| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Damien Arcuri
    |
Posted - 2008.04.26 03:27:00 -
[61]
 Originally by: Chani Fedaykin
if you would implement the 'standard' diplomacy behaviour, it would be too much benefit imo for slight negative standings ... you would get a better standing with a faction @ -0.01 than with one @ 0.01
Good point. However, that's a problem even with existing skills. If you have diplomacy trained higher than connections, your effective standing drops when your raw standings increase from -.01 to 0.01.
Your skill additions are impressively thought out, but I'm not sure I like the idea of 5 new skills just to deal with one problem. They fit into two categories: first, reduce negative standing changes; and second, improve the worst possible faction standing the character can have. As long as faction standings are repairable, do we need skills to slow down negative faction standing changes?
Factional Diplomacy skill (works on faction standings only):
diplomatic_faction_standing = faction_standing + ((Diplomacy + Factional_Diplomacy) * .04 * (10-faction_standing))
Prereq: Social 4, Diplomacy 5
Chani's Deception skill (works on faction standings only):
diplomatic_faction_standing = faction_standing * (1-(Deception * .1)) + ((10-(faction_standing * (1-(Deception * .1)))) * .04 * Diplomacy)
Prereq: new skills (see Chani's descriptions)
I personally don't care one way or the other. Chani's is more conservative, which might be good.
This final bit decides whether to use social or diplomacy skills, and caps diplomatic standing so that the modified standing function is continuous:
final_faction_standing = (standing < 0) ? MIN(diplomatic_faction_standing, .4*Social) : (faction_standing + ((10-faction_standing) * .04 * Social))
Note that for NPC corp standings, EVE seems to use Diplomacy if faction standing is less than 0, even if corp standing is above 0. So the new corp standing function (which doesn't use any of the new skills) would be:
diplomatic_corp_standing = corp_standing + (Diplomacy * .04 * (10-corp_standing))
final_corp_standing = (corp_standing < 0 || faction_standing < 0) ? MIN(diplomatic_corp_standing, .4*Social) : (corp_standing + ((10-corp_standing) * .04 * Social))
Originally by: Astria Tiphareth
It really annoys me that as a roleplayer I can't undo choices I make in the game, such as this faction system. I don't mind working to undo a choice (I'm currently grinding negative Gallente standings along those very lines) but to get totally stuck is unacceptable. It just promotes alts and metagaming.
QFT
|
Nebulous
Minmatar
Thukker Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 11:45:00 -
[62]
I have not studied completely all the factions but many of the bad standings you get towards a certain faction can be made good by working for friends of that faction, for example my Angel standings used to be awful, by working for the Thukker tribe I now have possitive standings with the angel faction.
Like i said it might not be the case with all factions but it might be worth taking a look if you can boost your standings via a different faction first.
----------------
 |
Chani Fedaykin
|
Posted - 2008.04.28 11:59:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Damien Arcuri
Good point. However, that's a problem even with existing skills. If you have diplomacy trained higher than connections, your effective standing drops when your raw standings increase from -.01 to 0.01.
however my skill suggestion doesnt propose an additional skill for positive standings (imo not needed) - which removes the possibility to have positive and negative standings adjusted by the same amount (skill level)
Originally by: Damien Arcuri
Your skill additions are impressively thought out, but I'm not sure I like the idea of 5 new skills just to deal with one problem. They fit into two categories: first, reduce negative standing changes; and second, improve the worst possible faction standing the character can have. As long as faction standings are repairable, do we need skills to slow down negative faction standing changes?
the impressiveness of the skill additions is directly related to my opinion, that it should take a big investment to achieve the possibility to fly for any faction regardless of (unmodified) standings.
basically the proposed reduction in negative impact should help a pilot to not reach the state where he has to max out these skills to be able to fly missions for all factions. in general, i think any negative impact on faction standings should relate to positive ones ... which is sadly not the current state. however this would make the 'need' for a reduction obsolete.
Originally by: Damien Arcuri
final_faction_standing = (standing < 0) ? MIN(diplomatic_faction_standing, .4*Social) : (faction_standing + ((10-faction_standing) * .04 * Social))
'.4*Social' looks a bit weird ... shouldnt this be 'Diplomacy'?
social only affects the standing gain, not the actual standings afaik
Originally by: Damien Arcuri
diplomatic_corp_standing = corp_standing + (Diplomacy * .04 * (10-corp_standing))
final_corp_standing = (corp_standing < 0 || faction_standing < 0) ? MIN(diplomatic_corp_standing, .4*Social) : (corp_standing + ((10-corp_standing) * .04 * Social))
if corp standing is affected by the same skills as now, there is no need to alter anything.
unmodified faction < 0 ? use diplomacy : use connections
there was / is no intention to adress corp/personal standings that get below -2.0 because thats something a pilot can prevent without problems.
Originally by: Nebulous
...Like i said it might not be the case with all factions but it might be worth taking a look if you can boost your standings via a different faction first.
its obious that you can gain faction standings IF you are able to fly missions for a 'liked' faction, thats not the point. the problem is that you can screw your standings and not be able to fly for a faction again (and their friends) ... forever
---
 |
Chani Fedaykin
|
Posted - 2008.05.07 06:16:00 -
[64]
seems like i always scare ppl away with my long replies ^^ |
Travis Shireen
Gallente
Minmatar Ship Construction Services
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 00:16:00 -
[65]
/signed
- Player Action Points: A suppliment to Faction Warfare |
Siouxsie Xai
Gallente
Garoun Investment Bank
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 00:24:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Stakhanov
As an ISK farmer hunter , I am against this suggestion. ISK farmers have all the time in the world to grind standings , right now the only way to make a significant dent in their income is to kill their haulers and make them fail missions until they can no longer use their high quality agents. With enough persecution , it is possible to make some of their characters worthless for farming , so that they get recycled. Which (more or less) nullifies the GTC investments on them. If they have to restart from scratch with new characters , their profits will be much lower.
I don't want to mutilate those farmers for days on end , only to have them come back with +9 standings a week later.
As for the pirates standings , who cares. If you have been ratting all over the place , pirate factions are right to hate you - I could use most low level pirate agents without even training diplomacy.
I assume you have a method of recognising ISK farmers, that does not include people simply trying to get more ISK for themselves? As a general rule farmer hunting is a witch hunt.
I consider the missing pleasure hub interior a bug.. even if it is not. Please fix it. :P |
Chani Fedaykin
|
Posted - 2008.06.19 11:27:00 -
[67]
considering that fw will put players up against empire factions - which will ofc lower their standings without gain (killing ships/structures) i think its even more important to find a solution for stuck standings
besides concord is one faction for example that can go negative (pirate faction missions) without the chance to recover ever (no important missions, doesnt like any other faction) iirc
btw: nice 'move' to make thukker neutral to minni at least - considering that some minni ships have thukker design :P
---
features & ideas |
Astria Tiphareth
|
Posted - 2008.06.19 12:58:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Chani Fedaykin
considering that fw will put players up against empire factions - which will ofc lower their standings without gain (killing ships/structures) i think its even more important to find a solution for stuck standings
Greyscale & Ginger did at least concede in a dev blog that the issue of stuck low standings was on their todo list. Hopefully we'll see some progress.
___
My views may not represent those of my corporation or alliance, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties... |
GavinCapacitor
|
Posted - 2008.07.07 03:03:00 -
[69]
Having a point a absolutely no return sucks. Plain and simple. Lots of good ideas and suggestions in this thread, and I hope CCP implements one of them to fix the problem. As a player with one account and one character, having options completely & permanently closed to me just doesn't sound fun... and it's supposed to be a game after all.
|
Karze Dywine
Minmatar
Gradient
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.07.08 06:22:00 -
[70]
Originally by: grgjegb gergerg
Could take an idea from Freelancer here, and use storyline missions.
If one faction hated you, their enemies liked you. Spamkill enough of one, and more diplomatic options with another opened up.
Basically, have NPC kills repair standing with enemies while hurting empire standing. Have empire faction rat patrols (Caldari Navy for example), and have players hunt them down in lowsec for tags, mediocre loot, and Guristas standing.
After X number of CN kills, give the player a special Guristas storyline mission in a neutral station, which would help a lot more. After a week or two, the player would be quite negative with CN, and Guristas missions would open up.
And then, have random Guristas patrols out in lowsec, with a few neutral stations with CN storyline agents.
It shouldn't be EASY, but it should be POSSIBLE.
This is the same as what I had in mind
|
|
Blue Disk
|
Posted - 2008.07.10 12:50:00 -
[71]
Won't this become a much bigger problem now that Faction Warfare is in place? People are going to be doing PvP against other factions, and they will eventually get negative faction standings and get stuck.
I was planning on doing some missions for each faction in the hopes that I would always have at least one corp in each faction that would let me run missions. But it sounds like that won't work since one my faction standing goes down enough, I'll be stuck anyway.
|
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |