Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[RawCode]

most games?
what games?

it's about immersion, you can't atack neutrals, no matter what your standing is, it will drop to hostile and then will eventually drop to vengeful just because neutrals will attack you, you will defend yourself and this will cause reputation drop again.

[Morbo513]

I think there's an inherent problem with having factions for supposedly factionless people, and this goes both for Independent as well as Pirates. I know it's like this because the alternative is probably a hell of a lot of work. If you've played STALKER's CoC mod with dynamic relations, it's the same issue. These "factions" are each comprised of people doing their own thing, each concentrating on their own survival and gain, over any wide-ranging strategic or ideological goals - and if any have such goals, they aren't necessarily shared with other members of the "faction". They aren't organised in the same way as the Hegemony or Tri-Tachyon. A bounty hunter going after pirates for the hegemony isn't going to share the same interests as a smuggler - Which is another thing that bugs me. These smuggler fleets shouldn't be designated as such, they should only really be identifiable by their behaviour (Transponder off/going dark on approach) and fleet composition. But their very existence is pointless gameplay wise, since you're going to *** off that entire "faction" for engaging them despite that fleet's criminal acts, while the system's authority might reasonably see such an action as lawful. There's more aspects and facets to this issue, but I don't really have a solution other than making each independent world, and each independent fleet type their own sub-faction. If you rack up a bounty, all the bounty hunters will be hostile to you (With some actively hunting you). If you're constantly pirating independent trade fleets, they'll spread word to one another and put that bounty on your head, while avoiding your fleet themselves. If you're targeting smugglers, those other sub-factions shouldn't care.

most games like this you cant avoid the consequences of your actions.  it becomes too easy for the player.

I think it simply makes sense that if a fleet is outside communication range of the civilised systems, they shouldn't be able to communicate they were attacked by you or any others. In such a situation, what consequence would there actually be? As the economy systems become more complex, this could be a viable means to create instability, or on the other hand, the player (and AI fleets) could take jobs to escort scavenger fleets.

[StarGibbon]

Gameplay > Concept > Realism.

Doesn't matter if it's realistic. Games are heavily abstracted, not a simulation of reality.  The gameplay requires that there be discrete factions, and that your actions with one influence standing with that faction directly, and possibly other factions as well. Too much granularity on this level would simply be noise.  The game wants to model complexity on the loadout screen and ship systems, not its fictional politics.

If one wants to diminish the impact of your actions through anonymity, the game provides the transponder mechanic for that.

[Gothars]

I don't get what the problem with Independents is supposed to be. It's just a label. The only mechanic is the shared standing, and that makes total sense.
If the independents were a bunch of sub factions they'd still talk to each other, at least if someone is either hunting them down or helping them out a lot. So you'd have to implement the same shared-standing mechanic we have now, except maybe for a little 0.X multiplier to simulate mitigated impact of your actions on other independent sub-factions.

[Histidine]

I don't get what the problem with Independents is supposed to be. It's just a label. The only mechanic is the shared standing, and that makes total sense.
If the independents were a bunch of sub factions they'd still talk to each other, at least if someone is either hunting them down or helping them out a lot. So you'd have to implement the same shared-standing mechanic we have now, except maybe for a little 0.X multiplier to simulate mitigated impact of your actions on other independent sub-factions.

The current system has no capacity for - to pick a field which clearly illustrates the difference, and one which the player would expect to occur at least sometimes - independents fighting each other.

[Gothars]

The current system has no capacity for - to pick a field which clearly illustrates the difference, and one which the player would expect to occur at least sometimes - independents fighting each other.

How'd that influence the player, though? Seems like it would just be for show when independents fight each other.

I mean, of course it's a simplification to conflate all indies, but one with a great cost-benefit ratio. And finding that kind of simplification is one of the things good game design is all about.

[DinoZavarski]

Not sure if it is the same bug, but i had similar problem: While on Remnant probe mission for the Independents i was detected by an independent scavenger fleet and got a message about -150 points drop of my relation with Independents (from +100 to -50). They did not attack me however.

[Sutopia]

Not sure if it is the same bug, but i had similar problem: While on Remnant probe mission for the Independents i was detected by an independent scavenger fleet and got a message about -150 points drop of my relation with Independents (from +100 to -50). They did not attack me however.

Happened to me too, suddenly the transponder skill flashed red for I'm just hanging around without any engagement. I was lucky to have transponder off though, and it's always a good habit keeping it off when not in ruled system.

[The2nd]

Gameplay > Concept > Realism.

Doesn't matter if it's realistic. Games are heavily abstracted, not a simulation of reality.  The gameplay requires that there be discrete factions, and that your actions with one influence standing with that faction directly, and possibly other factions as well. Too much granularity on this level would simply be noise.  The game wants to model complexity on the loadout screen and ship systems, not its fictional politics.

If one wants to diminish the impact of your actions through anonymity, the game provides the transponder mechanic for that.

I don't get what the problem with Independents is supposed to be. It's just a label. The only mechanic is the shared standing, and that makes total sense.
If the independents were a bunch of sub factions they'd still talk to each other, at least if someone is either hunting them down or helping them out a lot. So you'd have to implement the same shared-standing mechanic we have now, except maybe for a little 0.X multiplier to simulate mitigated impact of your actions on other independent sub-factions.

I agree with gameplay > realism but the independent faction system atm is just a copy paste from the rest of the factions.  It feels unfinished/like a placeholder. It's ok for now but I would expect something more for  the finished game. I mean the Persean league is what the Independents feel to be now, independent worlds allied into a single faction. A 0.X multiplier would be a good start to change that feeling.

Furthermore the transponder mechanic is fine for the core worlds but with the addition of the outer rim I think it isn't sufficient enough anymore. You are far off in a corner of the map and see a scavenger go pirate switching his transponder the way it's convenient. In one moment Pirate in the other Independent and vice versa. If you then attack an Independent, several tanker loads away from civilization, with transponder off no less you get an instant reputation loss with an "Independent faction". That just feels bad and destroys immersion.   

I'm not saying you should be able to attack everyone without repercussions but with the new additions in 0.8, in my opinion we should have a discussion about faction interaction and transponder mechanics in conjunction with the new systems.   
 

[StarGibbon]

Gameplay > Concept > Realism.

Doesn't matter if it's realistic. Games are heavily abstracted, not a simulation of reality.  The gameplay requires that there be discrete factions, and that your actions with one influence standing with that faction directly, and possibly other factions as well. Too much granularity on this level would simply be noise.  The game wants to model complexity on the loadout screen and ship systems, not its fictional politics.

If one wants to diminish the impact of your actions through anonymity, the game provides the transponder mechanic for that.

I don't get what the problem with Independents is supposed to be. It's just a label. The only mechanic is the shared standing, and that makes total sense.
If the independents were a bunch of sub factions they'd still talk to each other, at least if someone is either hunting them down or helping them out a lot. So you'd have to implement the same shared-standing mechanic we have now, except maybe for a little 0.X multiplier to simulate mitigated impact of your actions on other independent sub-factions.

I agree with gameplay > realism but the independent faction system atm is just a copy paste from the rest of the factions.  It feels unfinished/like a placeholder. It's ok for now but I would expect something more for  the finished game. I mean the Persean league is what the Independents feel to be now, independent worlds allied into a single faction. A 0.X multiplier would be a good start to change that feeling.

Furthermore the transponder mechanic is fine for the core worlds but with the addition of the outer rim I think it isn't sufficient enough anymore. You are far off in a corner of the map and see a scavenger go pirate switching his transponder the way it's convenient. In one moment Pirate in the other Independent and vice versa. If you then attack an Independent, several tanker loads away from civilization, with transponder off no less you get an instant reputation loss with an "Independent faction". That just feels bad and destroys immersion.   

I'm not saying you should be able to attack everyone without repercussions but with the new additions in 0.8, in my opinion we should have a discussion about faction interaction and transponder mechanics in conjunction with the new systems.   
 

"Independent" is just supposed to be a catch all faction for parties that don't fit into the game's established branded factions.  Are you sure your argument for increased granularity in the Independent faction isn't just boiling down to arguing for more factions?  That seems outside of the game's focus, and better left to modding.  If it makes you feel better, think of the entire universe as "Independents", and the branded factions as the discrete sub-factions within.  The game has to draw a line at some number of factions, and so everyone else gets abstracted into the "Indie" category.

You could further break down the independent faction into "the scavenging independents", the "merchant independents", the "mercenary independents", etc, but that really just feels like noise to me for the game's design, and all it really amounts to is adding a number of smaller, inconsequential factions.

8 discrete factions is pretty good for a game of this type. Sid Meier's pirates had, what? 4?  M&B had something like 5 by default. Gotta draw the line someplace, and leave the rest to the modders.

[DinoZavarski]

I'm not saying you should be able to attack everyone without repercussions but with the new additions in 0.8, in my opinion we should have a discussion about faction interaction and transponder mechanics in conjunction with the new systems.   

I would like to see transponder codes as in-game commodity - something you can buy and sell on the black market, get as loot in battle or even forge with a skill. Also an ability to use such fake codes with chance to fail that increases with your level and number of ships. Even higher chance to be caught if you allow to be scanned, attempt to land on developed planet or visit faction that knows you well (high negative/positive rep.).

BTW: What about faction IFF transponder hull mods that you have to add on your military grade ships when you get commission (no entry in the space of factions like Hegemony with military grade ships that have no friendly faction IFF).

[SCC]

I think that if instead of "independents" you'd have "reputation" it'd be a bit easier for some people to grasp.
On the topic of transponder, I wish outside core systems any actions took little bearing on your stance with anyone, perhaps with exceptions of a given faction's military ships, if they make their way to one of their markets. Just so greedy scavenger wouldn't be a problem.