The Elite Dangerous ingame reputation system thread

[Aldaris]

Again, this is an appeal to the minimal nature of the loss in order to justify the inappropriate nature of the loss. It's poor, illogical, lazy coding and could be done MUCH better. Just because it's a small loss, that doesn't make the inappropriate trigger OK.

If you REALLY want something tied to the real world and time spent in game play then you should be rewarding people with something extra for playing more, NOT punishing people by taking something away for NOT playing. There's also the point that it's inviting exploitation - eg: if I know I'm going away for a month soon I can be an at all I like and know that by the time I get back I'll have avoided most of the consequences.

Yes it is, because I'm a realist. The real impact of this change is negligible. To say it's poor, illogical and lazy just because you don't like it seems like a poor, illogical and lazy argument. And yes, because it is a small loss does make the trigger ok. The loss incurred by the trigger is irrelevant and tiny. As they're connected that makes the trigger ok in my book.

Are there better ways of simulating this? I'm hard pressed to think of one that makes sense within the concept of an on going universe while still keeping it a game but I suppose it could be done. Does the fact it could potentially be improved make the current system bad? Not in my book. It doesn't make it exploitable. If you're all the way into allied you'd have to tank your rep to hated. You'd slowly go to unfriendly. You'd now have an epic grind to get back to allied. If you were already unfriendly before going to hated I'm presuming you didn't care about that rep in the first place. No exploitation has occurred.

 

[xaisis]

So elite wants me to leave my real life and play their game, or il be punished.

is it gonna be p2w as well ?

 

[Kafka1]

So, as a person who can only get to play ED on a weekend, due to having a job, can anyone tell me catagorically what I need to do to avoid rep decay?
Do I just need to log in, fly a mission for the minor / major faction, or what?

Thanks in advance for brief, well-informed responses

 

[Sandmann]

Yes it is, because I'm a realist. The real impact of this change is negligible. To say it's poor, illogical and lazy just because you don't like it seems like a poor, illogical and lazy argument. And yes, because it is a small loss does make the trigger ok. The loss incurred by the trigger is irrelevant and tiny. As they're connected that makes the trigger ok in my book.

If that were the reason for my description you'd be right, but it's not. I describe it as poor, illogical, and lazy coding because it IS... it's using triggers that aren't connected to the event because they're easy and already exist rather than actually doing some hard work and creating a new trigger that's relevant to the event. There is no logical connection between the trigger and the event because using the game's internal logic the "real world" doesn't exist therefore why should you be penalised for spending time there?

I do wish people would stop trying to justify a poorly coded trigger by saying "but it's only a small loss". IT DOESN'T MATTER if it's a big or a small loss, it's STILL DUMB!

Are there better ways of simulating this? I'm hard pressed to think of one that makes sense within the concept of an on going universe while still keeping it a game but I suppose it could be done. Does the fact it could potentially be improved make the current system bad? Not in my book. It doesn't make it exploitable. If you're all the way into allied you'd have to tank your rep to hated. You'd slowly go to unfriendly. You'd now have an epic grind to get back to allied. If you were already unfriendly before going to hated I'm presuming you didn't care about that rep in the first place. No exploitation has occurred.

Really? You REALLY can't think of a better way of doing this? It's really not hard, how about this one? As a coder you set up a timed check on a player (say once an hour) to see if he supported his allies or provoked his enemies. You start the timer when he logs in and stop it when he logs out. If the answer is yes you leave his reputation with that faction alone. If the answer is no you decay that reputation. That way you have a trigger that's ACTUALLY RELATED to what you do in game and it achieves the same result without penalising people for not playing and without opening itself up to exploitation. It also means that you'd lose rep with factions you ignore, which you currently don't do (another stupidity). It's really not hard - but it requires new coding (with all the relevant testing etc) instead of just recycling what's already there. They've gone with a dumb, easy solution.

- - - Updated - - -

So, as a person who can only get to play ED on a weekend, due to having a job, can anyone tell me catagorically what I need to do to avoid rep decay?
Do I just need to log in, fly a mission for the minor / major faction, or what?

Thanks in advance for brief, well-informed responses

From everything I've read, just log in once a day. I don't think you actually have to DO anything, it just seems to be an idle timer.

 

[Teldja]

yeah yeah yeah whine and whine deal overcome and adapt. wow

The whining will never stop, give them god mode in game, then mebbee it will. jeez

You really don't get it, right ?

This is so funny: "deal, overcome and adapt", nice try but not good enough.
There is nothing, really, to deal with, to overcome or to adapt to, in Elite (so called) Dangerous, anymore.

I was looking forward to a real dynamic reputation decay linked to your actions and decisions in game.
Well we have one now (sort of) but poorly implemented.

It was really stupid to be allied with everyone, granted.
You make the choice to allied yourself with someone (outside of Power Play) ?
You should deal with the consequences that come with it and become hostile or unfriendly to the opposite faction.
You brake the law and become wanted ?
The wanted tag should stick with you until someone collect the bounty.

But no today we have reputation decay punishing and rewarding offline gamers, waouuuuu, ED became reaaaally dangerous !

You don't have to worry now, all you have to do is to put your head in a sand bag for a week and all will be forgotten...

 

[Kramster]

You really don't get it, right ?

I was looking forward to a real dynamic reputation decay linked to your actions and decisions in game.
Well we have one now (sort of) but poorly implemented.

It was really stupid to be allied with everyone, granted.
You make the choice to allied yourself with someone (outside of Power Play) ?
You should deal with the consequences that come with it and become hostile or unfriendly to the opposite faction.
You brake the law and become wanted ?
The wanted tag should stick with you until someone collect the bounty.

.

This is exactly what I was hoping powerplay was going to address instead of a new minigame.
I have always assumed that the faction/naval system was a placeholder, guess not, just a mechanic not really thought out and implemented in any meaningful way just like this offline nonsense

 

[Guyperson]

Rep decay in its current state just seems like little more than a middle finger toward casual players. People who can't play much don't gain reputation very quickly in the first place, and now they lose it the fastest too.

"He's busy with work! Quick, cancel his pass to the VIP lounge!"

Meanwhile you could go off to opposing factions and do downright treasonous acts for months on end, yet your allies won't even so much as bat an eyelash as long as you keep your CMDR online.

 

[kreuzbichler]

how increase reputation with Federation??

my Federation reputation is now unfriendly and I can almost take no missions that would get me back up to neutral


don´t know why it happened, maybe it was a few minor violations like smuggling a bunch of slaves and several tons of drugs, and not paying my loitering fines. How is that bad for reputation?

 

[SentineI]

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?

It's not so much about the severity of the effect (although PP now prevents you from getting Bulletin Board missions if you don't have suffiicent rank/status/etc), but rather the feeling: Why bother putting effort into increasing from Friendly to Allied, if I know the game is going to steal that away from me while I'm asleep (or working, or playing some other game, or ...) ? And if I *do* still put the effort in, then I'm going to feel really cheated when I later see it drop back to Friendly - enough that I may have second thoughts about playing ED.

From a pyschological perspective, humans are mentally wired to really dislike being cheated. Putting in effort for good results (positive rep), and then having the game steal that away from you (due to nothing you've done in the game), can be easily interpreted as being cheated. You can try word games to claim it's not, but that's unlikely to change how people feel about it.

People (quite sensibly) also tend to dislike putting in "pointless" effort. In other words, effort that is wasted. Putting in effort to get from Friendly to Allied, and then seeing that drop back to Friendly, is quite easily interpreted as pointless. While I suspect gamers are more likely to enjoy such "spinning hamster wheel" mechanics, I think a lot of the more casual players won't.

Hardcore players aren't going to care too much, because they can easily get back Allied status... but "casual" players WILL care. They'll feel like ED has become a grind, because they "have to" do certain things to maintain their rep, rather picking something because it's fun.


I also worry this is merely a sign of things to come:
* Not logged in & done any military missions for 2 weeks? You're obviously not dedicated to the Imperial/Federal navy (delete as appropriate), so you've dropped one rank.
* Not logged in for 1 month? Your bank balance has dropped by 10% because your in-game character was paying living fees (and space station rental fees), but you weren't around to earn any credits. But it's "just simulating real life" & "the galaxy goes on without you" so it's all good, yeah?
* Not logged in for 2 months? Your Elite rating just dropped back to Mostly Harmless, because you're not continually proving that "you are the best". But it's still enough to participate in PowerPlay, so no harm right?

 

[Titus Balls]

And it will all over very soon as game will go into stability mode.

Do we really need to do this again and again? This fake outrage? Take a walk. Enjoy sunsets. For Christ sake.

Pecisk:

First of all let me preface this by saying that you and I are usually on the same wavelength - we have some disagreements, but generally we both agree - and we both want to see the game and Frontier succeed.

But on this I think you're being a bit blinkered. This is not fake outrage - there was no outrage. But Frontier do not have a good reputation amongst their players at the moment. If they continue down this path of bad releases then people are going to leave, and in their droves.

After the heat death of the game universe I suspect you'll still be there championing them.

On a personal level, I do take a lot of walk and enjoy a lot of sunsets - I also have started Scuba, do Salsa classes and generally have quite a full life outside of this game. My dog moves from Scotland to London next week, and I expect to be out the house quite a lot.

But when I want to sit down and play it, and I can't because on Frontier's continued ineptitude at releasing stable major updates during the busiest gaming period for most people - i.e the weekend - then I have to question things like my continued financial investment in the company - both through the game, and through shares - and my continued emotional and time investment in the game itself.

- - - Updated - - -

Titus, I always take note of your posts.

My background is project management and production. About fifteen years of significant work. David is not alone in meeting the Royals.

I remember at the launch party being lucky enough to make a statement and ask a question of David. It was basically, is there someone trying to sabotage Elite Dangerous. I doubt you'll find that footage. (edit; perhaps the first question).

At the end of the evening, I was the last person in the autograph line. Rather than ask David for a signature, I found myself saying frankly words along the lines of watch your back and you're backers. I was rather tipsy and honest.

He was a true gent and apologized for not being able to answer the question directly (edit; when I asked it on camera.)

I've followed Elite Dangerous and Frontier for about a year now on a daily basis. I've got a considerable amount of money in shares and thirty years of good faith. So all with good intentions and good reason.

I still feel that someone is doing something wrong. Once is an accident, twice is careless, three times is deliberate.

And I'm very keen to learn a new trick and be proved wrong.

There's merit in the saying, Published and be damned.

(edit; On a lighter note, I've got 34 tonnes of fish to deliver in time for a party or I'll not make admiral!)

I'm not sure what you are insinuating? Are you saying someone in Frontier is trying to deliberately sabotage this game? Or people outside of it? Or even me?

I, like you, am an investor in more than one way and I certainly want to see things succeed.

I don't feel their is a conspiracy. I played Eve for a long time, and CCP got just as much flack in the beginning and for a few years into Eve's existence. The problem I see if that Frontier haven't learned any lessons from anyone's past and are doomed to repeat them.

They haven't even learned lessons from their own mistakes as far as I can see. And Frontier's marketing department seem to have far too much power.

And when it comes to DBOBE, it feels a bit like "Big Brother" in that they wheel him out when they have to calm the proles - but beyond that, the inner party seems to be in more control than the figurehead.

 

[kreuzbichler]

 

[Sandmann]

It's not so much about the severity of the effect (although PP now prevents you from getting Bulletin Board missions if you don't have suffiicent rank/status/etc), but rather the feeling: Why bother putting effort into increasing from Friendly to Allied, if I know the game is going to steal that away from me while I'm asleep (or working, or playing some other game, or ...) ? And if I *do* still put the effort in, then I'm going to feel really cheated when I later see it drop back to Friendly - enough that I may have second thoughts about playing ED.

From a pyschological perspective, humans are mentally wired to really dislike being cheated. Putting in effort for good results (positive rep), and then having the game steal that away from you (due to nothing you've done in the game), can be easily interpreted as being cheated. You can try word games to claim it's not, but that's unlikely to change how people feel about it.

Hardcore players aren't going to care too much, because they can easily get back Allied status... but "casual" players WILL care.


I also worry this is merely a sign of things to come:
* Not logged in for 2 months? Your Elite rating just dropped back to Mostly Harmless, because you're not continually proving that "you are the best". But it's still enough to participate in PowerPlay, so no harm right?
* Not logged in for 1 month? Your bank balance has dropped by 10% because your in-game character was paying living fees (and space station rental fees), but you weren't around to earn any credits.

+1 to this. Persistence applies in ALL fields.

 

[Nagual]

I believe my statement on hearing 1.3 was being released into the wild was "Unless they've fixed a shed load of bugs, this is going to be bad" - turns out the release version of 1.3 has some really nasty bugs that beta 8 didn't. Not letting us play with 1.3RC in beta was a mistake. Not fixing a lot of the reported bugs was a mistake.

 

[Guyperson]

From a pyschological perspective, humans are mentally wired to really dislike being cheated. Putting in effort for good results (positive rep), and then having the game steal that away from you (due to nothing you've done in the game), can be easily interpreted as being cheated. You can try word games to claim it's not, but that's unlikely to change how people feel about it.

There's a technical term for it: Loss aversion. Not to be confused with risk aversion, though the two are often associated.
It's a powerful part of human psychology and it has a very strong effect on everyone's decisions.

 

[Shaamaan]

So, after waiting 10 minutes for my Pythons shields to recharge (what a waste of my time - time which is already limited) I learn all my ranks, which I've been grinding slowly, will also go down?

Well, this is a deal breaker. I'm putting ED on hold (screw my ranks - I won't be able to hold them anyway). I've changed my Steam review to a negative one as well.

Bye bye ED. I may come back if you stop huffing Onionhead and start taking your meds.

 

[Krait_79]

It's not so much about the severity of the effect (although PP now prevents you from getting Bulletin Board missions if you don't have suffiicent rank/status/etc), but rather the feeling: Why bother putting effort into increasing from Friendly to Allied, if I know the game is going to steal that away from me while I'm asleep (or working, or playing some other game, or ...) ? And if I *do* still put the effort in, then I'm going to feel really cheated when I later see it drop back to Friendly - enough that I may have second thoughts about playing ED.

From a pyschological perspective, humans are mentally wired to really dislike being cheated. Putting in effort for good results (positive rep), and then having the game steal that away from you (due to nothing you've done in the game), can be easily interpreted as being cheated. You can try word games to claim it's not, but that's unlikely to change how people feel about it.

People (quite sensibly) also tend to dislike putting in "pointless" effort. In other words, effort that is wasted. Putting in effort to get from Friendly to Allied, and then seeing that drop back to Friendly, is quite easily interpreted as pointless. While I suspect gamers are more likely to enjoy such "spinning hamster wheel" mechanics, I think a lot of the more casual players won't.

Hardcore players aren't going to care too much, because they can easily get back Allied status... but "casual" players WILL care. They'll feel like ED has become a grind, because they "have to" do certain things to maintain their rep, rather picking something because it's fun.


I also worry this is merely a sign of things to come:
* Not logged in & done any military missions for 2 weeks? You're obviously not dedicated to the Imperial/Federal navy (delete as appropriate), so you've dropped one rank.
* Not logged in for 1 month? Your bank balance has dropped by 10% because your in-game character was paying living fees (and space station rental fees), but you weren't around to earn any credits. But it's "just simulating real life" & "the galaxy goes on without you" so it's all good, yeah?
* Not logged in for 2 months? Your Elite rating just dropped back to Mostly Harmless, because you're not continually proving that "you are the best". But it's still enough to participate in PowerPlay, so no harm right?

Agreed. When i play a game it should always be because i want to play it, not i have to play it to maintain my position.

 

[Moosegun]

So, after waiting 10 minutes for my Pythons shields to recharge (what a waste of my time - time which is already limited) I learn all my ranks, which I've been grinding slowly, will also go down?

Well, this is a deal breaker. I'm putting ED on hold (screw my ranks - I won't be able to hold them anyway). I've changed my Steam review to a negative one as well.

Bye bye ED. I may come back if you stop huffing Onionhead and start taking your meds.

What do you mean ALL your ranks??? It is purely your faction rating might drop slightly over a period of time if you dont maintain it. Seriously I really do get some of the arguments against offline decay but some of this hyperbole is getting out of hand.

 

[Cmdr Kurnek]

Totally agree. FD are getting a reputation as a poor developer, the kind that duct tapes over some problems (pp smuggling bonuses, smuggling still doesn't work outside of those), employs cheap ideas to counter others (grind mechanics), and just hopes people won't notice the rest (ship integrity/paint bug, mission 'overhaul' etc).

I completely agree that FD's marketing department has too much power, which wouldn't be by itself a bad thing, but as they aren't taking stock of previous failures and planning around them, it seems like their marketing department is also not taking an appropriate long term view. FD has a great advantage in that it doesn't have a majority of shareholders who care nothing about videogames breathing down their neck and forcing them to push things out early. They need to learn to take their time and build some trust.

In short, fix bugs, balance and gameplay mechanics. Then build shiny things like powerplay to put on top. FD currently seem far too focused on the latter and it's getting them a bad rep. At some point people will stop coming back to see if it has improved. They will lose hope/faith, and move on to one of the many other similar games that are planned. True, those who seem to think FD can do no wrong and judge the game by the standards of the 80's will still be around, but that's a pitifully small playerbase to draw income from, especially when you consider FD are trying to break into the Xbox/casual/teenage market.

 

[Titus Balls]

Totally agree. FD are getting a reputation as a poor developer, the kind that duct tapes over some problems (pp smuggling bonuses, smuggling still doesn't work outside of those), employs cheap ideas to counter others (grind mechanics), and just hopes people won't notice the rest (ship integrity/paint bug, mission 'overhaul' etc).

I completely agree that FD's marketing department has too much power, which wouldn't be by itself a bad thing, but as they aren't taking stock of previous failures and planning around them, it seems like their marketing department is also not taking an appropriate long term view. FD has a great advantage in that it doesn't have a majority of shareholders who care nothing about videogames breathing down their neck and forcing them to push things out early. They need to learn to take their time and build some trust.

In short, fix bugs, balance and gameplay mechanics. Then build shiny things like powerplay to put on top. FD currently seem far too focused on the latter and it's getting them a bad rep. At some point people will stop coming back to see if it has improved. They will lose hope/faith, and move on to one of the many other similar games that are planned. True, those who seem to think FD can do no wrong and judge the game by the standards of the 80's will still be around, but that's a pitifully small playerbase to draw income from, especially when you consider FD are trying to break into the Xbox/casual/teenage market.

To your last point.

Can you just imagine the outrage if what happened last night happens when they launch on XBox....

In a way, I hope that Microsoft actually provide something of being a sensible and final arbiter of anything being pushed out. It's not only Frontier's reputation at stake when the XBox version is launched.

Maybe that will give them a lesson in improving the PC version.

 

[Sandmann]

Agreed, there's still a lot of misunderstanding about many of the aspects of 1.3. I'm still trying to find a reason to like PP for instance but I can't. Just not interested in paying my credits to help expand an imaginary person expand their empire for no significant benefit to myself. Must be something to it though coz lots of other people seem to like it. I do take Shaamaan's point though... if I've got two games going and in one I lose a bunch of stuff for not playing for a while and in the other I don't I'm more likely to play the one that I'm NOT being coerced to play... and the longer that goes on the more likely I am to not bother coming back again.