Forums » Suggestions
Even a 1:1 gain:loss ratio on mutual exclusion is lenient compared to other games I've played. I've played games where it was more inline with a 1:2 gain:loss for opposing factions.
In these games, if you did anything specifically for one faction, it was essentially noticed by the other as support for their enemy and so they decreased your faction. It was still possible to get high standing with opposing factions, though, by doing missions for other factions that happened to have a secondary standing boost for one or the other of the warring factions, and this is more-or-less how I would support having higher standings otherwise mutually exclusive factions. Even then, it would need to be well balanced to make sure that getting to such a point was much harder than these previous games allowed, and certainly much harder to keep.
In these games, if you did anything specifically for one faction, it was essentially noticed by the other as support for their enemy and so they decreased your faction. It was still possible to get high standing with opposing factions, though, by doing missions for other factions that happened to have a secondary standing boost for one or the other of the warring factions, and this is more-or-less how I would support having higher standings otherwise mutually exclusive factions. Even then, it would need to be well balanced to make sure that getting to such a point was much harder than these previous games allowed, and certainly much harder to keep.
"the "diplomat of the verse" thing is an excuse to abuse the role and do whatever the hell you want."
^
for those who aren't aware, this is actually an endorsement by TRS of my idea, since we all know his play style favors abusing roles and doing whatever the hell he wants.
That said, I disagree with the premise. As hard as it should be to get universal POS (or duel serco/itani POS), it should be very easy to lose it, and possibly also need to be actively maintained. There should be exclusive penalties in place for Diplomats of the Universe that would prevent such abuse.
^
for those who aren't aware, this is actually an endorsement by TRS of my idea, since we all know his play style favors abusing roles and doing whatever the hell he wants.
That said, I disagree with the premise. As hard as it should be to get universal POS (or duel serco/itani POS), it should be very easy to lose it, and possibly also need to be actively maintained. There should be exclusive penalties in place for Diplomats of the Universe that would prevent such abuse.
IMO, any standing above Respected should require active maintenance, with the amount of work involved scaling up with the standing, regardless of any dual-standings or whatever. (I'm only talking about during time the player is actually logged in though; people don't need to have standings decay while logged out.)
"the "diplomat of the verse" thing is an excuse to abuse the role and do whatever the hell you want."
Not necessary, again! As others said, if you define 'penalities' well, it will be something to earn hard and loose easy.
Not necessary, again! As others said, if you define 'penalities' well, it will be something to earn hard and loose easy.
Oh get real, there's no game rule you can put in that stops someone using a 'diplomat of the verse' character as a spotter bot for one side or the other, or giving intelligence or trading items in backwater sectors.
When a player loyal to the enemy faction finds out this is happening there's no mechanic to report them and therein lies the problem. It's ripe for abuse.
The devs need to man up and put in a player controlled faction system, that's where the real drama lies and that's where vendetta is at it's most fun.
When a player loyal to the enemy faction finds out this is happening there's no mechanic to report them and therein lies the problem. It's ripe for abuse.
The devs need to man up and put in a player controlled faction system, that's where the real drama lies and that's where vendetta is at it's most fun.
There already is one, TheRedSpy. it's called deciding whether to shoot someone based on how they've acted towards you or others you view positively.
That becomes a lot more difficult (or at least costly) in nation space when someone is tri-POS...
But I like tomato sauce, not pesto sauce!
Why not rig it so that instead of a fixed sum between 2 warring factions, it's set up so that the higher your standing with one faction, the harder it becomes to increase your standing with the other. Change the of standing points scored, rather than this constant point system we currently have. While I was sad to see my 13 gold bars disappear when the faction system was changed (I worked hard for all of them, and GS never provided any sort of reward for those of us who did - issue, but not important), I understood what they were trying to accomplish. Nevertheless, despite POS being a pain to get, it was still a grind. If the scale adjusts rather than the sum, it would reflect that your helping one side in a conflict wouldn't necessarily harm your relationship with the other side, but would make it harder to gain additional standing with that other side.
i werked harder to get my tri KOS when friendly fire protection was on, and i never claimed any reward fer it so...
"I worked hard for all of them, and GS never provided any sort of reward for those of us who did"
My understanding is that POS grants better prices than Admired. Not to say that it's a sufficient reward, but it does count as "any sort of reward".
"If the scale adjusts rather than the sum, it would reflect that your helping one side in a conflict wouldn't necessarily harm your relationship with the other side, but would make it harder to gain additional standing with that other side."
That is insufficient. Standing gains with the Itani must result in standing losses with the Serco. They are embroiled in a centuries-long war, not a friendly football rivalry. It's a nice touch though.
My understanding is that POS grants better prices than Admired. Not to say that it's a sufficient reward, but it does count as "any sort of reward".
"If the scale adjusts rather than the sum, it would reflect that your helping one side in a conflict wouldn't necessarily harm your relationship with the other side, but would make it harder to gain additional standing with that other side."
That is insufficient. Standing gains with the Itani must result in standing losses with the Serco. They are embroiled in a centuries-long war, not a friendly football rivalry. It's a nice touch though.
Guys, don't make a minor issue into a talking point. My point (however minor) was that those with 13 POS lost some of them. While understandable, it was a little frustrating to have all the work done to get all 13 just disappear like that.
However, this isn't the issue. What is one is how to effectively manage a player's standing if he/she wants a relationship with both parties. What constitutes a standing? I just happen to agree with some that a simple sum is too simplistic. For example, how else would you explain double agents using VO standing rules?
However, this isn't the issue. What is one is how to effectively manage a player's standing if he/she wants a relationship with both parties. What constitutes a standing? I just happen to agree with some that a simple sum is too simplistic. For example, how else would you explain double agents using VO standing rules?