An idea that popped into my head while reading Screenmonsters great C+P ideas (https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...nt-suggestions-by-an-in-game-criminal.560800/)
Why is it factions trust criminals who are notorious?
Think about it. Why do hardened cannibals like me get trusted with gold, tasty passengers etc? Why do leaders think with a notoriety of 10 I'd 'blend in' when half the galaxy wants my head?
Idea: missions offered in the UI are filtered by your notoriety rating (there is a caveat, read on later).
In short, unlawful players won't be trusted with lawful goods, but offered missions that reflect and use those criminal instincts.
So, a hardened pirate / killer won't be offered transport missions to move high value goods. They will be offered missions to kill. So for high end wetwork, you need to be a proven killer(1)
Smuggling requires keeping a low profile. High notoriety makes you 'hot' and thus you won't be trusted with smuggling missions.
(1) these missions would pay the most, but incur notoriety in that system against the target faction.
Caveat:
Different gov types and BGS states change these rules
Some govs don't care who you are. Anarchies have no restrictions (so it reflects the "no rules" aspect). Dictatorships would be more loose with the requirements, whereas democracies would be most stringent.
The negative BGS states might also make factions 'bend the rules' since they are desperate for your help- but the fines might be doubled or scale based on how much notoriety (and thus risk) you pose being trusted. Some BGS states might bypass notoriety altogether, since they need those landmines- war for example.
What this change would do
Your actions in the wider game would have a local and immediate effect as to a factions reaction to you in a way that only requires linking variables that already exist in the game. Killers and criminals would find being legit in 'civilised' systems harder, but not impossible- those factions have enemies to disrupt via disposable means (i.e. you). It also magnifies distinctions between gov types, with anarchies being useful since they have no rules on what you can do- maybe this might stop them being punching bags, even.
It adds a mild role play aspect- you will see the galaxy react to you, and if you want to be legit again you have to be good and do good.
Why is it factions trust criminals who are notorious?
Think about it. Why do hardened cannibals like me get trusted with gold, tasty passengers etc? Why do leaders think with a notoriety of 10 I'd 'blend in' when half the galaxy wants my head?
Idea: missions offered in the UI are filtered by your notoriety rating (there is a caveat, read on later).
In short, unlawful players won't be trusted with lawful goods, but offered missions that reflect and use those criminal instincts.
So, a hardened pirate / killer won't be offered transport missions to move high value goods. They will be offered missions to kill. So for high end wetwork, you need to be a proven killer(1)
Smuggling requires keeping a low profile. High notoriety makes you 'hot' and thus you won't be trusted with smuggling missions.
(1) these missions would pay the most, but incur notoriety in that system against the target faction.
Caveat:
Different gov types and BGS states change these rules
Some govs don't care who you are. Anarchies have no restrictions (so it reflects the "no rules" aspect). Dictatorships would be more loose with the requirements, whereas democracies would be most stringent.
The negative BGS states might also make factions 'bend the rules' since they are desperate for your help- but the fines might be doubled or scale based on how much notoriety (and thus risk) you pose being trusted. Some BGS states might bypass notoriety altogether, since they need those landmines- war for example.
What this change would do
Your actions in the wider game would have a local and immediate effect as to a factions reaction to you in a way that only requires linking variables that already exist in the game. Killers and criminals would find being legit in 'civilised' systems harder, but not impossible- those factions have enemies to disrupt via disposable means (i.e. you). It also magnifies distinctions between gov types, with anarchies being useful since they have no rules on what you can do- maybe this might stop them being punching bags, even.
It adds a mild role play aspect- you will see the galaxy react to you, and if you want to be legit again you have to be good and do good.
Last edited:
