Print

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

[Invelious]

FW missions, given how huge the rewards are, really should be harder, and the mission should be in a "plex" that works as a mechanic to contest systems. I don't imagine it being that difficult for CCP to arrange.

[Casiella]

They'd actually have to put some energy and resources into FW for that to happen. /bitter

[Aria Jenneth]

I look on standings as a matter of trust, rather than a matter of loyalty.

You can be very loyal to people who do not trust you and have little reason to. You can be very disloyal to people who trust you entirely.

The factions seem to use pilot standings as an indication of who can be relied upon and who is owed a good turn or three. It's less "like and dislike," and more history.

Used in that light, they seem pretty valid. Aria, for instance, still has neutral Angel standings (at best), but this works because she's never really proven her personal willingness to do (as missions so often are) "deniable ops" for Curse on a regular basis. Her reliability remains questionable, but that need not have anything to do with how "loyal" she's perceived as being. It's they just don't have much history of direct dealings with her, so her quality and reliability as a mission pilot is unknown and few, if any, favors are owed.

A high-standing character might be viewed by most within the faction as a horrid, mercenary toad who'd sell out his own mother for a few ISK, but also as a useful asset, so important missions and high rewards it is!

That's for capsuleers. A few of the factions could stand to have their standings to each other adjusted.

Cartel and Nation, I'm looking at you.

[scagga]

In the unlikely event that he decides to go Ammatar he would probably follow Kazzi's example and start shooting up Republic owned assets to nuke his standings with them.

Wait, Kazzi is ammatar?

[Arnulf Ogunkoya]

In the unlikely event that he decides to go Ammatar he would probably follow Kazzi's example and start shooting up Republic owned assets to nuke his standings with them.

Wait, Kazzi is ammatar?

No Scagga. But Kazzi said when he turned against the Empire he made an effort to nuke his Empire standings.

[Mizhara]

In the unlikely event that he decides to go Ammatar he would probably follow Kazzi's example and start shooting up Republic owned assets to nuke his standings with them.

Wait, Kazzi is ammatar?

No Scagga. But Kazzi said when he turned against the Empire he made an effort to nuke his Empire standings.

Which in turn makes him far more trustworthy from an IC point of view than anyone who just switches sides without such an effort. Not naming and shaming anyone in particular here, but we've all seen people suddenly be on the diametrically opposite side of a conflict and apparently accepted entirely without even the slightest actual effort spent in gaining trust and so on.

RP is far more convincing and for that matter satisfying if it's actually taken into space and into action.

[Ghost Hunter]

Dropping by to say,

Standings is one of the few ways people have of showcasing their loyalty to a given faction if they intend to use the tool that way. The way of least resistance I have decided upon is it is a mercenary contract system. High faction standing from them to you does not necessarily imply that they (CCP controlled event entities) like you, but you are regarded favorably in their system as a point of contact. However, on the flipside, you can use it to showcase how much devotion your character has to a given faction by representing it with a certain amount of farmed standings.

E.g, I intend to get +10 to Sansha's Nation at some point or the other (how ever far away that is). In the way I see things, the Nation may regard me as a favorable mercenary (excluding my participation in the live events), while my character is fanatical to Nation itself.

There is the argument that farming enough high standings to represent something like that is tedious and boring. I agree, but it is because of this tedious nature that showcases one's devotion to their faction. You can settle on 5-7 range as a normal 'committed' range, or score for +10 for the fanatical range.

On the other hand I don't feel it proper to hold it against people if their standings are super-super low, but as the standings system is hopefully improved that might be a valid pitfall to finally get out of.

[Matariki Rain]

I look on standings as a matter of trust, rather than a matter of loyalty. [....]

A high-standing character might be viewed by most within the faction as a horrid, mercenary toad who'd sell out his own mother for a few ISK, but also as a useful asset, so important missions and high rewards it is!

I agree. Perhaps we could frame it as "working relationship and contacts".

[Mizhara]

The thing is, none of that changes the fact that to get those standings, you perform actions in space that ultimately harms someone or other, either through direct violence or by providing a service for said someone or other's enemy.

Thus it should very much be taken into account in RP.

[Senn Typhos]

The thing is, none of that changes the fact that to get those standings, you perform actions in space that ultimately harms someone or other, either through direct violence or by providing a service for said someone or other's enemy.

Thus it should very much be taken into account in RP.

That. Thats why I got Senn missioning for Nugo and Internal Sec. They're just shady enough to compliment a capsuleer on his ability to take care of business, without asking where he got his ship, why he needs the money or how he got so good at blowing up other people's stuff.

[Merdaneth]

The thing is, none of that changes the fact that to get those standings, you perform actions in space that ultimately harms someone or other, either through direct violence or by providing a service for said someone or other's enemy.

Thus it should very much be taken into account in RP.

No it doesn't. I've done missions for Amarr agencies in Republic space. They give you exact the same missions as Republic agencies give you. Mostly against Angels. My claim is that Republic is aided much the same if criminal elements are removed regardless for whom the mission is done for many missions. In fact, one could argue that having Amarr corps pay for keeping Republic space clean is even better.

Also, to say that one proves loyalty by doing a tedious standings grind, I think you are mixing up IC and OOC motivations. Grinding might be tedious from an OOC perspective, but doesn't need to be from an IC perspective. The concept that someone should sweat OOC to convince IC that he has really switched sites is somewhat preposterous to me.

Also, the means to 'get' certain standings is so limited that it might not fit one's character. Merdaneth is not planning to attack civilian transports, period. If that's an acceptable method for Kazzzi, fine, but its not for everyone.

I'm happy to see standings more as a limited kind of 'job history' with regards to the missioning profession then anything else. They do not imply loyalty or disloyalty by themselves. That's why I think a role-playing stance of corp members 'not doing missions for opposing factions' is fine, but I dislike conditions as 'need to have a positive standing of X with Y'. Apart from the fact that being below -5.0 severely limits corp ops.

[Merdaneth]

The thing is, none of that changes the fact that to get those standings, you perform actions in space that ultimately harms someone or other, either through direct violence or by providing a service for said someone or other's enemy.

Thus it should very much be taken into account in RP.

No it doesn't. I've done missions for Amarr agencies in Republic space. They give you exact the same missions as Republic agencies give you. Mostly against Angels. My claim is that Republic is aided much the same if criminal elements are removed regardless for whom the mission is done for many missions. In fact, one could argue that having Amarr corps pay for keeping Republic space clean is even better.

Also, to say that one proves loyalty by doing a tedious standings grind, I think you are mixing up IC and OOC motivations. Grinding might be tedious from an OOC perspective, but doesn't need to be from an IC perspective. The concept that someone should sweat OOC to convince IC that he has really switched sites is somewhat preposterous to me. Maybe it shouldn't be easy for the character, but it doesn't have to be hard for the player.

Also, the means to 'get' certain standings is so limited that it might not fit one's character. Merdaneth is not planning to attack civilian transports, period. If that's an acceptable method for Kazzzi, fine, but its not for everyone.

I'm happy to see standings more as a limited kind of 'job history' with regards to the missioning profession then anything else. They do not imply loyalty or disloyalty by themselves. That's why I think a role-playing stance of corp members 'not doing missions for opposing factions' is fine, but I dislike conditions as 'need to have a positive standing of X with Y'. Apart from the fact that being below -5.0 severely limits corp ops.

[Borza]

For those who tend not to pve a lot either standings don't say much about them. Is a CVA member who almost never run missions less loyal to the Empire than some random guy farming LP to sell the faction items?
It's a reflection on what type of gameplay you do to make money more than anything else 95% of the time.

[Mizhara]

Low standings with anyone doesn't indicate lack of loyalty. High standings with someone indicates having aided that faction/corp through actions in space. Sure, that may not indicate loyalty either, but it's one hell of a proof that you've been doing work for said corporations/factions.

I don't get how this is hard to incorporate into RP?

If it's in-space it's in-character as far as I'm concerned, at least.

[Aodha Khan]

I think standings is a misused game mechanic. Standing doesn't in any way shape or form imply loyalty to the NPC corp or faction that one has positive standings towards. Vice versa for negative standing, negative standing doesn't imply disloyalty, hatred or opposition.

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