than in the NFZ). There should be. The penalties should be significantly lower than for killing of course, but there should be consequences. And Inc has said that he does want to add stuff like that, as well as escalating punishments for repeat offenders."
I really think a karma system of some kind is the best way to go. something that dynamically, with time, determines how trustworthy or dickish of a pilot you are, and then scales the severity of the punishments (as well as your ability to punish others) based on your record.
It's not as difficult as you think, especially considering how fragile greyhounds are, and the fact that they are frequently already heavily damaged by mines from the chase if it started in unprotected space. Although they have only succeeded in tanking my standing once in that manner, I have had *many* pirates try it in the last few weeks. I also think I have yet to have one not intentionally hit my conc mines in protected space in hopes that I made the mistake of dropping prox there. The bottom line is that pretty much *all* of the self-proclaimed 'pirates' I've run into since I returned would go out of their way to get killed by you in protected space so they can tank your standing, and the little slap on the wrist they get in return in case they accidentally finish you off in a monitored sector isn't enough deterrent when they can get back to admire again in an hour. This is a very one-sided battle stacked against the traders, who actually care about having their standings maxed, and the 'pirates', who only need them just high enough to grief the traders.
"Good idea. That way I can get in my hog, dart ahead of you, and drop mines in your face!"
I don't think that's as easy as you think. It's hard enough for most hogs to catch up to my moth enough to shoot me from behind, but to get ahead of me while carrying heavy mines, and do it with enough energy and speed left for fine control, and to drop them from a sufficient distance ahead to get around their safeties... I don't think it can be done.
If you think so though, we can always make the exemption only for nonlethal ordnance, like concs.
"As for first-shot detection in general, the problem there is that you need to also detect shots that don't quite hit. Otherwise I could fire at you (but intentionally miss), causing you to panic and shoot back, hitting me first."
I disagree. Any pilot should be expected to be able to maintain trigger discipline well enough when being shot at, to not return fire until they start taking damage. The bigger issue here is that at present, you can't fight back or defend yourself with lethal force *at all* in protected space.
"No, neither of those would be appropriate. For close-range defenses, you want something more along the lines of a gat turret. They're good at what they do while still being evadable enough to be fun."
I don't think evadable should be part of the plan. If you're intentionally shooting other players from within that close of a range of the station, you should expect to die, not to be able to finish them off quickly before turboing out of the sector without a scratch. The NFZ is only 1000m, and outside of that range all bets are off anyway. The point of the NFZ is to prevent exactly the sort of station killing and griefing that is currently going on, with newbies getting shot at as soon as they undock. If rats are really that desperate for a kill, they can wait until they can hit them from outside the range of the station guns.
"Yes. The problem is that it can be very hard to do that in a way that can't be exploited. Besides, there should be some amount of ability to punish the victims - after all, being bound by the law is the cost of being a "good guy". But yeah, it's not good enough yet.
I think the main problem is that currently there are no repercussions for damaging people (other than in the NFZ). There should be. The penalties should be significantly lower than for killing of course, but there should be consequences. And Inc has said that he does want to add stuff like that, as well as escalating punishments for repeat offenders."
I really think a karma system of some kind is the best way to go. something that dynamically, with time, determines how trustworthy or dickish of a pilot you are, and then scales the severity of the punishments (as well as your ability to punish others) based on your record.
There is likely a much easier, way less carebear way to "fix" this... remove the caps from the negative faction standing. Though personally, I have not seen the alleged problem beyond a few isolated incidents and call BS on it being a wide spread problem.
Removing caps won't do anything. The penalty for killing someone who is PoS with a faction will only drop someone's standing from mid-admire to just below neutral, where they can run 2-3 bulk procurement missions and get back where they started without going through the trouble of becoming un-hated first, which they generally do rather than hitting the bottom first. For that to work the penalty would have to be unilaterally increased until it actually meant something, not the slap on the wrist it currently is. Then of course there's still the problem of punishing traders who defend themselves or are used as ramming implements.
I still think evidence beyond your saying it happens frequently is needed.
Still denying it? Funny, that's what all the rat types seem to say. But then what they say and what they do haven't ever exactly been similar.
And you know what? I don't care that your type deny the problem. Problem exists, and either devs will do something about it, or they won't. That's all there is to it. I think the devs are smarter than to be fooled by all the rats in the game throwing their hands up in the air and proclaiming they don't know what we're talking about. It's not like it isn't, you know, happening all the time. Is it a day ending in a y? then there's probably [FAMY] in Dau L-10 griefing newbs.
But go ahead, keep calling everyone liars when they point it out. I'm sure that'll stop those killjoy devs from ruining your fun eventually. :)
And you know what? I don't care that your type deny the problem. Problem exists, and either devs will do something about it, or they won't. That's all there is to it. I think the devs are smarter than to be fooled by all the rats in the game throwing their hands up in the air and proclaiming they don't know what we're talking about. It's not like it isn't, you know, happening all the time. Is it a day ending in a y? then there's probably [FAMY] in Dau L-10 griefing newbs.
But go ahead, keep calling everyone liars when they point it out. I'm sure that'll stop those killjoy devs from ruining your fun eventually. :)
Just so I'm clear... by your definition, I am a rat and a griefer?
I who leads a guild that exists (due to lacking game mechanics) as a form of RP.
Me being a person who has given millions of credits to newbs, announces on 100 whenever I destroy an enemy voy... where to find the cargo, and in all my time has never shot at or killed a newb without them shooting first?
You have a strange definition of pirate and griefer. However, thank you... you have shown that you are not looking to separate griefers and folk who role play pirates, and have a system that punishes them accordingly... you are looking for punitive action against anyone whose style of play you dislike.
Also, for the record... my first five or so years here were spent as a trader. I was pirated many times and killed even more... just never in any of the fashions you claim are so prevalent.
Obvious attempted manipulation is obvious.
I who leads a guild that exists (due to lacking game mechanics) as a form of RP.
Me being a person who has given millions of credits to newbs, announces on 100 whenever I destroy an enemy voy... where to find the cargo, and in all my time has never shot at or killed a newb without them shooting first?
You have a strange definition of pirate and griefer. However, thank you... you have shown that you are not looking to separate griefers and folk who role play pirates, and have a system that punishes them accordingly... you are looking for punitive action against anyone whose style of play you dislike.
Also, for the record... my first five or so years here were spent as a trader. I was pirated many times and killed even more... just never in any of the fashions you claim are so prevalent.
Obvious attempted manipulation is obvious.
If you're going to lie, Earthshine, you ought to get your stories straight ahead of time. You complain that people are suiciding by crashing into you, and then turn around and say that it's hard for them to even catch up enough to shoot you, let alone get ahead.
And your collision claims are still bullshit. You can crash into somebody at full turbo now and deal no damage. You tell blatant lies and act like we're the ones making stuff up.
Also, you seem to be forgetting that even back when collision damage was still enabled, collision deaths had no penalties. We didn't crash into people to tank their standings, we'd crash into them to kill them after whittling down their armor, without being penalized. That is why the devs removed ship to ship collision damage in the first place.
So, in conclusion: LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE!!! :P
And your collision claims are still bullshit. You can crash into somebody at full turbo now and deal no damage. You tell blatant lies and act like we're the ones making stuff up.
Also, you seem to be forgetting that even back when collision damage was still enabled, collision deaths had no penalties. We didn't crash into people to tank their standings, we'd crash into them to kill them after whittling down their armor, without being penalized. That is why the devs removed ship to ship collision damage in the first place.
So, in conclusion: LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE!!! :P
"So, in conclusion: LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRE!!! :P"
+1
+1
why don't you ninnies just pay the damn ransom then none of this bs would matter
A little less vitriol would probably do us well here.
The penalty for killing someone who is PoS with a faction will only drop someone's standing from mid-admire to just below neutral, where they can run 2-3 bulk procurement missions and get back where they started without going through the trouble of becoming un-hated first
This statement strikes me as a bit of an exaggeration... I've experienced some very harsh faction penalties by accidentally killing a player in guarded space. Also, going from neutral to admire in 2-3 bulk procurement missions seems like quite a feat. I'm not saying it's impossible, but they would have to be fairly uncommon missions in my estimation.
On the other hand, consider that the devs are almost certainly tracking these things and are not likely to be swayed by forum rhetoric. If necessary, I'm fairly positive they could grep who killed whom where with what weapon and look for trends.
The penalty for killing someone who is PoS with a faction will only drop someone's standing from mid-admire to just below neutral, where they can run 2-3 bulk procurement missions and get back where they started without going through the trouble of becoming un-hated first
This statement strikes me as a bit of an exaggeration... I've experienced some very harsh faction penalties by accidentally killing a player in guarded space. Also, going from neutral to admire in 2-3 bulk procurement missions seems like quite a feat. I'm not saying it's impossible, but they would have to be fairly uncommon missions in my estimation.
On the other hand, consider that the devs are almost certainly tracking these things and are not likely to be swayed by forum rhetoric. If necessary, I'm fairly positive they could grep who killed whom where with what weapon and look for trends.
It can be done, assuming you can find the elusive Bulk Proc that takes you around the verse and back... but the bulk of bulk procs are less than three systems.
Perhaps the best/easiest fix would simply be to...
A. fix the bulk proc missions as they haven't changed much since they were created. Make them require multiple trips.
or...
B. Stop handing out the most faction points for Bulk Procs.
Or preferably both. Either one should eliminate this fictitiously "widespread problem"... sadly, nothing fixes carebear lies, whining and ill conceived manipulation.
Perhaps the best/easiest fix would simply be to...
A. fix the bulk proc missions as they haven't changed much since they were created. Make them require multiple trips.
or...
B. Stop handing out the most faction points for Bulk Procs.
Or preferably both. Either one should eliminate this fictitiously "widespread problem"... sadly, nothing fixes carebear lies, whining and ill conceived manipulation.
I was making a point about griefer apologetics and pirates quick to call anyone a liar who points out that griefers exist among them, but I think you just made that point better than I could, Ryan and Pizza, so thank you. :)
As for your claims that the standing tanking from ramming doesn't happen, the 8-10 hours I spent getting my XX back to PoS this last week would like to disagree with you.
As for your claims that the standing tanking from ramming doesn't happen, the 8-10 hours I spent getting my XX back to PoS this last week would like to disagree with you.
Phaserlight:
"This statement strikes me as a bit of an exaggeration... I've experienced some very harsh faction penalties by accidentally killing a player in guarded space. Also, going from neutral to admire in 2-3 bulk procurement missions seems like quite a feat. I'm not saying it's impossible, but they would have to be fairly uncommon missions in my estimation."
I'm basing this off a specific recent incident where one of the aforementioned griefers who was Tunguska Admire, was shooting at me outside a Tung station, and I decided I'd had enough of his BS and to tank his standing, so I stood still for a second and let him finish me off. I had Tunguska PoS at the time, and when he came back he was Tung Dislike, and gloating on 100 that it had only dropped his standing to -215. My guess is if he was over +800, he wouldn't have even dropped below neutral.
And for Tung, or really any faction existing more than a couple jumps outside of yellow space, that's one or two XC loads worth of bulk proc missions to earn back to admire, if you get the right ones, from personal experience.
"This statement strikes me as a bit of an exaggeration... I've experienced some very harsh faction penalties by accidentally killing a player in guarded space. Also, going from neutral to admire in 2-3 bulk procurement missions seems like quite a feat. I'm not saying it's impossible, but they would have to be fairly uncommon missions in my estimation."
I'm basing this off a specific recent incident where one of the aforementioned griefers who was Tunguska Admire, was shooting at me outside a Tung station, and I decided I'd had enough of his BS and to tank his standing, so I stood still for a second and let him finish me off. I had Tunguska PoS at the time, and when he came back he was Tung Dislike, and gloating on 100 that it had only dropped his standing to -215. My guess is if he was over +800, he wouldn't have even dropped below neutral.
And for Tung, or really any faction existing more than a couple jumps outside of yellow space, that's one or two XC loads worth of bulk proc missions to earn back to admire, if you get the right ones, from personal experience.