The Elite Dangerous ingame reputation system thread

.

  • .

    Votes: 32 100.0%
  • .

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    32
  • Poll closed .
yeah yeah yeah whine and whine deal overcome and adapt. wow

Yeah we get it that you like it and that it doesn't impact you. It's still poorly implimented.

I'm sure I covered this in my previous comments in the beta thread, but I'll state my opinion here too:
1. I think a time based system for this is not the right approach. It should be based on activity. (So things you do in the game are calculated and the net result applied, more or less how I think it's worked before this update.)

2. I think that an activity for one Major Faction should inversely affect your influence of the other two. (So unlike before, you shouldn't be able to become Allied to all three simultaneously, but only one at a time.)

3. I think if there is a time based cooldown needed, it should only apply to the Hostile to Unfriendly. (Although, personally, I think it's more challenging if you have to work it off as well, just like before the update.)​

I think these time based cooldown mechanics are a simplistic answer to avoid creating a more sophisticated background simulation. However, I think that ED isn't going in that direction, like X3 or EVE, so I think it's just a case of make the best of it or ask for adjustments if it's not working well.

In that case, I think 20 days is far too short. It needs to be 30 at least, if not more.

Yep all good ideas. The way it's done now is nothing more than an "easy fix"... it was the simplest method to code.
 
If that's where it stops, I actually really like it. I'm mostly a casual player so I don't have time to combat reputation decay - but if doing one mission is enough to get back to allied, I think that's perfectly ok.

The people who wrote that they got back to allied with one or a couple of missions didn't think before they spoke: They had decay of less than one day from the patch. so they were still just a tiny bit below allied, so one or a few missions were enough.

But FD's statement was that the decay will go all the way down to *just* above friendly, from where its a long way back up. So, don't expect to take a 3 week vacation and get back to allied with a couple of missions.

No, you'll be paying higher repair costs, fuel costs and have a higher chance of interdictions. I saw my rep going down with logging off for just a few hours. This system is ridiculous and by the time they fix that, we'll all have lost our allied standings.
 
Can we all just take a breath before we light the torches and see how it plays out? Do you honestly believe the sky will fall if you go from allied to friendly? If you leave the game for 3 weeks, you haven't done anything to help your faction, so why should you have the same rep?

I think it should decay if you are not doing anything to actively promote it. I'm on an exploring CG right now and doing nothing for my rep. I think it should all decay because I've basically dropped off the grid and into the black.

Yes, reputation should only improve or worsen because of what you do, not because of what you DON'T do. If you perform another activity and don't support your allies your rep should worsen (decay). If you continue to break the laws of a faction it should worsen. If you follow the laws of a faction and support them in their business it should improve. These are all things you DO. If you leave the game and simply don't play for a while this is something you're NOT doing and it should have no impact EITHER WAY. It also discriminates against those who have busy work/family lives, in favour of those who have lots of free time and can game for hours every day.

Changes to your in-game reputation should be as a direct result of your in-game behaviour and shouldn't have anything to do with your real life.
 
Last edited:
Can we all just take a breath before we light the torches and see how it plays out? Do you honestly believe the sky will fall if you go from allied to friendly?

Pompus... loose rep and you have to pay higher fuel and repair bills and suffer more interdictions.

And why should you not have to give up your real life to keep your reputation up in Elite at all times, like its a job? because its a game.

If anything, reputation should decay if you're in the game, not on exploration, but hanging around in populated space yet not doing anything for your faction. That's the only time your reputation should decay, if at all. I've never seen any stinking game where your reputation decayed, turning into an infinite Gerbil wheel for the simple minded.


And basically, by the reasoning FD officially claims, we're all being punished so bad guys can get out of their bad rep. Now if that really was the aim, there would be no need to decay anything but bad rep.
I smell subterfuge, stealth nerfs and dishonesty.
 
another silly, silly thread which i cant even bother to comment on. lets dumb down some more shall we...

What's dumb about wanting a fair and rational method for implementing rep decay? Noone's saying it's a bad idea to have it... in fact it's a good idea. We're just saying it's a bad idea to base it on time you spend doing something else.
 
The decay is very slow. If you complete, like, one mission a day or even a week, you'll be fine. Even if you never do a mission, your rep will only drop from Allied to Friendly, or Hostile to Unfriendly. Chill out dude.
 
Last edited:
The decay is very slow. If you complete, like, one mission a day or even a week, you'll be fine. Even if you never do a mission, your rep will only drop from Allied to Friendly, or Hostile to Unfriendly. Chill out dude.

And when I go overseas for six weeks (as I do several times a year) or have to work for 7-10 days in a row all my hard work's gone down the drain. Real people often don't have time to play every day or sometimes even every week. And don't tell me to "chill out", it makes me want to do very angry things to you.
 
Pompus... loose rep and you have to pay higher fuel and repair bills and suffer more interdictions.

And why should you not have to give up your real life to keep your reputation up in Elite at all times, like its a job? because its a game.

If anything, reputation should decay if you're in the game, not on exploration, but hanging around in populated space yet not doing anything for your faction. That's the only time your reputation should decay, if at all. I've never seen any stinking game where your reputation decayed, turning into an infinite Gerbil wheel for the simple minded.


And basically, by the reasoning FD officially claims, we're all being punished so bad guys can get out of their bad rep. Now if that really was the aim, there would be no need to decay anything but bad rep.
I smell subterfuge, stealth nerfs and dishonesty.

And in the last 48 hours, you've quantified this? How many times have you been interdicted by police in a friendly system. For me, interdictions occur, less that 1 in 20 regardless of my rep. Fuel and repair bills? How much higher?

Please give us some real numbers and not some sky is falling doomsday predictions.

Before people start screaming about "all their hard work going into the toilet" perhaps we should quantify what is actually at stake. Until I see some numbers, based on observation and fact, I will continue to contend that 48 hours is not sufficient enough for anyone to judge the effect of rep decay other than perhaps what's printed on your right hand display in your cockpit.
 
And when I go overseas for six weeks (as I do several times a year) or have to work for 7-10 days in a row all my hard work's gone down the drain. Real people often don't have time to play every day or sometimes even every week. And don't tell me to "chill out", it makes me want to do very angry things to you.

Now now, no need to get all fussy and want to do angry things to me. What I'm saying is it wont be very hard to get back to allied with your preferred faction. The missions that have the icon of a hand with a + above it always reward the most rep, and usually they just want you to go get them some fish or animal meat. You'll be back to allied in no time.
 
And in the last 48 hours, you've quantified this? How many times have you been interdicted by police in a friendly system. For me, interdictions occur, less that 1 in 20 regardless of my rep. Fuel and repair bills? How much higher?

Please give us some real numbers and not some sky is falling doomsday predictions.

Before people start screaming about "all their hard work going into the toilet" perhaps we should quantify what is actually at stake. Until I see some numbers, based on observation and fact, I will continue to contend that 48 hours is not sufficient enough for anyone to judge the effect of rep decay other than perhaps what's printed on your right hand display in your cockpit.
100% THIS

Are the people in this thread up in arms about ACTUAL hard facts and figures? Or are you knicker wetting about possibilities, theories and principle you object to?

Because until I has seen some actual figures about HOW MUCH you can lose and HOW QUICKLY you lose it I cant make an opinion.
 
100% THIS

Are the people in this thread up in arms about ACTUAL hard facts and figures? Or are you knicker wetting about possibilities, theories and principle you object to?

Because until I has seen some actual figures about HOW MUCH you can lose and HOW QUICKLY you lose it I cant make an opinion.

It doesn't matter a damn HOW MUCH you lose or HOW QUICKLY. What matters is that you lose it for NOT PLAYING.

If your bank started charging you money for not coming into the bank for a few days, you'd be irate about it, and it wouldn't matter if it was "not much"... well that's what's happening with ED now. I don't mind losing rep if I play to support a different faction, in fact that would make sense. What doesn't make sense is that real life costs you in game rep now.

- - - Updated - - -

Now now, no need to get all fussy and want to do angry things to me. What I'm saying is it wont be very hard to get back to allied with your preferred faction. The missions that have the icon of a hand with a + above it always reward the most rep, and usually they just want you to go get them some fish or animal meat. You'll be back to allied in no time.

It's irrelevant how hard it is to get back or how much you lose. I shouldn't lose it for having a real life. I should lose it for being in game and supporting a different faction. And if you're surprised that people get upset when you belittle their concerns you really need a reality check. Don't tell me how to feel or not feel about things.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't matter a damn HOW MUCH you lose or HOW QUICKLY. What matters is that you lose it for NOT PLAYING.

If your bank started charging you money for not coming into the bank for a few days, you'd be irate about it, and it wouldn't matter if it was "not much"... well that's what's happening with ED now. I don't mind losing rep if I play to support a different faction, in fact that would make sense. What doesn't make sense is that real life costs you in game rep now.

- - - Updated - - -



Irrelevant how hard it is to get back or how much you lose. I shouldn't lose it for having a real life. I should lose it for being in game and supporting a different faction. And if you're surprised that people get upset when you belittle their concerns you really need a reality check. Don't tell me how to feel or not feel about things.
OK so it is the principle you are upset about, thanks for clarifying.

My point is not belittling your concern just that there is a MASSIVE difference between continual lose (not capped) of reputation over a matter of days and a minor capped lose over a matter of weeks. If it is a case, as has been suggested in this thread that it is only a small lose which is capped to just below allied then for me it is not a big problem.
 
It doesn't matter a damn HOW MUCH you lose or HOW QUICKLY. What matters is that you lose it for NOT PLAYING.

If your bank started charging you money for not coming into the bank for a few days, you'd be irate about it, and it wouldn't matter if it was "not much"... well that's what's happening with ED now. I don't mind losing rep if I play to support a different faction, in fact that would make sense. What doesn't make sense is that real life costs you in game rep now.

- - - Updated - - -



Irrelevant how hard it is to get back or how much you lose. I shouldn't lose it for having a real life. I should lose it for being in game and supporting a different faction. And if you're surprised that people get upset when you belittle their concerns you really need a reality check. Don't tell me how to feel or not feel about things.


Dudeman, I was never directly speaking to you until you quoted me and started on a directed hissy fit at me. I just happened to post right after you.

Let's say you have an employee working for you; they work hard and earned a raise or two because they deserved it.

Then they disappear for a while.

After 6 weeks they return, wanting their job back. In the time that they were gone, you had hired a new employee who was also a hard worker, and you gave them a couple raises because they deserved it. Do you fire your new employee, and give your old one their job back, paying them what they were earning before they left? Or, do you hire them back, but start them at the original rate of pay until they prove they can be trusted again?

This game doesn't just take place on your computer, there is a background simulation constantly being developed and manipulated by other players. I'm sorry that you are upset about it, but this is the reality of the situation.

Also, we still don't actually know the rates at which our reps are decaying over time. I personally haven't noticed any decay so far, even after going into Fed space and killing their logistic officers. Then again, this update is only two days old now. So, why don't we wait to see how it plays out?
 
Last edited:
OK so it is the principle you are upset about, thanks for clarifying.

It's not the principle. The principle of rep decay is fine. It's a good thing. It's the mechanism. You're losing rep (good OR bad) through non-game activities. It's like getting in game credits for going to work, it's just a stupid idea. Rep los or gain should ONLY be achieved as a result of what you do in game.

My point is not belittling your concern just that there is a MASSIVE difference between continual lose (not capped) of reputation over a matter of days and a minor capped lose over a matter of weeks. If it is a case, as has been suggested in this thread that it is only a small lose which is capped to just below allied then for me it is not a big problem.

I don't care if it's one point or one million. It doesn't matter! It's WHY you lose it that matters, not how much.
 
Dudeman, I was never directly speaking to you until you quoted me and started on a directed hissy fit at me. I just happened to post right after you.

I apologise for the misunderstanding, but it was still damn rude of you. Don't go around telling people how to feel or not feel.

Let's say you have an employee working for you; they work hard and earned a raise or two because they deserved it.

Then they disappear for a while.

After 6 weeks they return, wanting their job back. In the time that they were gone, you had hired a new employee who was also a hard worker, and you gave them a couple raises because they deserved it. Do you fire your new employee, and give your old one their job back, paying them what they were earning before they left? Or, do you hire them back, but start them at the original rate of pay until they prove they can be trusted again?

This game doesn't just take place on your computer, there is a background simulation constantly being developed and manipulated by other players. I'm sorry that you are upset about it, but this is the reality of the situation.

This whole complicated explanation is not only completely unnecessary (and slightly insulting) but also irrelevant. Unnecessary because I'm fully cognisant of the idea of docking pay for not turning up at work AND that of the ongoing background simulation. Slightly insulting because you felt the need to type out such a long explanation for such a simple concept. Irrelevant because ED is not a job, it's not real life, it's a game and as such it stops when you stop playing it. The game doesn't impact real life, and real life shouldn't impact the game, they are two separate "worlds". The mechanism of docking your rep for having a real life is just plain dumb. Dock it for what you do in game, but DON'T dock it for time spent elsewhere.

Also, we still don't actually know the rates at which our reps are decaying over time. I personally haven't noticed any decay so far, even after going into Fed space and killing their logistic officers. Then again, this update is only two days old now. So, why don't we wait to see how it plays out?

It STILL doesn't matter HOW MUCH or at WHAT RATE they decay. What matters is that they decay for spending time away from the game! I keep saying "apples" and you keep replying "no, because of zebras". They are completely unrelated arguments!
 
It's not the principle. The principle of rep decay is fine. It's a good thing. It's the mechanism. You're losing rep (good OR bad) through non-game activities. It's like getting in game credits for going to work, it's just a stupid idea. Rep los or gain should ONLY be achieved as a result of what you do in game.
So it is the principle of offline decay vrs online decay. You dont like the fact that the game continues to fact in your existence even though you are not actually online.

I don't care if it's one point or one million. It doesn't matter! It's WHY you lose it that matters, not how much.
It STILL doesn't matter HOW MUCH or at WHAT RATE they decay. What matters is that they decay for spending time away from the game! I keep saying "apples" and you keep replying "no, because of zebras". They are completely unrelated arguments!
Of course it matters, there is a massive difference between coming back after two weeks holiday and finding all your rep has gone completely and coming back to find out you need to do a couple of missions to get back to where you were. I want to know the REALITY of what happens rather than hearing people complain about a principle they dont like. Dont get me wrong I GET why you dont like it, just the extent of implementation is what will allow me to make my judgement. If you dont care that is fine, you dont like the principle, but for me (and other by the look at it) we cant make up our minds until we understand that ACTUAL effects.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom