Say goodbye to Anarchies

[Screemonster]

We need a way to sell bartenders illegal drugs in non-anarchy systems, and increase anarchist factions influence when doing so. Put the narc back into Anarchy.

Honestly the best way to fix balance would be to find more ways to bring anarchies more in line with other factions, and other factions more in line with anarchies.

For instance - if you go to a res site, the pirates there can be from any faction, including the controlling one.
Therefore, any faction should be a viable target for pirate lord assassination missions, and pirate massacre missions shouldn't care what faction the pirates you kill are from.

Undetected murders at lawful settlements should not incur bounties, thereby making all faction types a viable target for farming materials instead of encouraging people to exclusively go after anarchies.

"lawful" and "criminal" versions of the same mission type should have similar requirements - piracy and liberate missions should both be generated with the same rough numbers of cargo, instead of piracy requiring you to steal amounts of goods that make it impossible in a small ship while liberate jobs can be done with 8t of cargo space tops.

The disparity between anarchies and non-anarchies in this game isn't just limited to one or two things, it's stacks upon stacks of little things that all combine to make the whole thing wildly unbalanced.

 

[Fishy]

Honestly the best way to fix balance would be to find more ways to bring anarchies more in line with other factions, and other factions more in line with anarchies.

For instance - if you go to a res site, the pirates there can be from any faction, including the controlling one.
Therefore, any faction should be a viable target for pirate lord assassination missions, and pirate massacre missions shouldn't care what faction the pirates you kill are from.

Undetected murders at lawful settlements should not incur bounties, thereby making all faction types a viable target for farming materials instead of encouraging people to exclusively go after anarchies.

"lawful" and "criminal" versions of the same mission type should have similar requirements - piracy and liberate missions should both be generated with the same rough numbers of cargo, instead of piracy requiring you to steal amounts of goods that make it impossible in a small ship while liberate jobs can be done with 8t of cargo space tops.

The disparity between anarchies and non-anarchies in this game isn't just limited to one or two things, it's stacks upon stacks of little things that all combine to make the whole thing wildly unbalanced.

I bow to your actually thought out ideas. I was just after a silly pun.

 

[Kekkonshiki]

Our Anarchy faction, Omerta Brotherhood, controlled 12 systems. Since EDO we now control 8 and still dropping.

I've stopped playing because of this.

Frontier need to identify and fix the problems with the BGS and then revert the BGS state to what it was before EDO went live.

 

[Unknown Zombie]

• Black Markets in Anarchy Stations shouldn't exist - they should just simply be called the "Commodities Market" and buy everything, stolen or not
• Black Markets should exist literally everywhere else, and should benefit resident Anarchy factions when sold to

hell yes

 

[Jmanis]

• Black Markets in Anarchy Stations shouldn't exist - they should just simply be called the "Commodities Market" and buy everything, stolen or not
• Black Markets should exist literally everywhere else, and should benefit resident Anarchy factions when sold to

I agree they should be everywhere, but disagree with the Anarchy benefit comment, simply because it would create a bizarre situation where, if there are multiple anarchy factions in a system, they would all benefit from the sale of goods. I think the current implementation where:

• when owned by non anarchy factions, BM sales hurt the economy/ influence of a faction
• when owned by anarchy, BM sales benefit the economy/ influence of that faction

... makes sense, though I'd also argue that stolen goods[1] should still negatively affect Anarchies for <reasons>, but that ship sailed a long time ago.

• Lawful factions should target each other on the mission board as much as they target Anarchies (because it's a dog eat dog galaxy)

This is why i favour missions which target owned installations such as skimmers, installation scans, powerplant takedowns, as they seem way more common for lawful factions and will reliably target other lawful factions, provided they own assets. States seem to matter a bit too.

• POI "bad guys" should be pulled from an equally distributed random distribution of all factions present in the system'

This used to be the case. Not sure why it changed, but it did.

• Anarchy space should be as dangerous, PvE-wise, as High Security systems are "safe", i.e. being able to travel around them with ease should be end-game content, just like traveling around High Sec is noob game content. I'm talking you get pulled in Anarchy space, instead of three cops showing up to defend you, there should be three pirates showing up, pounding on your .

I think more nuance is needed here. Something I've proposed before is that the equation should be one reward as a function of lawfulness, risk and security status.

In short, being a criminal in anarchy should be fairly safe and low-paid... being lawful in high security space should also be safe and low paid.

Trying to undertake lawful activities in Anarchy should be dangerous and well-paid, likewise undertaking criminal activities in high-security systems should be very well paid. But the lawfulness of a system shouldn't be a straight-up determinant of risk; rather, your reputation (and criminal notoriety[2]) should influence how you are responded to.

[1] On the rationale that now, ostensibly you can steal from a criminal faction and sell it back to them, and they benefit from that, somehow.

[2] Though I'd also argue Notoriety shouldn't necessarily be a criminal measure, and should go -10 (notoriously wanted criminal) up to +10 (notorious bastion of law and order), each with pro's and con's (imagine if Anarchy wouldn't sell you e-breaches if you have positive notoriety!)

 

[Deleted member 115407]

[2] Though I'd also argue Notoriety shouldn't necessarily be a criminal measure, and should go -10 (notoriously wanted criminal) up to +10 (notorious bastion of law and order), each with pro's and con's (imagine if Anarchy wouldn't sell you e-breaches if you have positive notoriety!)

How would you incur negative notoriety though?

 

[Jmanis]

How would you incur negative notoriety though?

Crime?

EDIT: To be clear, criminal acts would gradually incur negative Notoriety, and lawful acts positive notoriety, as opposed to the current system which is (literal) positive notoriety from criminal acts.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

Crime?

EDIT: To be clear, criminal acts would gradually incur negative Notoriety, and lawful acts positive notoriety, as opposed to the current system which is (literal) positive notoriety from criminal acts.

Ah, I skimmed the last sentence. What would cause one to have positive notoriety? Just doing non-criminal stuff?

 

[Riverside]

I agree they should be everywhere, but disagree with the Anarchy benefit comment, simply because it would create a bizarre situation where, if there are multiple anarchy factions in a system, they would all benefit from the sale of goods. I think the current implementation where:

• when owned by non anarchy factions, BM sales hurt the economy/ influence of a faction
• when owned by anarchy, BM sales benefit the economy/ influence of that faction

... makes sense, though I'd also argue that stolen goods[1] should still negatively affect Anarchies for <reasons>, but that ship sailed a long time ago.

This is why i favour missions which target owned installations such as skimmers, installation scans, powerplant takedowns, as they seem way more common for lawful factions and will reliably target other lawful factions, provided they own assets. States seem to matter a bit too.

This used to be the case. Not sure why it changed, but it did.

I think more nuance is needed here. Something I've proposed before is that the equation should be one reward as a function of lawfulness, risk and security status.

In short, being a criminal in anarchy should be fairly safe and low-paid... being lawful in high security space should also be safe and low paid.

Trying to undertake lawful activities in Anarchy should be dangerous and well-paid, likewise undertaking criminal activities in high-security systems should be very well paid. But the lawfulness of a system shouldn't be a straight-up determinant of risk; rather, your reputation (and criminal notoriety[2]) should influence how you are responded to.

[1] On the rationale that now, ostensibly you can steal from a criminal faction and sell it back to them, and they benefit from that, somehow.

[2] Though I'd also argue Notoriety shouldn't necessarily be a criminal measure, and should go -10 (notoriously wanted criminal) up to +10 (notorious bastion of law and order), each with pro's and con's (imagine if Anarchy wouldn't sell you e-breaches if you have positive notoriety!)

Aren't you just swapping notoriety (a game feature that eliminates the suicidewinder loophole) for local faction rep?

I could kind of see something similar to superpower rep (but for criminal activity) working with your suggestions, I think notoriety is just part of the game rules to provide some consequence rather than a progression scale with benefits. It is very, very easy to get Not 10 and the hardest part about going back to Not zero is finding a place to leave the ship that doesn't make the GPU fans too noisy

 

[Jmanis]

Aren't you just swapping notoriety (a game feature that eliminates the suicidewinder loophole) for local faction rep?

I could kind of see something similar to superpower rep (but for criminal activity) working with your suggestions, I think notoriety is just part of the game rules to provide some consequence rather than a progression scale with benefits. It is very, very easy to get Not 10 and the hardest part about going back to Not zero is finding a place to leave the ship that doesn't make the GPU fans too noisy

Short version, I think that the current implementation of Notoriety is pretty bad, but tbh, the whole of C&P needs yet-another rework. The fact notoriety 10 is easy to achieve in the current system means that mechanic would need a complete rework (just the same as any increasing reward-based mechanism around having Hostile rep with a faction would require getting Hostile rep to be more difficult than just abandoning missions).

In other words, as far as my suggestions go there'd be no semblence of the current system left (where the current system sees negative results == player failure, positive effects == player success, which is part of the problem for anarchies right now)

That said... I see the following being a thing:

• Local faction rep is an assessment of your actions for/against that specific action.
• Notoriety more comparable to "Fame/Infamy" for your actions generally.
• Superpower reputation being the assessment of your actions generally for/against that superpower.

I see a combination of all three of these aspects producing unique assessments of your place in things at any given time.

 

[Jmanis]

Ah, I skimmed the last sentence. What would cause one to have positive notoriety? Just doing non-criminal stuff?

In short, yes. I'd also argue a case for superpower-specific notoriety.

 

[Riverside]

Short version, I think that the current implementation of Notoriety is pretty bad, but tbh, the whole of C&P needs yet-another rework. The fact notoriety 10 is easy to achieve in the current system means that mechanic would need a complete rework (just the same as any increasing reward-based mechanism around having Hostile rep with a faction would require getting Hostile rep to be more difficult than just abandoning missions).

In other words, as far as my suggestions go there'd be no semblence of the current system left (where the current system sees negative results == player failure, positive effects == player success, which is part of the problem for anarchies right now)

That said... I see the following being a thing:

• Local faction rep is an assessment of your actions for/against that specific action.
• Notoriety more comparable to "Fame/Infamy" for your actions generally.
• Superpower reputation being the assessment of your actions generally for/against that superpower.

I see a combination of all three of these aspects producing unique assessments of your place in things at any given time.

tbh I'm not really sure this thread is the best place to discuss further modifications to the BGS & I think the way Anarchy support and how it relates to criminal activity is okay (was okay pre-Odd). Could be more involved & fruitful but okay & I'd be happy to return to the pre-Odd status quo with Anarchy factions being more challenging (I supported them mostly for the challenge, to see if I could do it & for how long).

Notoriety provides a couple of useful benefits (to the game balance), to generally discourage players from killing innocent NPC without consequence (since otherwise it's only money which is not that hard to obtain) and once that line has been crossed by the player to provide some motivation to either live that slightly more thrilling life 'on the run' or settle down for a bit until the heat dies down (pre-3.0 I used to take the week long bounties as motivation to go exploring then return to pay it off).

TL'DR is I think Notoriety in it's current form works for the things it achieves, for most players.

And while gaining notoriety of greater than zero might work as an unlock (gang initiation) I don't think that's really connected to faction support of any kind. Being a criminal & supporting Anarchies are two separate things I think, the connection is in the players' roleplay.

In general I agree that criminality as a career choice could do with a lot more rewarding gameplay loops though, no matter which faction the player is allied or hostile towards.

 

[Jmanis]

tbh I'm not really sure this thread is the best place to discuss further modifications to the BGS & I think the way Anarchy support and how it relates to criminal activity is okay (was okay pre-Odd).

On the contrary, I'd argue the current state of anarchies is because their fundamental support loops (and more specifically, the absence of rewarding activities and targetability of lawful factions with said activities) are entirely flawed, and any minor tweaking is just the proverbial in the river. I'd also argue it wasn't OK pre-Odd either (or really, ever since we first had Lockdown/Civil Unrest/Famine/Bust all but disappear from the galaxy). In other words, it's an issue that transcends just Anarchies.

But to delve into that too far, yeah, that's something better for the suggestion forums.

 

[[PS4] Filthymick420]

How would you incur negative notoriety though?

Through disreputable activities. Smuggling, assassinations, being scanned for illegal goods. Kind of like the honor system on red dead or mass effect. I live this idea it would be pretty sweet actually

 

[Jmanis]

Through disreputable activities. Smuggling, assassinations, being scanned for illegal goods. Kind of like the honor system on red dead or mass effect. I live this idea it would be pretty sweet actually

alluding back to "perhaps beyond this topic, but"

Spoiler

Outer Worlds has a neat system where it tracks positive and negative actions separately, where if you have 100% negative, they hate you, 100% positive they love you, but 100% positive and negative* and they give you fearful reverence.

Now, it shouldn't be the same thing necessarily here, but Hostile rep with no notoriety in Federal space would mean you're just a nuicance pest. Hostile Rep with a local faction with -10 notoriety makes you out as a well-known and feared individual within that faction's domain, while hostile Federal Superpower rep pegs you as "The Scourge of the Federation", but also means you're highly sought out (in terms of remuneration) by Imperial agents looking to cause ruckus in Federal space because of the impact you could carry.... but likewise (should) make you unwelcome universally across federal space and facilities[1]

Conversely, if you have -10 Notoriety and Hostile Federal reputation, but are allied with a local federal faction, they may sternly tolerate you, but limit most services/rewards for any services.

[1] notwithstanding changes to allow docking when hostile using anonymity protocols, in order to access criminal underground services within that territory.

 

[[PS4] Filthymick420]

Good game imo. I just seen an outer worlds 2 teaser earlier

I like your ideas for honor system A LOT. It would give sooooo much to pay attention to when making decisions

 

[Jmanis]

Good game imo. I just seen an outer worlds 2 teaser earlier

Maybe all Elite needs is LENS FLARE and BWAAAM!

 

[Ydiss]

No idea if anyone added this to the topic, it's too long to read it all now, but you can get bounties for anarchy states from Odyssey on foot kills. I'm no BGS expert but I'm sure that handing in bounties for a faction has a positive effect. One thing I've noticed about Odyssey is it seems you can hand in on foot bounty vouchers anywhere, not just at the faction's systems. I just handed in bounties for Diamond Frogs, a player anarchy faction. I killed this target in their own system, jumped out, docked in my home system and handed the voucher in there.

Whether this is intended or not and whether it helps or not I don't know. But I am noticing most of the anarchy systems I frequent are not doing badly (they're all in boom state and the factions are still holding a health lead, which isn't trending downwards any longer). Just my observations, definitely nothing scientific.

One other thing I've seen, which I don't understand, is these boom state factions still have settlements that go inactive. I imagine they're generating missions there. I'm unsure why this is happening if the faction is in a state of boom. Maybe if a settlement gets hit hard enough, this happens and then it generates restore missions to boost the influence? Maybe it's part of the process of them losing influence and if not enough restore missions get completed then the state changes? Maybe it just means it's a failing settlement and the missions generated to restore it are actually a way for rival factions to take the location over?

I don't know. Just something I've noticed three times, three different systems and three different factions (all anarchy).

Edit: Diamond frogs seem to be doing pretty well?

Diamond Frogs - minor faction | Elite:Dangerous | INARA

The companion site for Elite:Dangerous with the game database, market data, trade routes, outfitting, engineers, blueprints, crafting, Thargoid war, squadrons, logbooks, galleries, galaxy information and much more...

inara.cz

 

[Colonel of Truth]

Edit: Diamond frogs seem to be doing pretty well?

Diamond Frogs - minor faction | Elite:Dangerous | INARA

The companion site for Elite:Dangerous with the game database, market data, trade routes, outfitting, engineers, blueprints, crafting, Thargoid war, squadrons, logbooks, galleries, galaxy information and much more...

inara.cz

We start our 22nd? 23rd? Odyssey war today. There's still a constant pressure on our systems that we have to play whack-a-mole to prevent inf loss/war/retreat. Any illusion that we're doing well is down to the heroic effort of our BGS players. We're well organised and know how to work the BGS but constantly putting our fires instead of growing is pretty tiring. For example, just today we lost 3.5%+ INF in 7 systems. Derrim and Baraswar were closer to 10% and that will happen every day unless we work hard to counter it or the systems slide into war and INF gets locked for a bit.

We're pretty handicapped by the fact we own twice as many ground bases as the next closest anarchy and, thanks to this fantastic game design, these are nothing but a hindrance.

 

[Obi Wan Naboo]

Edit: Diamond frogs seem to be doing pretty well?

If having 8 systems in civil unrest, 1 in lockdown and about half a dozen in (perpetual) war is the definition of "doing well", than they are doing splendidly !

Also my 2 cents regarding Black Markets:

• they have been nerfed a while ago so they now hurt Anarchies just like everyone else
• Powerplay restrictions supersede the freedom of Governments, so even Anarchies need BMs to be able to buy the goods deemed illegal by the exploiting power.