Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Hello.

Iv been watching the blobbing aspects and while i feel fozzie sov has helpped a little it needs some revisions, however i dont think that fozzie has dont a lot for removing the problem at hand.

I would like to purpose a new diplomatic system.

Mechanical Operaiton

The Current Options for (-10,-5,0.+5,+5) Will be changed to "Neutral" "Hostile" "Friendly".

Progression/digression
Neutral Bodies will neither degrade or process in relations.
Hostile bodies have a harder time returning to positive standings.
Positive Standings have a harder time returning to Neutral.

Setting an alliance to Positive will build standings over time.
Setting an alliance to negative will reduce standings over time.

Additional conditions will propagate standings in a direction.

For every x Positive-Players in your space, you will improve relationships by 0.1 point per a day.
For every x Negative-Players in your space, you will improve relationships by 0.2 point per a day.
For every Non-Alignment Based Players in your space, you will reduce standings by 1 Per a day (not equal type)
Docking at a station will grant 0.01 Point per a dock per a person per a day.
Standings will be two way, You toward them, and them toward you. The Average value between the two will grant the over all relationship.

Basically it works like this.

Lets take Alliance A (which we will call A) and Alliance B (Which we will call b).

If Alliance A has B set to neutral, no standing change will happen under any condition.
If Alliance A has B set to Hostile, then the following conditions apply

B killing the ships of A will reduce rating by 0.05 Per a kill
B killing the stations, anchored, etc of A will reduce rating by 0.5 per an aggression
B Contesting sov with A will reduce standings by 1.

If A Has B set to hostile, then the following conditions apply

B Docks at A's Stations, the relationship will improve 0.001 Point per a toon, per a day
B Kills A ship that is neutral to A in the territory of A's Space, 0.05 Point per a day, per a toon
B Kills A ship hostile to A, in the territory of A's Space, 0.05 Point per a day, per a toon


Additional Mechanic.
For every Positive standing after 3, the growth rate (Time required to hit +10) is increased by 200% (up to a year before +10).

Standings Color changes
Color changes will now sort for additional effects

-10 Sworn Enemy
-7.5 Hated Enemy
-5 Rival
-2.5 Disliked
0 Neutral
+2.5 Friendly
+5 Allies
+7.5 Brotherly
+10 Life-Pact

Time to change standings
For the 1st Positive ally it should take 1 months from 0 to +10
For the 2nd Positive allies it should take 2 months from 0 to +10
For the 3rd Positive allies it should take 3 months from 0 to +10
For the 4th Positive allies it should take 6 months from 0 to +10
For the 5th Positive allies it should take 12 months from 0 to +10
For the 6th (or more) Positive allies it should take 12 months from 0 to +10

+2.5 Standings are granted every 25% Of the time duration.
So 1st would gain "blue status" after 8 days
So 2nd would gain "blue status" after 16 days
So 3rd would gain "blue status" after 23 days

And so on.

A full standing reset would be granted instantly on the patch. After the patch, all standings in 0.0 would get a full reset.


Lastly,

The pictures of characters, corporations etc, would be changed (in operation) no local manipulation could take place (like the old school +/- Picture swap outs we use to have)

Oooookaaaaay. But why do these standings actually DO?

I think you are under the assumption that players care about standings at all in null-sec. Or rather, that they care about any standings beyond what their director/CEO/diplomat sets.

I really can't even express how bad the intelligible portions of these ideas are, except for these quotes attributed to Wolfgang Pauli:

"It is not only not right, it is not even wrong"

"What you said was so confused that one could not tell whether it was nonsense or not"

it doesnt matter what you call things a red is still a red even if its called a "sworn enemy" which is really an odd thing to have in a video game (unless you're in one of the russian coaltions or in that "my legion is best legion" spat)

Diplomancy is an out of client aspect of the game, this makes no sense.

And we are on a rill here. This is the 3rd really bad idea I have read of your in the last few minutes.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=437529&find=unread
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=437512&find=unread

"Yeay, i cannot set my own standings, because a stupid game mechanic will do it for me." What will happen? I'm just going to use an OOG tool for standings, which will let me do what i want, and not give a damn f*** about what the game is going to display.

Stupidity solved.

Now, go back playing Wow, if you want mechanic-managed standings.

It's just a label.

It does nothing to incentivise alliances and blobs to dismantle and start fighting each other.

Unless you assume that someone is going to forget the red'd someone a while back and they become -10 and just get shot by some random uninformed corp newbie.

OP personally I think one of the main problems with your proposal is the belief that the in-game standings set between player entities are of any real importance. The standings systems real utility is as a labelling and identification convenience rather than a true reflection of the politics between those entities.

You don't balance a game by making it a ballache to play. That is not how it works.

You break up blobs by giving them a reason to break up, not by making the game really annoying to play.