This is my only real gripe. It needs to take at least a month to fully decay, in my opinion
The Elite Dangerous ingame reputation system thread
- Thread starter Sir.Tj
- Start date
This is my only real gripe. It needs to take at least a month to fully decay, in my opinion
Hmmm... I'm just curious, how many of your customers have assassinated targets on your behalf?
Also, what if your shop had customers, say, once every month? And lets say in another nearby city there is a shop with dozens of customers each hour? You make a living, because your shop is specialized to a certain sort of client, but the shop in the city is a supermarket. The supermarket is, of course, going to forget customers very quickly. But you, you'd never forget them if they were coming once or twice a month.
Faction rep decay would work for some factions (the populous ones with lots of mercenaries), but the niche out of the way ones?
Again, completely unimmersive and poorly thought out from the perspective of the roleplayer.
It's a fair point you make. However, that's real life, this is a game where I go to escape real life. Unfortunately, the comparison is not valid in this situation (in my opinion, obviously
)
I think they might be wise to follow this advice. Let Powerplay cook in the oven for a few weeks at least with the beta testers, but give us the other improvements, epecially the ships!
I'd like a (slow) decay of relations (at both ends of the spectrum) but I'd prefer it to scale on game time instead of real time.
Should have known, when everything is going too well...
If you have played since Gamma, this is how it is going to be now:
You have hade LOTS of game time, and so made lot of minor factions your "allies", and so also major faction.
Congratulations, now you get to cruise around Milky Way, trying to remember where your allies are located, to do some mission for them (or lose your allied-status with both).
You have had not so much game time, but managed to get some minor factions "allied", but major factions seems a bit hard to get "allied" with?
Forget it, your game time will not be enough to keep even those that you are allied with (if you remember where they are). Go shoot something. Or mine. Just make credits.
If you have played since Gamma, this is how it is going to be now:
You have hade LOTS of game time, and so made lot of minor factions your "allies", and so also major faction.
Congratulations, now you get to cruise around Milky Way, trying to remember where your allies are located, to do some mission for them (or lose your allied-status with both).
You have had not so much game time, but managed to get some minor factions "allied", but major factions seems a bit hard to get "allied" with?
Forget it, your game time will not be enough to keep even those that you are allied with (if you remember where they are). Go shoot something. Or mine. Just make credits.
If I could give you more rep I would....
The more I read the more the PP 1.3 "upgrade" needs to be put on hold and re-thought for the sake of all the casual and time limited players which I am sure are the majority, a lot been backers and fans of the original Elite games. We are at an age where we have families and commitment outside of a game... The time we have to play needs to be FUN otherwise it just becomes unpaid job... hell I work enough hours already and treasure the short time I have after a long day at works and after the kids are in bed... it ain't long.
Please FDev, re-think this rep.drop situation and the whole reward mechanics of the powerplay element.
CMDR Flaxton
So, a player's position decays over real-time?
Thus the game favors time-rich players, while disenfranchising the time-poor. Its an odd position for a commercial enterprise as the latter tend to have more disposable income to spend on shiny things. Unfortunately this favors a pay-to-win store...
I have used decay-to-zero in games myself - but only between in-game entities, such as the inter-faction relationships, but otherwise let player activies dominate any net changes.
If the problem is with "maxing out" - then use unbounded scores, with logarithmic effects. Fixed lookup tables are a hangover from human moderated games.
Where problems can arise is newbie-vs-oldie players - newcomers not being able to compete in an environment dominated by high-levelled established players. Untended, this results in an unhealthy inversion of players - a hard core of high level, vs a volatile mix of newbies who don't persist. This is often aggrivated by development focusing on the high end over the low - bigger ships, better weapons...
In this game, player positions mostly (optimistically) affect interactions with the game world, and are not directly involved in inter-player interactions (other than bigger shinier hardware); which partially alleviates the newbie-vs-oldie problem.
Sadly, if we must tread water with factions and powers, then exploration is moot. Why have a 1:1 scale simulation of the galaxy if we are confined to human space?
I'm about half way back from visiting the top of the disk - straight up - and even that has taken over two months so far. What would be left of my hard earned rep when I get back? Didn't anyone read the note I left?
Look, FD are trying to do something big here - but it shouldn't be complicated. I believe, from what I have read, that they are taking the wrong approach. The game should be built out of the simulation - not tacked on top of it.
Thus the game favors time-rich players, while disenfranchising the time-poor. Its an odd position for a commercial enterprise as the latter tend to have more disposable income to spend on shiny things. Unfortunately this favors a pay-to-win store...
I have used decay-to-zero in games myself - but only between in-game entities, such as the inter-faction relationships, but otherwise let player activies dominate any net changes.
If the problem is with "maxing out" - then use unbounded scores, with logarithmic effects. Fixed lookup tables are a hangover from human moderated games.
Where problems can arise is newbie-vs-oldie players - newcomers not being able to compete in an environment dominated by high-levelled established players. Untended, this results in an unhealthy inversion of players - a hard core of high level, vs a volatile mix of newbies who don't persist. This is often aggrivated by development focusing on the high end over the low - bigger ships, better weapons...
In this game, player positions mostly (optimistically) affect interactions with the game world, and are not directly involved in inter-player interactions (other than bigger shinier hardware); which partially alleviates the newbie-vs-oldie problem.
Sadly, if we must tread water with factions and powers, then exploration is moot. Why have a 1:1 scale simulation of the galaxy if we are confined to human space?
I'm about half way back from visiting the top of the disk - straight up - and even that has taken over two months so far. What would be left of my hard earned rep when I get back? Didn't anyone read the note I left?
Look, FD are trying to do something big here - but it shouldn't be complicated. I believe, from what I have read, that they are taking the wrong approach. The game should be built out of the simulation - not tacked on top of it.
Deleted member 37733
D
I left an open question earlier in the thread which nobody picked up on, since you're a recent poster with this point of view I'll pick on you. But don't take it personally.
Whether or not reputation decay has any parallel in the real world is irrelevant, ED is a game <- the hint is right there. New game mechanics should only be introduced to increase enjoyment. Besides that other people have argued the opposing point and made comparisons to the real world where decay is illogical (please no car analogies, there are quite enough of those on the internet already). So we are at a point where we have to examine the mechanism itself and what it's knock on effects are.
1.3 is being molded around reputation so it's an important feature. As it stands there is little doubt reputation decay is designed to enforce regular and possibly excessive gameplay. By having decay it penalises players that cannot invest considerable time into the game. There is a poll here https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=3245&highlight=how+old which shows that the average age of ED players is well above the norm for a typical game, older players often have greater outside commitments of friends, family and work. So decay will affect a large proportion of players.
I have never known a game which rolls your character backwards when you don't play regularly. I'm sure everyone here would understand and accept avid players pulling ahead in credits, levels, perks or whatever but why reverse any advancement we make? Such a penalty serves no purpose other than to frustrate certain players. It sure sounds like Sisyphus to me. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisyphus
Last edited by a moderator:
Also what about them system passes like you get for say earth?
Grinding missions to get one for a certain system only to come back a week or two later and having to grind all over again because your rep has degraded.
Plz Fd remove this Reputation Decay system it's more of a punishment to many ppl who cannot put in the hours.
Grinding missions to get one for a certain system only to come back a week or two later and having to grind all over again because your rep has degraded.
Plz Fd remove this Reputation Decay system it's more of a punishment to many ppl who cannot put in the hours.
Last edited:
Really like the idea of reputation decay (again, something that should have been in the initial release before players got too used to it not being there). It doesn't make sense to me that, whilst I'm plying my trade in the Federation (yes I do feel unclean), all of my old contacts in the Empire don't move on with their lives and forget about me. "Remember old commander whojamaflip who used to do missions for us? Wonder what happened to him? Ah well... onwards and upwards".
.
This whole 'I don't want to redo things I've already done' really can't wash in a limited, but open-ended, 'dynamic' universe. Things move on - the state of the universe should not be static just because you're not there. And the fact that there is decay surely gives an impetus to keep playing to stave off the forces of entropy? Which is worse? Being made a hamster on a treadmill to continually get sunflower seeds, or getting all of the sunflower seeds then not having anything to do? Personally I'll take the former over the latter, YMMV.
.
The devil of course is in the detail of the decay rate - if it is made slow enough, so that the decay from fully 'allied' to 'friendly' takes 6 months+ would most people be happy?
.
(Slightly OT: I'm a bit annoyed at present that things I see as adding much needed realism to the game, like the module prices and rep decay are being shouted down as disrupting more 'casual' play styles).
.
This whole 'I don't want to redo things I've already done' really can't wash in a limited, but open-ended, 'dynamic' universe. Things move on - the state of the universe should not be static just because you're not there. And the fact that there is decay surely gives an impetus to keep playing to stave off the forces of entropy? Which is worse? Being made a hamster on a treadmill to continually get sunflower seeds, or getting all of the sunflower seeds then not having anything to do? Personally I'll take the former over the latter, YMMV.
.
The devil of course is in the detail of the decay rate - if it is made slow enough, so that the decay from fully 'allied' to 'friendly' takes 6 months+ would most people be happy?
.
(Slightly OT: I'm a bit annoyed at present that things I see as adding much needed realism to the game, like the module prices and rep decay are being shouted down as disrupting more 'casual' play styles).
Last edited:
No, because the delay occurs only while you're offline.
So? That's the entire point. The universe is supposedly playing out in real time. If you're not there to participate... tough. It moves on <shrug>. Why should you be able to pick up exactly where you left off 6 months ago in a dynamic game. Same principle as taking a mission, you find you suddenly don't have the real life time commitment to fulfil - you take the hit in-game.
.
Now, if we were talking single player (sniff!), or solo rather than open for that matter, with separate save slots (again sniff!), then, by all means remove the decay.
Deleted member 37733
D
Well you have pretty much made an argument against decay there. It's not picking up exactly where you left off (nobody has an issue with that), it's the fact you go backwards.
Last edited by a moderator:
got the sniffles?
The problem is the world changes when you're offline, but doesn't change when you're online.
I take or leave missions knowing full well the time restrictions, I have a choice.
1.4 release: Tribble infection.You also have a choice whether to let your faction connections remain strong or wither. And yes I have the sniffles, it only becomes floods of tears when I look at more than one DDA at a time and thing 'what might have been...'
Population doubles every 3 hrs I'm offline, and not tossing them out the airlock.
Yeah, I got nothin'
Last edited:
this is very interesting, but what is the cause of the rep decay, in other words do we just have to be active in a positive way in there regions to maintain it or improve it or does it decay as an opposite reaction to a positive action, for example if I run say a mission for empire and fed and alliance and gain positive faction for them will that hold my decay off or does it now gain me positive empire faction and negative alliance and fed faction as a result of the empire positive faction.
also the mechanic used to display the faction isn't very useful in this instance for example if I wish to maintain a positive allied faction for all 3 major factions how will I know how much faction has decayed and when too know how much positive faction I need to put back in to maintain it at allied. now if would seem that I have to wait till I notice it hitting friendly then go and doo some faction positive stuff to get it back up again , but again how much positive action will I need too do to ensure half a day later I don't have to go back n redo some. etc
Enty
If I'd known about this at Kickstarter time, it would probably have been a deal-breaker. Any game that attempts to coerce me into playing daily (like the free, vacuous mobile games) will get exactly $0 from me.
At kickstarter time, it was suggested that this was not a game for 24/7 gamers, it was a game for people who could afford to throw in £200 for a pledge, and £2000 for a gaming machine because they work a 45 hour week (or whatever is typical in the IT industry).
I might play several days in a week, then not at all for several months if I'm busy. I have no interest in how this might add to realism for some, to me its just an irritation like the lack of a built-in trade computer...