Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Louella Dougans]

A few of the factions could stand to have their standings to each other adjusted.

Cartel and Nation, I'm looking at you.

How so? They're already negative to each other, aren't they?

[Louella Dougans]

There's only a few ways to get negative standings with individual NPC corps.

Declining & failing missions for that corp.

Shooting trade ships belonging to that corp (highsec only).

For the pirate factions, engaging their belt npcs reduces standings (very slowly)

Shooting player ships + pods belonging to that corp (Only for a handful of corps - School, bloodline, militia, handful of legacy players)

Shooting pods is the biggest impact, followed by player ships.



Negative faction standings are comparatively easier to obtain. Shoot npcs belonging to that faction.

This is how you end up with things like being -10 to Blood Raider Covenant (faction) but only -0.01 to the Blood Raiders (corp).

It's clunky.

[Saede Riordan]

A few of the factions could stand to have their standings to each other adjusted.

Cartel and Nation, I'm looking at you.

How so? They're already negative to each other, aren't they?

I don't think she meant in regards to each other. For instance I'm pretty sure the Gallente aren't neutral with the Sansha (which according to standings they are) and the Cartel aren't neutral with the Amarr (which according to standings, they are)

[Merdaneth]

So killing your own faction ships or working for an enemy faction doesn't imply something? huh?

But it does. Only 'killing ships' is very imperfectly encapsulated in standings. As said, I could destroy thousands of Republic Fleet vessels and not have my corp standings move one bit.

But I ask for a lvl 1 mission twice and then decline, then suddenly they start to dislike me.

I think the ship-killing part is more important than the derived stat we call standings. Actions matter, not some odd stat called standings that only represents a tiny part of action that could cause standing shifts.

Missioning implies that you've done missions. Standings indicate mostly missioning, and they should be treated as mission indicators, not as loyalty indicators.

[Louella Dougans]

I'd lean towards only using faction standings as a tool to gauge initial impressions.

If someone says they're an X faction loyalist, and they have terrible faction standings with X faction, then it feels a bit odd to me.

If they never do anything to improve those standings, or they get worse, then it feels even odder.


for pirate faction loyalists, it feels odd if they do this. Like, I've seen some self-proclaimed "sani sabik" actively running missions for e.g. Amarr Navy. It doesn't make sense to me. If they had terrible blood raider standings but were actively missioning for blood raiders, then it would make sense, even though their standings are poor, because they're doing something to improve them.

That's why i like Valerie's corp, since they seem to only have standing with the Blood Raiders.

[Seriphyn]

It's simple enough...Seri's RP is "Federal military", thus has standings with the FedNav, FIO and FDU. Bit generic, that said...

If you flip faction, but still got standings with your new enemy faction, even though you are actively pursuing the faction you flipped to, I would consider them to be "out-of-date".

[Aodha Khan]

and the Cartel aren't neutral with the Amarr (which according to standings, they are)

Why aren't Cartel neutral to Amarr? I would think the Cartel does good business with Amarr as they use one of the largest Cartel commodities.

[Gottii]

and the Cartel aren't neutral with the Amarr (which according to standings, they are)

Why aren't Cartel neutral to Amarr? I would think the Cartel does good business with Amarr as they use one of the largest Cartel commodities.

I think you just answered your own question.  Angels would be a competitor to Amarrian Holders in providing slave labor.  They would also provide slaves for illegal purposes (such as Blood Raider rites) that most Amarrians wouldnt want to go on the record for obtaining.

As an example, guns are (for the most part) legal in the US.  Doesnt mean they're aren't illegal gun runners who make a lot of money.

[Casiella]

Except that, in this case, CCP says they are neutral. Doesn't mean they do business openly, of course, but the standings are one way and some RPers would like to see them another, perhaps.

[Kazzzi]

Something else that bothers me about standings. Standings are mostly affected by running missions. Including RSS missions that prevent the Amarr navy from virus bombing Ashab and Penirgman. This is also a reason I don't take any PVE fundamentally seriously, but that's for another thread.

The standing system is a lil messed up. It seems to me that like most things in EVE, it's missing a few features.

[Casiella]

Like most things in EVE, it provides a framework for future iteration and they have some really awesome ideas for improvements in the backlog.

There, do I get my CCP moniker now?