These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

I'd like to see tags4faction the way tags4sec works
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zircon Dasher
#141 - 2013-06-16 00:15:08 UTC
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:


you don't understand that i want to play all parts of the game intensively and not just one profession, the game needs to adjust to that, because that is what hardcore players are looking for, if you only run one or two missions on the weekend sure you never need what i'm talking about, however my playstyle is different

tags4faction will not harm your playstyle so you should be fine with it, beeing resistant just for the sake of it does not help


I am not resistant for the sake of it.

You are asking to be able to shoot one navy for six months, then be neutral for six months, then shoot them again for six months, then be neutral again for six months...and you want these transitions to be easy.

Well I like it that if you shoot someone's navy for six months, they have a hard time trusting you again. That's the consequence of your actions. That's how it should be. Again, I hope you learn to appreciate this mechanic, because it is working as intended.


Honest question: How is this fundamentally different than tags4sec...or are you against that too?

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Harry Forever
SpaceJunkys
#142 - 2013-06-16 00:17:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Harry Forever
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:


you don't understand that i want to play all parts of the game intensively and not just one profession, the game needs to adjust to that, because that is what hardcore players are looking for, if you only run one or two missions on the weekend sure you never need what i'm talking about, however my playstyle is different

tags4faction will not harm your playstyle so you should be fine with it, beeing resistant just for the sake of it does not help


I am not resistant for the sake of it.

You are asking to be able to shoot one navy for six months, then be neutral for six months, then shoot them again for six months, then be neutral again for six months...and you want these transitions to be easy.

Well I like it that if you shoot someone's navy for six months, they have a hard time trusting you again. That's the consequence of your actions. That's how it should be. Again, I hope you learn to appreciate this mechanic, because it is working as intended.


again, i dont want to have it easy, i just dont want to do boring level 1 missions for hours after some weeks of faction warfare, they can add the tag system to have a challanging way to fix the standings, but not the level 1 missions for hours, thats the point... all cool with your consequences mechanic

Harry Forever vs. Goonswarm
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#143 - 2013-06-16 00:20:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Honest question: How is this fundamentally different than tags4sec...or are you against that too?
The difference is that security is supposed to be fairly easy to both lose and regain; faction standings are supposed to be slow and hard to lose and gain. One is short-term; the other is picking a side (almost for life).

There's a reason why the tag-for-faction-standing option is a limited offer, and nothing has really been presented to demonstrate why this desperately needs to change…

Also, tags-for-sec doesn't actually change how sec status is being repaired — it's still a whole bunch of grinding — whereas the OP wants to skip the parts he doesn't like and take an easy option (no matter how much he claims the opposite, because it's not a matter of difficulty but of resistance).
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#144 - 2013-06-16 00:28:56 UTC
Harry Forever wrote:
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:


you don't understand that i want to play all parts of the game intensively and not just one profession, the game needs to adjust to that, because that is what hardcore players are looking for, if you only run one or two missions on the weekend sure you never need what i'm talking about, however my playstyle is different

tags4faction will not harm your playstyle so you should be fine with it, beeing resistant just for the sake of it does not help


I am not resistant for the sake of it.

You are asking to be able to shoot one navy for six months, then be neutral for six months, then shoot them again for six months, then be neutral again for six months...and you want these transitions to be non-boring.

Well I like it that if you shoot someone's navy for six months, they have a hard time trusting you again. I like it that you are bored out of your skull doing level 1's. That's the consequence of your actions. That's how it should be. Again, I hope you learn to appreciate this mechanic, because it is working as intended.


again, i dont want to have it easy, i just dont want to do boring level 1 missions for hours after some weeks of faction warfare, they can add the tag system to have a challanging way to fix the standings, but not the level 1 missions for hours, thats the point... all cool with your consequences mechanic


*sigh*...ok, since semantics are getting in the way, I fixed it for you.
Zircon Dasher
#145 - 2013-06-16 00:30:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Zircon Dasher
Tippia wrote:
The difference is that security is supposed to be fairly easy to both lose and regain; faction standings are supposed to be slow and hard to lose and gain. One is short-term; the other is picking a side (almost for life).


That's a great normative claim and I assume that you can point me to a CCP post saying this?

Even if the (currently) controversial normative premise in your argument is accepted it does not negate the fact that someone has to do the grinding.... time/energy requirements do not change. Just as with tags4sec the increase can merely be decoupled from time/space/agent.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#146 - 2013-06-16 00:37:31 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
That's a great normative claim and I assume that you can point me to a CCP post saying this?
I can point to a long history of mechanics that show this to be the case.

Quote:
Even if the (currently) controversial normative premise in your argument is accepted it does not negate the fact that someone has to do the grinding.... time/energy requirements do not change.
Actually, if we look at tags-for-sec, they do change: it takes a fair bit more grinding for the tags than if you were just going for the sec level. If the OP got his wish, a direct translation would entail doing even more L1 missions. Twisted
Estella Osoka
Perkone
Caldari State
#147 - 2013-06-16 00:39:43 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Estella Osoka wrote:
The mechanic is fine. I have had to grind standings just like others on here have, and I do not hear them raging. For the record, I am in FW and my standing with Caldari has not suffered much. In fact, if I were to drop from FW I could easily go back to running missions for Caldari. The fact of the matter is that you want your "EASY" mode button, because you can't be bothered to grind the standings, and are too supid to know that you should DECLINE missions that have you fighting Faction navies.

And for the personages on here saying you don't need alts, how do you think you are going to move capital ships around with just your main?


Argument: I was a mindless bot for a couple weeks in order to grind up from -10..... AND YOU SHOULD BE TOO!


Also: friends

Also: Hrrrrnnnnng more plz


LOL, have fun with that. I expect many killmails about you when you start flying capital ships.
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#148 - 2013-06-16 00:40:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Smohq Anmirorz
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:


you don't understand that i want to play all parts of the game intensively and not just one profession, the game needs to adjust to that, because that is what hardcore players are looking for, if you only run one or two missions on the weekend sure you never need what i'm talking about, however my playstyle is different

tags4faction will not harm your playstyle so you should be fine with it, beeing resistant just for the sake of it does not help


I am not resistant for the sake of it.

You are asking to be able to shoot one navy for six months, then be neutral for six months, then shoot them again for six months, then be neutral again for six months...and you want these transitions to be easy.

Well I like it that if you shoot someone's navy for six months, they have a hard time trusting you again. That's the consequence of your actions. That's how it should be. Again, I hope you learn to appreciate this mechanic, because it is working as intended.


Honest question: How is this fundamentally different than tags4sec...or are you against that too?


If I shoot other players in low sec, I can get a negative security status and Concord shoots at me.
If I shoot NPC navies, I can get a negative standing with them and they'll shoot back at me.

One is about pvp. One is about pve. One is about player interaction. One is about interaction with NPCs. How is it that they are fundamentally the same?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#149 - 2013-06-16 00:46:15 UTC
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
One is about pvp. One is about pve. One is about player interaction. One is about interaction with NPCs. How is it that they are fundamentally the same?

Ooooh… Twisted

The punishment for PvPing your way into low sec status is to have to do a lot of horrible PvE.
So maybe the punishment for PvEing your way into low faction standing should be to have to do a lot of horrible PvP.

…it fits the OP's requirement of being a challenging, not-L1 way of getting his standings back after all. P
Zircon Dasher
#150 - 2013-06-16 00:54:19 UTC
Tippia wrote:
I can point to a long history of mechanics that show this to be the case.


Darn. I was actually hoping that CCP said this and we would not have to rely upon the naturalistic fallacy or argument from tradition fallacy.Sad

Quote:
Actually, if we look at tags-for-sec, they do change: it takes a fair bit more grinding for the tags than if you were just going for the sec level. If the OP got his wish, a direct translation would entail doing even more L1 missions. Twisted


Again, I have ignored almost everything the OP has said as I am interested in the topic at a broader scope.

I should have said time/energy does not *necessarily* change... the actual EVE hours necessary for standing grind could increase or decrease depending on implementation. I would be ok if it took longer for someone longer to grind standing if they only hunted for tags (just like tags4sec). Where/number of tags dropped is a level of design and balance that I am not interested in atm. I am looking for principled differences between the two and, so far, I have not seen one.

Not surprising given the OP and this being GD.... but still.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Zircon Dasher
#151 - 2013-06-16 00:59:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Zircon Dasher
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:

If I shoot other players in null sec, I can get a negative security status and Concord shoots at me.
If I shoot NPC navies, I can get a negative standing with them and they'll shoot back at me.

One is about pvp. One is about pve. One is about player interaction. One is about interaction with NPCs. How is it that they are fundamentally the same?


I assume you meant lowsec....... or did they start giving out sec loss in 0.0 and WH?


EDIT:

Your point is actually a good one. If you think that tags4standing is too valuable to be allowed then what you are saying is that NPC related content matters more than player related content. After all, under the current mechanics the people who are most punished are those who want to interact with players (aggressively or cooperatively) and are being discouraged from doing so because they did something "bad" to an NPC entity years ago.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#152 - 2013-06-16 01:00:17 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Darn. I was actually hoping that CCP said this and we would not have to rely upon the naturalistic fallacy or argument from tradition fallacy.Sad
It's more a case of “I can't see anyone making a good case for changing the design”. Why should gaining faction standing be made any easier than it already is?

Quote:
I am looking for principled differences between the two and, so far, I have not seen one.
Well, there is the general design principle that one is easy to lose and regain and the other is not. One is deliberately designed to be easy to go between, whereas the other is designed around much stronger sense of permanence.
Smohq Anmirorz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#153 - 2013-06-16 01:02:18 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Smohq Anmirorz wrote:

If I shoot other players in null sec, I can get a negative security status and Concord shoots at me.
If I shoot NPC navies, I can get a negative standing with them and they'll shoot back at me.

One is about pvp. One is about pve. One is about player interaction. One is about interaction with NPCs. How is it that they are fundamentally the same?


I assume you meant lowsec....... or did they start giving out sec loss in 0.0 and WH?


oh, yeah...low sec, of course.
Zircon Dasher
#154 - 2013-06-16 01:21:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Zircon Dasher
Tippia wrote:
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Darn. I was actually hoping that CCP said this and we would not have to rely upon the naturalistic fallacy or argument from tradition fallacy.Sad
It's more a case of “I can't see anyone making a good case for changing the design”. Why should gaining faction standing be made any easier than it already is?

Quote:
I am looking for principled differences between the two and, so far, I have not seen one.
Well, there is the general design principle that one is easy to lose and regain and the other is not. One is deliberately designed to be easy to go between, whereas the other is designed around much stronger sense of permanence.


If discouraging players from interacting is not a good case...well then there is no discussion.

If tags4standing inherently makes gaining faction standing easier then tags4sec has also been made easier.Since I take it that you deny tags4sec makes gaining sec status easier then your argument is incoherent.

The inferential gap between "the mechanics have always been this way" to "CCP thinks it should be this way" is a bit of a stretch (thus why I asked for a some sort of statement). For all I know (and it appears for all you know) they hate the mechanic but have not had the time or a better option available to them.

anyway: time for beers and no more EVE talk.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Julius Priscus
#155 - 2013-06-16 01:41:15 UTC
Harry Forever wrote:
honestly the NPC Faction Standing hinders you to play the game like you want to play it, it feels like a cage put on the endless possibilities the game has to offer, for me it feels like the biggest drawback

Edit: in particular the fast negative impact on the standings when you play missions or factional warfare makes it impossible to enter other faction space with your character if you want to change playstyle or do trading, grinding up endless hours of level 1 mission does not feel like the right solution here

Edit: as the character skill training is so timeconsuming I prefer just playing with my main, therefore I would prefer a better way to repair damaged faction standings

Edit: the discussion brought some good ideas, maybe a tags4faction should be added simular like the tags4sec
VaL Iscariot
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#156 - 2013-06-16 02:08:40 UTC
Ignores any differing point of view. Wants to have a conversation.

Doesn't want to pick sides. Wants to do faction warfare.

Runs faction and story line missions. Complains about the faction sec hit.

Blocks those who call him out on his whining. Plays EVE Online.

dirt bag Harry Forever
Oggat
The Adam's Family
#157 - 2013-06-16 03:10:19 UTC
Julius Priscus wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:
honestly the NPC Faction Standing hinders you to play the game like you want to play it, it feels like a cage put on the endless possibilities the game has to offer, for me it feels like the biggest drawback

Edit: in particular the fast negative impact on the standings when you play missions or factional warfare makes it impossible to enter other faction space with your character if you want to change playstyle or do trading, grinding up endless hours of level 1 mission does not feel like the right solution here

Edit: as the character skill training is so timeconsuming I prefer just playing with my main, therefore I would prefer a better way to repair damaged faction standings

Edit: the discussion brought some good ideas, maybe a tags4faction should be added simular like the tags4sec




He had a valid debate.
The fact that he put it in GD and got trolled in to the ground is just par for EVE forum. He could have put it in F&I and it still would have been trolled by the same people who GD trolled it, he just wouldn't have got as much feedback.

Will we ever see Standings4Sec? Dunno but I'm sure either way it won't really have much to do with our bickering. Knowing that less than 100 Dread Guristas Brass tags are making their way to Jita a month since they put in the new units in low sec, I don't think anyone could afford to raise their faction using tags anyway.
Skorpynekomimi
#158 - 2013-06-16 08:55:38 UTC
Harry Forever wrote:
honestly the NPC Faction Standing hinders you to play the game like you want to play it, it feels like a cage put on the endless possibilities the game has to offer, for me it feels like the biggest drawback

Edit: in particular the fast negative impact on the standings when you play missions or factional warfare makes it impossible to enter other faction space with your character if you want to change playstyle or do trading, grinding up endless hours of level 1 mission does not feel like the right solution here

Edit: as the character skill training is so timeconsuming I prefer just playing with my main, therefore I would prefer a better way to repair damaged faction standings

Edit: the discussion brought some good ideas, maybe a tags4faction should be added simular like the tags4sec


Tags for faction standing?

What, you mean like COSMOS missions and agents?

Economic PVP
Harry Forever
SpaceJunkys
#159 - 2013-06-16 09:00:36 UTC
Skorpynekomimi wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:
honestly the NPC Faction Standing hinders you to play the game like you want to play it, it feels like a cage put on the endless possibilities the game has to offer, for me it feels like the biggest drawback

Edit: in particular the fast negative impact on the standings when you play missions or factional warfare makes it impossible to enter other faction space with your character if you want to change playstyle or do trading, grinding up endless hours of level 1 mission does not feel like the right solution here

Edit: as the character skill training is so timeconsuming I prefer just playing with my main, therefore I would prefer a better way to repair damaged faction standings

Edit: the discussion brought some good ideas, maybe a tags4faction should be added simular like the tags4sec


Tags for faction standing?

What, you mean like COSMOS missions and agents?


yea but not just one time, it needs to be a system like the new tag4sec system, so you have a better way to repair damaged faction standings

Harry Forever vs. Goonswarm
Darius Brannock
Doomheim
#160 - 2013-06-16 11:07:31 UTC
I think that we should leave COSMOS agents out of this discussion. They can raise faction standing above zero. I think it is a valid point to think about a mechanic like "tags for security to zero" that would work in a similar fashion for faction standings where the mechanic could not raise standings above zero and could be used over and over.

Perhaps this could be achieved in creative ways. For example, having special npcs in FW complexes/missions in losec that drop the required tags. Ideas such as this would maybe pull more people into FW while giving others the opportunity to get out and leave the war behind. This kind of mechanic could extend to pirate factions as well where they would take those tags for standing that dropped from the special empire npcs to raise a standing to a pirate faction to zero.

Maybe instead of looking for ways to humiliate the OP or discredit him, we could discuss how such a mechanic could be made interesting and create more content?