5. Allow bonds to be handed in anywhere and still count towards the war they were earned in.
5. Allow bonds to be handed in anywhere and still count towards the war they were earned in.
1. Don't count bonds at all. They're just a "sweetener" just like cash from massacre missions
2. Introduce squadron carriers (though that wouldn't help non-squadron affiliated CMDRs)
3. A temporary docking station for bond drops and refuel/repair/restock
4. Allow docking at hostile.
To be fair, I would like this solution the least, but it would address the problem too.
5. Allow bonds to be handed in anywhere and still count towards the war they were earned in.
This is fine, and it doesnt drop that quick.
Fdev dont need to balance anything here, this is how it should be. Differcult to start in a new system, I have been involved with many systems when you dint have any assets. There is newrly always another station owned by a different faction which you can land at.
I don't think that makes much sense. Trading with a faction benefits them and so improves your reputation with them. Why would they punish you for that?Doesn't matter how gradual it is, it's broken. No other activity in the game punishes you for doing well at it, which is what this is doing. Imagine if, after trading for a long time, the target station you're trading at says "We refuse to trade with you any more". That's the equivalent of this... do really well in a war and get your options to contribute to the war limited.
...
I don't think that makes much sense. Trading with a faction benefits them and so improves your reputation with them. Why would they punish you for that?
Attacking a faction, killing their members and trying to take their station(s) from them gives them no incentive to help you in any way. On the other hand, your reputation will improve with the faction you're are fighting for.
You should be, it's 100% the point. Great post.That's not the point here.
Success in trade enables further success in trade.
Success in war disables further success in war, because of this mechanic.
Bottom line is: How do you win wars?
It's ridiculous to consider that, in order to be most effective at a war, I have to be careful not to annoy the enemy too much.
- Resolve Conflict Zones
- Do scenarios
- Submit Combat Bonds; but if you become hostile, you can't do this anymore.
Just to re-iterate, I have no problem getting locked out of stations and such[1] for being Hostile. I have significant issue with the fact someone who can cash their bonds is more effective than someone who can't. It's totally non-sensical. Two players on opposing sides both destroy 4 ships and earn 200k in bonds to collect. The ships are gone, that's the impact right there... cashing bonds should have nothing to do with the war outcome.
Either the effect of cashing bonds on a war outcome needs to be removed (which is the quick and easy fix), or an alternate arrangement to hand in the bonds implemented.
[1] Notwithstanding the fact that, allowing Anonymity Protocols access when hostile unlocks a host of potential gameplay opportunities, and the knee-jerk "lock hostile people out of stations" mechanic is totally short-sighted and inconsistent with other aspects of the game, but I'm not here to beat that drum.
This is fine, and it doesnt drop that quick.
Fdev dont need to balance anything here, this is how it should be. Differcult to start in a new system, I have been involved with many systems when you dint have any assets. There is newrly always another station owned by a different faction which you can land at.
Do not fight against controlling faction, I guess. Becoming hostile is correct for me: you fighting against them, what did you expect?..
Destroying enemy ships does not affect the outcome of the war.
Collecting your bond for those kills does, and you cannot do this if the enemy owns the only station in the system.
That is, contributing to the war effort can prevent you contributing to the war effort. It's absurdity. Claiming combat bonds should not affect the outcome of the war.
It doesn't count to the war. Anything claimed through Interstellar Factors has no effect.Now I see. What about claiming the bonds in the interstellar factors in other systems?
all you have to do is run some REP missions to keep you up before you start CZ. if you run a few CZs per day, then the your rep doesn't move that much. e.g. I'm on day 4 now of a CZ, and I haven't entered unfriendly yet. my rep with the opposing faction was high before we started,
or if there are any cash missions do one or two of these, while docked at station. just keep the bar our of hostile
personally I think its working as you would expect.
you fight against a faction, they like you less. to more you fight against them, they more they dislike you.
if you do it so many times you end up hostile
if they own a station, its only right they do not allow you in.
seems very normal to me.
seems very normal to me.
Given that the pending time for conflict has been reduced from three days to one, this strategy would require extensive planning. As all rep missions include an element of inf, every mission successfully completed would tend to move the anticipated antagonist's influence level away from the necessary congruence to trigger the conflict (under most circumstances).all you have to do is run some REP missions to keep you up before you start CZ.
You mean, fight them one minute, help them the next? What will they think of you?or if there are any cash missions do one or two of these, while docked at station. just keep the bar our of hostile.
I've gone from Allied to just above hostile in one day in a war (with opposition). Fortunately, I'm defending. If there is no change I'll be taking explo data into the warzones and selling it to the station owner. A couple of mapped terraformables will deal with the issue. It feels a bit daft though