Restrict access to opposing navy when you attain high rank

[nanite2000]

I realise that the military progression path in the game is still pretty undeveloped at the moment. However, when it gets expanded and improved in future, I would like to suggest a restriction in how you rank up.

Since it's very unrealistic a navy would allow you to become top rank in both it's own and the opposing faction, I would propose that you should be unable to go beyond a certain rank in one navy without relinquishing your current rank with the other.

This would force players to choose their preferred side, or face a long path to returning to the high rank (and perks!) they currently enjoy with their current navy when they eventually become a turncoat.

Similarly, any superpower-aligned Engineers should only be accessible when you are either above a certain rank, or Allied, with the superpower they are aligned with.

Again, this would force players to be very careful about which military path they choose to follow.

Thoughts?

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

+1

I always thought that each military ranking mission you do, should be targetted at the opposing faction.

Which causes rep loss, and a demotion in their navy.

But for the sake of gameplay, if you unlock the Corvette, and defect to the Empire, losing all your federation ranks, then blow up your Corvette, you can still rebuy it. Otherwise it's too harsh on the player, IMHO. And also allows for "backwards compatibility" for the CMDRs who already have both Cutter and Corvette.

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead

 

[Chrystoph]

I realise that the military progression path in the game is still pretty undeveloped at the moment. However, when it gets expanded and improved in future, I would like to suggest a restriction in how you rank up.

Since it's very unrealistic a navy would allow you to become top rank in both it's own and the opposing faction, I would propose that you should be unable to go beyond a certain rank in one navy without relinquishing your current rank with the other.

This would force players to choose their preferred side, or face a long path to returning to the high rank (and perks!) they currently enjoy with their current navy when they eventually become a turncoat.

Similarly, any superpower-aligned Engineers should only be accessible when you are either above a certain rank, or Allied, with the superpower they are aligned with.

Again, this would force players to be very careful about which military path they choose to follow.

Thoughts?

Given that the only benefit this provides is ship unlocks, and, no, I do not consider permits to a be an actual benefit in this case, no, thank you.

You are not actually "factioning" in any meaningful way so limitations would simply be a denial of a section of the game to no benefit. Given the game's current limitation of one Commander per license, this is especially limiting.

 

[Yaffle]

I agree. In a way there should be a number of 'loyalty points' available. At low levels you can be seen as favourable by all factions, but as you progress with one it starts to eat the points the others had, making them increasingly sceptical of you.

So, you have 100 points. At the start no faction has anything to do with you, and as you do missions they take your points. That 100 cannot be expanded. The top rank in any is 100 points, busting you back to zero with opposing factions.

 

[Tadeus72]

You are not part of the navy. You are just a trusted contractor with a honorary title and both factions aren't even at war. We will also have an Alliance rank in Beyond with new ships. Do you really want to block 2/3 of the top-end navy ships for people? It's just a game, let's not overdo it.

 

[sandkid]

You are not part of the navy. You are just a trusted contractor with a honorary title and both factions aren't even at war. We will also have an Alliance rank in Beyond with new ships. Do you really want to block 2/3 of the top-end navy ships for people? It's just a game, let's not overdo it.

This.

What you're looking for in 'locked out' design exists in Powerplay. If you want to have perceived uniqueness or 'loyalty' features, that's the place to do it. I would support ships for each of the Powerplay factions that are only purchasable at Rank 5. This puts them outside of casual player's grasp but not so far as to be declared 'too much trouble'. Given insurance rebuys allow you to perpetually not 'lose' a ship you have - collecting them all wouldn't be that hard either.

Unless you tend to fly with a bank balance so low that you ignore Rule #1 of Eve Online (and any other games with similar loss mechanics): Don't fly what you can't afford to lose.

 

[JetsonRING]

You are not "in" either Navy, the ranks are honorary.

 

[Allchemyst]

First, as it has already been said, the ranks are absolutely honorary - Notice how we're all greeted in the same "You're rabble but we'll let you in, loser" kind of way by station authorities, no matter how kingly we are? That's because, as far as actual power goes, we're still rabble.

More importantly, those titles are by no means binding - they do not mean, like true titles, that we have to comply to any military hierarchy and that any portion of the military must answer to us.

Faction ranks truly, and only, grant titles as a mark of recognition and service. You can, and eventually will, get to Admiral by hauling crap from station to station, albeit very slowly.

A "King" or "Admiral" can be said to have done only one thing : They have contributed, in one way or another, to bettering the lives of the people of the represented faction.


For players like me, the "pacifists", who, rather than siding with either faction like so many lapdogs, prefer to find ways to bring about actual peace - and barring such options, concentrate on actually helping the little people, be it saving crashed crews and recovering their lifepods - naval ranks simply imply that we have made a career out of either preventing or avoiding conflicts and made ourselves reliable - neutral - partners to the people of both actions.

So, nope, and nope again. I profoundly hope FD, when they get around to making naval ranks do something, will keep how factions recognize the efforts of neutral agents. I'd feel the game would gain a lot from giving us the ability to become negotiators, instead of just being hired guns for overly ambitious hubris-monsters. But negotiators need to be held in high esteem by both sides of the negotiation.

 

[Nitross]

If restrictions are added on to the current system, it is simply adding grind without additional value.

First, you would have to remove rank requirements from some system permits; perhaps substitute rank with a reputation requirement for capital systems for instance. After all, every merchant that brings goods to Sol can't actually be required to be part of the army, right?

Second, you would need solid alternatives to rank locked ships. You could have mirrored choices across each navy or have a standard version of the ship that doesn't require rank and a military version with cosmetic difference (and maybe a small tweak to stats); the method isn't important, what is important is to avoid inflating grind by having to switch faction because you now want the largest multipurpose ship instead of the biggest combat ship of the game or simply because some of the more useful mid range ships are locked behind the navy ranks.

We already see the "grind inflation" phenomenon with Power Play exclusive components, even if most of those aren't used in top tier builds or aren't that much of an improvement over regular components that only the most dedicated players go after them. However, the fact that players join and quit powers on a whim to obtain the special gear dilutes the meaningfulness of picking a power.

But, if we effectively remove rank requirement from most system permits and ships, what should be rank locked in an "exclusive navy" system?

Well, first, I would permit lock military systems and installations. And instead of having the military ships available anywhere, those ships - or rather, special ship kits and paint jobs - would be sold at military stations and outposts.

Also, military stations could sell special modules. To reduce the need for power play pledge switching and to avoid increasing the need to switch navies, this could be the same modules as those available in Power Play. This would give an alternative to players who want the module but can't make the commitment to Power Play, but may require to add restrictions to Power Play pledges according to the navy you are a part of and vice versa. In short: you could get Prismatic Shields either with Aisling Duval or a high enough rank in the Imperial Navy, but being part of the Imperial Navy would prevent you from pledging to a Federal or Alliance aligned Power.

Finally, if you want ranks to feel like a real "military career" instead of the "reserve forces" or "honorary title" it currently is, you should not be able to rank up completely on courrier missions; they should drop effectiveness quickly after the first ranks, possibly to zero. But you can't nerf those without an alternative: Combat Zones should be the best places to grind Navy rank, even without missions, followed closely by assassination missions or "retrival" missions with hostiles. The point is: how can you become an actual Admiral without any combat experience?

I'm no game designer, so that's just some basic ideas. The system could be even more fleshed out to be even better, or something completely different could be done to accommodate a "lockout" to navies without increasing grind.

TLDR - Rank grind is bad; without rethinking ranks completely, adding a "lockout" will just make it worse.

 

[space voyager]

In essence I agree with OP. I'd love to see some real military service and if it is added, than by all means lock the parallel military services. But for now what others have written stands.

 

[CMDR Yates]

In essence I agree with OP. I'd love to see some real military service and if it is added, than by all means lock the parallel military services. But for now what others have written stands.

Yeah, keep the existing honorary title system for "contractors", but also add an option to officially join the navy. It could be a solution for players who claim the game is "too" open, a more structured experience where you are handed missions and new ships as you progress. It would probably need to wait until (if) we ever get things like NPC wings and escort missions, though.

 

[trollson]

Consequences.<br> <br> If you complete a mission (or action) which gains you rep with one faction, then there would be a (smaller) loss in rep in opposing factions. Still allows you to collect all ranks, but it would be harder to do in parallel.<br> <br> Defining what is an "opposing faction" may be interesting, and fluctuate over time and space. If the major powers are not in direct conflict, then look at the minor factions that are being worked - are they in conflict with allies of other major factions? If you want to play all sides, then find places and times when they are in relative peace - but then I'd guess that the missions wouldn't be as lucrative.<br> <br>

 

[MBaldelli]

I realise that the military progression path in the game is still pretty undeveloped at the moment. However, when it gets expanded and improved in future, I would like to suggest a restriction in how you rank up.

Since it's very unrealistic a navy would allow you to become top rank in both it's own and the opposing faction, I would propose that you should be unable to go beyond a certain rank in one navy without relinquishing your current rank with the other.

This would force players to choose their preferred side, or face a long path to returning to the high rank (and perks!) they currently enjoy with their current navy when they eventually become a turncoat.

Similarly, any superpower-aligned Engineers should only be accessible when you are either above a certain rank, or Allied, with the superpower they are aligned with.

Again, this would force players to be very careful about which military path they choose to follow.

Thoughts?

Weren't you one of the people that often remind me that you're not actually in the Empire's or Federation's Navy and that the rank you get is in fact honorary?

If not...

You're not actually serving in the Federation's or Empire's Navy. Your rank there is entirely honorary. It is entirely possible to be working for both powers -- Federation and Empire -- without crossing lines with either of them as I'm proving in my actions and activities within the game. While I'm waiting for my morning coffee to kick in, instinctively this feels like player sadism (in order to make the game feel more alive) and I'm against that first and foremost.

I'm also not convinced about furthering cordoning off Engineers based on system permits. We have certain engineers already needing rare materials in order to access them. In some cases those are incredibly annoying -- especially when you consider that the 2.4 broke that system locking out players from Qwent and Palin because their material requirements bugged out. This can also be deemed player sadism.

 

[nanite2000]

Weren't you one of the people that often remind me that you're not actually in the Empire's or Federation's Navy and that the rank you get is in fact honorary?

I think you're confusing me with someone else.