*sam* Posted Oct 20, 2015, 9:43 pm	The following change will be made very soon: a squad will only be able to perform one truce with non-trader opposition during any one journey leg. This is to stop the exploit whereby players run un-armoured and unguarded lorries full of fuel between towns. edit: I'm still discussing the best way to do this... the mechanism listed above probably isn't the best way.
*The X Man* Posted Oct 20, 2015, 10:19 pm	Excellent! I am getting a box of tissues out in advance... actually, might need 2 boxes!
Grimm Sykes Posted Oct 20, 2015, 10:28 pm	Wow, that will make travel to Sarsfield and Firelight, from Badlands much more challenging.
d0dger Posted Oct 20, 2015, 11:00 pm	Just one point comes to mind. Will there be any changes to the negotiator spec made along with this? Seems pretty directly related.
Heli_Onerth Posted Oct 21, 2015, 12:05 am	You'll still be able to auto-truce friendly factions?
*Tango* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 12:07 am	Heli_Onerth said: You'll still be able to auto-truce friendly factions? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose?
Krakhedd Posted Oct 21, 2015, 12:23 am	This is tying two issues together - good rep allowing truces being one, and unarmored/unarmed lorries being the other - and packaging them into one solution under the guise of being a solution for only one issue. The far simpler solution, would be to treat these as separate issues, and resolve each individually. So, if it's unarmored, unarmed lorries you wish to be rid of, then require proper engines and armor in trade vehicles - perhaps, a minimum CR requirement. As for the effect of reps and travels this will have, I think we will find noobs, and even greenies and some vets, discouraged from moving around at all outside the Northern Triangle, perhaps not even within it. For a game which already requires so much individual time and effort to get off your feet, stay alive, and then stay competitive, this is also going to add HUGE hours of travel processing in the busier corridors, further discouraging exploration south of Gateway. Also, I am questioning that this is now an "exploit". This topic hasn't been openly broached in some time, and the last time it was (I think over a year ago), it was determined to NOT be an exploit. Is this a reversal? Furthermore, who is running unarmored and unarmed lorries around? Because I thought any spying or reporting on other players was a violation of the Terms of Service. Ergo, any other player who spies upon or investigates other players, or otherwise makes any report on them outside of a ToS grievance, has themselves committed a ToS violation. Any individual running their travels in such a manner, would have to openly admit to it. And finally, what of all the other fixes we have been waiting on, some for years? I can't imagine that this became an issue more recently than things like messed up hit boxes, various chassis dances, *ahem* reliable purple, or even the fact that a mutie gang in Morgan spawns all normies. Why is this all of a sudden such an issue, in fact changing from being a non-exploit to an exploit, without public discussion, overnight?
HexGrid Posted Oct 21, 2015, 12:31 am	Lets see if i understand what your saying. If i attack civs to keep my mutie rep high, your gonna force me to fight muties because someone took advantage of your obviously undeveloped game. Its hard enough for new players to get around with their developing characters. Now your gonna force them to fight against their hard fought allies because developed players (incl their alts, yeesh) who have reaped the benefits of pre-steam character resets (i f'n wish) and used a game mechanic you can't seem to fix without screwing the honest players. Maybe you could just temp/perma ban the abusers, lmfao.
HexGrid Posted Oct 21, 2015, 12:33 am	Heli_Onerth said: You'll still be able to auto-truce friendly factions? Not if you run into them more than twice & their non-civs.
*Boonwolf* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 12:45 am	So to fix 1-2 players your making factions obsolete. Force us to fight our OWN FACTION if we bump into 2 pirates on 1 trip? I have had the SAME gang hit my trav 3 times. This seems to be a rush idea without thought IMO
Tallus Posted Oct 21, 2015, 12:57 am	I take it Grimm found another loophole to drive trucks through. I think this change is ill advised: as likely to cause a problem -- of multiple, overly long convoy battles -- as to solve the problem of singleton blockade runners. A better solution would be to predetermine the CR strength/composition of the intercepting force and allow the ratio of CRs to modify the chance of truce. Personally, I find most encounters fairly tiresome and preordained, so more of them won't add to my enjoyment of the game.
*Boonwolf* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 1:10 am	Or possibly take a look at how rep is gained, as it is now you can have all factions like you at the same time. It dosnt take much to get good reps with gangs but it is a time consuming balancing act and forces numerous squads in many locations. Just because i killed your foe dosnt mean im your budy. Dont make me kill my buddy because i run into him 2 times in 1 trip.
Tallus Posted Oct 21, 2015, 1:22 am	Another possibility would be to track relationship between individual gangs as well as factions.
*StCrispin* ce.services.mh@gmail.com Posted Oct 21, 2015, 2:05 am	*sam* said: The following change will be made very soon:  a squad will only be able to perform one truce with non-trader opposition during any one journey leg. This is to stop the exploit whereby players run un-armoured and unguarded lorries full of fuel between towns. This wont stop that.  This will just mean the people with Alt accounts get a 1 up over people with excessive time to devote to actually playing instead of exploiting the game. for example:  I don't truce at all.  and I run unarmored 2L Lorries.  Its called the "Park and Fight" or the "Kill the Enemy" method. You take 2 Lorries with 1 crew, 3-4 escorts with 2 of them short 1 crew,  At the beginning of the fight you park the lorries, get out and board the combat vehicles, Kill everything, then get back in the Lorries and drive off. Though some people argue that's cheating, its the same as when you fight a return when you exit the loot car to re-enter the combat vehicles.  If "Park and Fight" is cheating when using a Lorry then its also cheating to exit a Loot car.
*StCrispin* ce.services.mh@gmail.com Posted Oct 21, 2015, 2:13 am	HexGrid said: Heli_Onerth said: You'll still be able to auto-truce friendly factions? Not if you run into them more than twice & their non-civs. Lets not forget another long running bug where you meet the same gang over and over and over.  I have on more occasions than I can count encountered the same gang (Same drivers even) on 10 out of 11 encounters from SF to SS.
HexGrid Posted Oct 21, 2015, 2:39 am	*StCrispin* said: *sam* said: The following change will be made very soon:  a squad will only be able to perform one truce with non-trader opposition during any one journey leg. This is to stop the exploit whereby players run un-armoured and unguarded lorries full of fuel between towns. This wont stop that.  This will just mean the people with Alt accounts get a 1 up over people with excessive time to devote to actually playing instead of exploiting the game. for example:  I don't truce at all.  and I run unarmored 2L Lorries.  Its called the "Park and Fight" or the "Kill the Enemy" method. You take 2 Lorries with 1 crew, 3-4 escorts with 2 of them short 1 crew,  At the beginning of the fight you park the lorries, get out and board the combat vehicles, Kill everything, then get back in the Lorries and drive off. Though some people argue that's cheating, its the same as when you fight a return when you exit the loot car to re-enter the combat vehicles.  If "Park and Fight" is cheating when using a Lorry then its also cheating to exit a Loot car. Wowsers dude, that takes ballz and definitely is not exploiting, salute. ps. impressed
*Tango* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 2:40 am	*StCrispin* said: *sam* said: The following change will be made very soon:  a squad will only be able to perform one truce with non-trader opposition during any one journey leg. This is to stop the exploit whereby players run un-armoured and unguarded lorries full of fuel between towns. This wont stop that.  This will just mean the people with Alt accounts get a 1 up over people with excessive time to devote to actually playing instead of exploiting the game. for example:  I don't truce at all.  and I run unarmored 2L Lorries.  Its called the "Park and Fight" or the "Kill the Enemy" method. You take 2 Lorries with 1 crew, 3-4 escorts with 2 of them short 1 crew,  At the beginning of the fight you park the lorries, get out and board the combat vehicles, Kill everything, then get back in the Lorries and drive off. Though some people argue that's cheating, its the same as when you fight a return when you exit the loot car to re-enter the combat vehicles.  If "Park and Fight" is cheating when using a Lorry then its also cheating to exit a Loot car. I don't see a problem with park and fight.  Never heard of it, but you're still leaving your lorries there and risking damage to them.  I don't see it getting you much advantage... Maybe I'm missing something? Who do you know with alt accounts?   That's a no-no.
*StCrispin* ce.services.mh@gmail.com Posted Oct 21, 2015, 2:52 am	Unoccupied vehicle will not be intentionally fired on by the AI. Making them and their cargo somewhat safe unless a stray shot hits them or they get rammed. I haven't done this in a while since I got jumped 18 vs 3 at SS Gates and my Negotiator 5 scout couldn't truce my own "liked" allies (and was subsequently killed in the fight) That and my lack of time to play since the baby. Sam: FIX THE BUG THAT CAUSES YOU TO ALWAYS GET THE SAME GANG ON EVERY ENCOUNTER PLEASE!!!!!!!!!! (That bug will make this change that much more odious) Also fix the Rep system... It has been broken since we discussed this same issue a year or more ago. The broken rep system is what is at the heart of this "Truce everyone" problem.
Flame Posted Oct 21, 2015, 3:51 am	Your saying I spent 5 (Real Life) years training my scouts and Building/Keeping Global Fame to truce Once??? What a waste of Time and Effort!! I am Merchant faction and run 4-6 couriers ALL the time and have my fair share of encounters without This NEW change! Flame!!
Grimm Sykes Posted Oct 21, 2015, 3:54 am	Tallus said: I take it Grimm found another loophole to drive trucks through. Not I, i ran some lorrys to EF from SS over a month ago, each had 42 armor per side and a 8L engine. Those are the only lorry travels i'eve done since i returned to play in July. I'm not subbed and can't even travel outside of the northern triangle, so point your finger elsewhere.
bootrag Posted Oct 21, 2015, 4:18 am	This is silly. If there are players "taking advantage" by using some tricky technique then you should address that issue with them if you don't approve. Many of us focus our gang efforts and personal time towards balancing these reps in the exact way that you intend to hobble. Why? I always am armed and armored. If you intend to make sweeping changes that affect the average payer in a such negative way then you might as well add in all of the other changes that subbed payers have been interested in seeing. Dont waste your time, and the months I've spent in game, with something that can be fixed in a sternly worded email please.
Tallus Posted Oct 21, 2015, 4:34 am	[quote=Grimm Sykes][quote=Tallus]I take it Grimm found another loophole to drive trucks through. [/quote] Not I, i ran some lorrys to EF from SS over a month ago, each had 42 armor per side and a 8L engine. Those are the only lorry travels i'eve done since i returned to play in July. I'm not subbed and can't even travel outside of the northern triangle, so point your finger elsewhere.[/quote] . No offense intended.... My gangers swore they saw a Grimm trucker near BL. musta been the radioactive worm in the tequila.
*StCrispin* ce.services.mh@gmail.com Posted Oct 21, 2015, 5:14 am	it wont change my game either since I have no Rep anyway. But its the wrong "Fix" The problem is how the rep system works. Not how players play. If the System in place allows a player to be loved by everyone, then fix it so being loved by one makes you enemy of their enemy. This is like fixing a bleeding Artery by chopping off the arm rather that sewing the hole shut. In the end it really just hurts New Players. Most Long time players can escape a pack of 4L Sunrises in a 3.2L Hearse with 4 Flat Tires. Conversely (I know from personal experiences) a new player would be hard pressed sometimes to survive in an opposite situation where they had the 4L and were chased by a Hearse with 4 flat tires!
HexGrid Posted Oct 21, 2015, 5:37 am	*K1500* said: *StCrispin* said: In the end it really just hurts New Players.  Most Long time players can escape a pack of 4L Sunrises in a 3.2L Hearse with 4 Flat Tires.  Conversely (I know from personal experiences) a new player would be hard pressed sometimes to survive in an opposite situation where they had the 4L and were chased by a Hearse with 4 flat tires! If we take new players to be those who haven't expanded beyond the northern triangle then I don't see what the issue is. Travels between SS-GW-ELMS usually only spawn one travel encounter and possible an arrival encounter. You can still attempt to truce one of those encounters - you will just have to think about which one you would prefer to play out. If anything this presents a better training experience for what you'll encounter in the southern towns. K LMAO K! Sam could cut the arms off all your gangers and you likely would still spew your yes man posts, lmao. /ignores Kl's judiciously biased posts
HexGrid Posted Oct 21, 2015, 5:52 am	Honestly dude you have shown it clearly yourself repeatedly. You don't care about how anyone else's game play is affected. As far as anything else Sam will do whatever he likes obviously and it is everyone else's RIGHT to voice their concerns and opinions. Be free and use yours any way you like, as will I. ps. I bet most will find that post hilarious.
JoniBoy Posted Oct 21, 2015, 5:54 am	To me, as a pretty new player, that change makes no sense, maybe because I am not aware of all the exploits that have been used before. First of all, I don't see why it is a cheat to move unarmored car around, its a risk anyone should be able to take, I assume that your point is that Evan should be always a bit dangerous no matter your reputation, which directly enters in conflict with the reputation system. Second I don't see why, if someone works his reputation, shouldn't be allowed to travel safely in some areas of Evan, afterall that is the only thing reputation is for. Third, makes no role-play sense that you can't truce a friendly faction just because you have already truced once. In my opinion, if you want to make Evan a bit more dangerous, a new untruceable faction could be introduced, a bunch of guys that simply have no friends and that you may encounter anytime. That, at least would make some sense, would also keep the faction system useful, since your chances of untruceable encounter would be reduced. Joni
HexGrid Posted Oct 21, 2015, 6:19 am	I'll tell you what. You don't criticize others posts and stick to the topic at hand & I will not do it to you
HexGrid Posted Oct 21, 2015, 6:35 am	*K1500* said: HexGrid said: I'll tell you what. You don't criticize others posts and stick to the topic at hand & I will not do it to you Well that's hilarious considering everything I have posted has been on topic - and both Crisp and Krak are people who I've talked a lot with over the years. What you've basically just said is "shut up and tow the line or else". All class man. K. rofl you are really out there, how is anything i said an "or else", and what the heck "or else" could anyone here do, lmao. fo·rum noun 1. a medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged. So there we go, do as you wish as will I. lolz
HexGrid Posted Oct 21, 2015, 6:56 am	With that exchange done. This is an extremely complicated mechanic to resolve with out diminishing scouting & negotiation. Diametrically opposed factions with alternating encounters trader-raider-trader-etc or variations of numerous ideas. I don't think its gonna be solvable threw game mechanics without completely changing how many people play. This being said, again the simplest solution would be to deal with the individuals themselves. Ultimately Sam will do whatever he likes, and I could tolerate the game disruption somewhat if compensated with the same skills reset the pre-steam release players got for the increased player base lolz.
HexGrid Posted Oct 21, 2015, 6:59 am	Oh and consider that the intro to ganger chrome skills resets suggestion. Sam would have to prioritise, hmm, torture players more or possibly make more chrome sales
*Splurs* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 7:15 am	I will throw my 2 cents in too while I am here, and would like to know how it is an exploit? If someone can explain to me why people are going to be punished that have either A) Factioned with a gang and their allies however cannot truce more than one encounter with those factions is FAIR, or Put in alot of hours and thought on how to impress each gang -yes IMPRESS because you need to be doing something right on all gangs to get your reps up to a point where you can truce anyone. I see it as a complete kick in the hurty bits to anyone that has done some Rep work to try to make travelling safer, or has tried to ally with the pirates/bandits especially down south where they will be made to fight their own faction or friendly factions no matter what. Call me Crazy but then what is the point of reps at all really, you get one truce and thats it. No point trying to be a pirate any more, factions only give you the faction bonus, it would mean nothing as you would still have to kill your own faction, no matter how loved you were with them. I would suspect someone has complained about this and a knee jerk reaction is to blanket ban things. I call poor form, very poor form.
DirkNotSoGently Posted Oct 21, 2015, 7:43 am	I can rarely truce and end up running from everyone - but the tide of opinion does seem pretty much one directional here Get ready for more rage quits
*goat starer* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 8:06 am	bootrag said: This is silly. If there are players "taking advantage" by using some tricky technique then you should address that issue with them if you don't approve. Many of us focus our gang efforts and personal time towards balancing these reps in the exact way that you intend to hobble. Why? I always am armed and armored. If you intend to make sweeping changes that affect the average payer in a such negative way then you might as well add in all of the other changes that subbed payers have been interested in seeing. Dont waste your time, and the months I've spent in game, with something that can be fixed in a sternly worded email please. it should obviously not be possible to be friends with every faction in this game unless you never chose to fight nd loot.... and even then if you are friendly with merchants or slavers it should bee impossible to friendly with reds. the reps should always have worked in a way that the best you could be was to have everyone neutral wiith you... and then only if you were irrelevant to all of them ie. doing nothing certain factions should always have very 'loose' loyalties in any case. all the pirates and slavers should weigh the possible gains of taking a lorry from you against you not liking them.... you should never be able to guarantee a truce.. especially against the higher fame gangs.
*Splurs* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 8:20 am	Quote: it should obviously not be possible to be friends with every faction in this game unless you never chose to fight nd loot.... and even then if you are friendly with merchants or slavers it should bee impossible to friendly with reds. I disagree, you can be friendly with them all, you hit the merchants for their goods, that you might sell off to the slavers, then to keep the merchants happy you go an kill a heap of pirates, and give their cars to the Reds. Each time you hit something you lose some rep, however each faction would look at the over all effect it has with the thinking of "Ok that gang took some of our cars and killed our gangers, but last week they MASSACRED our enemies, we can handle a few of ours killed if it means lots of theirs" Quote: certain factions should always have very 'loose' loyalties in any case. all the pirates and slavers should weigh the possible gains of taking a lorry from you against you not liking them.... you should never be able to guarantee a truce.. especially against the higher fame gangs. This one I believe is truly wrong, as I said before the gang/faction leaders would weigh up the pros and cons of taking a few lorries vs their forces getting decimated, or you helping out the enemies. Im no sea dog, however ever the pirates of old had a "code" if you wish where they wouldn't take other ships on the seas, because of the "greater goal" idea. Just because they are slavers/pirates doesn't make them stupid.
PvtParty Posted Oct 21, 2015, 8:47 am	I'm unsure what problem Sam's trying to fix here. My gang is allied to the Slaver faction, yet I still occasionally get attacked by Slavers. I don't massage reps, as can be seen by my current standings: Civs    Neutral Merchants    Neutral Anarchists    Unappreciated Mutants    Unappreciated Slavers    Liked (Primary Faction) Badlands Truckstop    Appreciated Morgan    Respected Deathrace Mafia    Neutral Evan Reds    Unappreciated Raiders    Unappreciated Privateers    Unappreciated I do run unarmed couriers (cars, not trucks) all around Evan, and regularly have to run encounters. Being unarmed already has a negative, in that enemy pursuers won't give up like they do when faced with an armed opponent. What is broken??
*The X Man* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 8:51 am	Splurs said: Im no sea dog, however ever the pirates of old had a "code" if you wish where they wouldn't take other ships on the seas, because of the "greater goal" idea. "The code is more what you'd call guidelines than actual rules" Splurs said: Just because they are slavers/pirates doesn't make them stupid. Slaughter their gang, loot their gear, then do a few favors for them, use HPs and they are back on your good side?? Those would be stupid pirates. Ask any player who had been done wrong in that way by another player (Insert ash reference here) and see if they are buddies the following week... most likely, they are still enemies... as it should be. There are way too many ways to quickly and easily regain good rep. This needs to stop. And never should you be on good terms with all factions... NEVER.
*The X Man* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 8:58 am	PvtParty said: What is broken?? Earning $10 Million+ per travel/transport with no risk and no effort. Sounds a bit broke. Only thing not broke is the player(s) "$$$".
*Splurs* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 9:02 am	Quote: Ask any player who had been done wrong in that way by another player (Insert ash reference here) and see if they are buddies the following week... most likely, they are still enemies... as it should be. There are way too many ways to quickly and easily regain good rep. This needs to stop. And never should you be on good terms with all factions... NEVER. Ok I will agree with that to some extent, HOWEVER I am still waiting for someone to tell me how this is an EXPLOIT and FORCE people to potentially have to fight their own faction no matter how loved they are? I will give an example, if I was allied with Civs, and traveled at 45mph between SS and GW, there is a chance of up to 5 encounters (2 gates and 3 encounters), yes rare however it is possible, IF by some chance I was un lucky enough to pull Grotons Gladiators every time then by the first wilderness encounter I would be shooting my own faction up another 4 times. EVEN if it was only the one wilderness encounter and I still pulled them 2 other times, your reps would still take a massive hit. Look at this in regards to a new player who might then get a bounty on their heads in SS for killing Civs and then they quit because they are always getting returns in SS by the malitia, driving their Civs worse. I know it is the far end of the scale, however it is possible and I am trying to highlight the bigger issues here. You shouldn't have to fight those how like you. Quote: There are way too many ways to quickly and easily regain good rep. This needs to stop. And never should you be on good terms with all factions... NEVER. If this is the TRUE problem then the "Exploit" that is being discussed is no exploit however a failing in the Reps. Fix the rep system rather than punishing everyone.
*sam* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 9:35 am	I'm still discussing the best way to do this... the mechanism I listed at the start of this post probably isn't the best way.
PvtParty Posted Oct 21, 2015, 9:36 am	*The X Man* said: PvtParty said: What is broken?? Earning $10 Million+ per travel/transport with no risk and no effort. Sounds a bit broke. Only thing not broke is the player(s) "$$$". $10 Million+ !?!  Is that even possible, without running a huge fleet of trucks? OK, here's one option to stop that... Rather than just CR/rep, use the value of the load to adjust the likelihood of an encounter. In a hostile environment, it is possible that friends will turn on friends if the payout is a large enough. If the game system was intelligent enough to allow for it, word of any gang shipping huge quantities of gear in relatively unprotected trucks would quickly get out and that gang would find targets painted on their backs. I thought there was meant to have been a change to reps some months back to prevent the All-Positive situation. Did that not happen, or did the change not work?
Racing Robbie Posted Oct 21, 2015, 9:41 am	OK I think people are jumping before they look here, and I for one would like a little clarity...... "A squad will only be able to perform one truce with non-trader opposition during any one journey leg¡¨ OK, so traders - you would truce with as many times as possible (especially if you have the tick in the truce with traders box) So this is going to affect the other side and you only will truce with one non-trader and the rest you'll have to play - I guess this means that the "Truce with Friendly Factions¡¨ becomes less important. Ok firstly let's clarify what a journey leg is - I'm figuring that as I can get 3 encounters between Elms and SS that would class as 3 journey legs. Is that right? But I don't know how many encounters I have been getting that I'm trucing in the background - are we talking about the ones where you get the message your encounter with a NPC has been auto-truced or are there ones that happen that we don¡'t even know about???? If it's the ones where we get the message, then I can't see this is going to make that much of a huge difference to me, as it's rare that I get more than one in a travel. The issues with Rep - I have to side with Goat here, it would be very rare that anyone would be friendly and trusted by all sides, I would go as far to suggest that to be able to achieve it you would have to be a renegade and side with no-one to stand any chance of it happening. If you are aligned with a faction when there are always going to people who don't trust you on principle The main problem here does appear to lie with the rep system and how it works. Agree that does seem daft that friendly factions would attack you but I would also suggest that the risk of friendly attack would be higher with certain factions, slavers and anarchists spring to mind, as there will be ones who always will try if they think they can get away with it..... The multiple encounters with the same gang - why is this a fault? Why isn't it possible that if you get away from a gang and they come hunting you Fight And Park - ok takes balls, and as long as the lorries are properly fitted out then not an issue, though I would of thought the AI Peds would like to try and capture them
Grimm Sykes Posted Oct 21, 2015, 10:01 am	PvtParty said: OK, here's one option to stop that... Rather than just CR/rep, use the value of the load to adjust the likelihood of an encounter. In a hostile environment, it is possible that friends will turn on friends if the payout is a large enough. Value based on what? Fuel is only 21 a can in TX, thats not very valuable. even in gateway it's worth less then half what it's worth in SS. Doing this would be like turning the game upside down, where the harder texan area would be easier to get out of with fuel, and pulling into noobville up north would be the hardest thing. How about this for a sensible suggestion... Make everything cost the same in every town, it would defeat the purpose of a dynamic market system, but isn't that better then defeating the purpose of a faction system? I do agree, the change proposed would render the faction system pointless, we all may as well be trapped as renegades Making everything cost the same in every town means there is no profit in moving goods, thus the exploit is removed. Maybe keep it dynamic, but as prices change they are still the same price in every town. with 13000 cans in SS market, there is no shortage on fuel to justify it costing 32 times more then in TX where only 10,000 cans are available. Another idea that comes to mind is the civ and merchant guilds could charge a tax for importing too much to a specific town Another thing the proposed change would do is render SF and FL camps useless money pits.
HexGrid Posted Oct 21, 2015, 10:04 am	*The X Man* said: Splurs said: Im no sea dog, however ever the pirates of old had a "code" if you wish where they wouldn't take other ships on the seas, because of the "greater goal" idea. "The code is more what you'd call guidelines than actual rules" Splurs said: Just because they are slavers/pirates doesn't make them stupid. Slaughter their gang, loot their gear, then do a few favors for them, use HPs and they are back on your good side?? Those would be stupid pirates. Ask any player who had been done wrong in that way by another player (Insert ash reference here) and see if they are buddies the following week... most likely, they are still enemies... as it should be. There are way too many ways to quickly and easily regain good rep. This needs to stop. And never should you be on good terms with all factions... NEVER. ya simple, like i said opposites should oppose. Forcing people to attack their preferred allies is just wrong.
RotaryJunkie Posted Oct 21, 2015, 11:04 am	Chances are I could've been a part of the problem here, as when my rep leveled off to positive-with-everyone I did a fair bit of running around in things that do. not. work. 1L lorry from EL to SS to BL with a mail stop at each. A few escorts with skeleton crews consisting of whatever cars I had lying around. An attempt at an SS->MO taxi with 1L Estates that went wrong when I found out that Appreciated is not always quite enough for a truce. Personally I don't think being rep positive with all factions should be possible, but I also don't think we should eliminate the ability to secure safe passage through reputation. If you manage to get all the gangs between two areas to come to the common conclusion that they would really do better to find someone else to shoot at, cool. However, I don't think this should be possible everywhere at once, someone's always going to be upset. Further, just like with courier and escorts, I think all travels should have some form of effect on reputation. Perhaps gangs that know they let you off easy will start looking at you in a slightly more negative light. Basically, what I'd like to see is being able to balance rep to make one travel... And then a guarantee that you're going to have your work cut out for you to do it again. I toyed with it, but determined it wasn't really worth it when I could just indiscriminately shoot baddies, make money, get loot, and actually play Darwkind... Instead of only playing when (and against who) I could "get away with it" to keep my rep intact. And/or potentially a bounty system, where yep, they might like you, but you've got some REAAAALLY nice stuff there... But for the right price they'll forget you. Finding a way to determine this would be interesting, perhaps base it off of total squad bulk space + number of times you've paid a gang off to ignore you in the previous week? Obviously, if you did it once, you'll do it again. And again. And again. So of course the price would go up. Obviously if you're disliked or worse, they're still going to try to kill you though.
PvtParty Posted Oct 21, 2015, 12:30 pm	Racing Robbie said: The multiple encounters with the same gang - why is this a fault? Why isn't it possible that if you get away from a gang and they come hunting you  My only quibble with this is seeing the same enemy gangers a second time, but in fresh cars. I think it would be cool if they stuck with the same cars as the first encounter, complete with any damage previously suffered. After all, it's not as if we get the chance to change vehicles, or even do repairs*, between encounters. * - Other than changing tyres/reloading weapons.
PvtParty Posted Oct 21, 2015, 12:32 pm	Grimm Sykes said: PvtParty said: OK, here's one option to stop that... Rather than just CR/rep, use the value of the load to adjust the likelihood of an encounter. In a hostile environment, it is possible that friends will turn on friends if the payout is a large enough. Value based on what? Fuel is only 21 a can in TX, thats not very valuable. even in gateway it's worth less then half what it's worth in SS. Doing this would be like turning the game upside down, where the harder texan area would be easier to get out of with fuel, and pulling into noobville up north would be the hardest thing. If it made the system workable, use the highest price in Evan at that point in time. Then, fuel loads would still be attractive to any would-be assailants in/around Texan.
*goat starer* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 12:48 pm	Splurs said: Quote: it should obviously not be possible to be friends with every faction in this game unless you never chose to fight nd loot.... and even then if you are friendly with merchants or slavers it should bee impossible to friendly with reds. I disagree, you can be friendly with them all, you hit the merchants for their goods, that you might sell off to the slavers, then to keep the merchants happy you go an kill a heap of pirates, and give their cars to the Reds. Each time you hit something you lose some rep, however each faction would look at the over all effect it has with the thinking of "Ok that gang took some of our cars and killed our gangers, but last week they MASSACRED our enemies, we can handle a few of ours killed if it means lots of theirs" Quote: certain factions should always have very 'loose' loyalties in any case. all the pirates and slavers should weigh the possible gains of taking a lorry from you against you not liking them.... you should never be able to guarantee a truce.. especially against the higher fame gangs. This one I believe is truly wrong, as I said before the gang/faction leaders would weigh up the pros and cons of taking a few lorries vs their forces getting decimated, or you helping out the enemies. Im no sea dog, however ever the pirates of old had a "code" if you wish where they wouldn't take other ships on the seas, because of the "greater goal" idea. Just because they are slavers/pirates doesn't make them stupid. that make absolutley no sense at all. That is not how gangs work in the real world.. it not how ideologies work... what actually happens is people might use you but they would tke the first opprtunity to shaft you and steal your ####. Especially out in the wilderness where they can blame it on someone else and there will always be a fog of doubt. Your analog with pirates is tenuous and entirelly anecdotal... its a myth. Pirate codes were drawn up for individual ships or groups of sailors... not for the whole of piratedom... you have been waching too much Pirates f the Carribean. there are multipe real world examples of criminals ganging up when it suits them and fragmenting when it is beneficial. From the Mafia to Cartels to football hooligans to terrorist organisations to inner city gangs... these 'factions' all have loose relationships because they all have personal interests that sometimes directly cnflict with their group interests. making up random nonsense to support an obviously preposterous position is
JoniBoy Posted Oct 21, 2015, 1:19 pm	*The X Man* said: PvtParty said: What is broken?? Earning $10 Million+ per travel/transport with no risk and no effort. Sounds a bit broke. Only thing not broke is the player(s) "$$$". Well, I am not a math expert but a lorry can carry around 2300blk if carries no weapons, that is 230 cans of fuel. Fuel cans sell at $790 in SS but sometimes can reach $1k. That is a huge 44 lorry squad to earn $10 Million. If someone dedicates his complete gang to moving lorries after all the work required to have good reputation with all factions deserves our respect. No effort?
Master TMO Posted Oct 21, 2015, 1:34 pm	Just going to toss my under-informed 2 cents in: I like the idea of tossing a risk/reward variable into the enemy's truce calculations: ((Value of cargo)+(Value of cars))/CR, where the Value is calculated at the average price across all of Evan. That shouldn't be too hard to calculate. It wouldn't even be too hard to do some sort of localization formula, maybe since each gang is only active in some towns, make it the average value across those towns, or max value, whatever. That's infinitely adjustable and really depends on how complex Sam wants to make the economy. Some gangs in each faction might be more treacherous than others, ie - more likely to attack their own faction. Civs gangs in general might be less treacherous, while Pirate gangs tend to be more treacherous, etc. The wealth of the player gang might also be taken into account. If all the gangs know that Bob is rich (and not just money, fleet and lockups and camps all count), then he's likely to be a larger target for some of them. I've only been playing about 6 months though, and not traveled out of the Northern Triangle, so there is a ton about this game that I don't know yet. Some or all of these might be already in the game, or invalided by something else.
Tallus Posted Oct 21, 2015, 1:43 pm	Machiavelli would have something to say regarding reputation: [The issue is not whether you are loved or hated, but rather whether you are feared].... and how much your potential enemies have to lose.
*The X Man* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 5:29 pm	JoniBoy said: *The X Man* said: PvtParty said: What is broken?? Earning $10 Million+ per travel/transport with no risk and no effort. Sounds a bit broke. Only thing not broke is the player(s) "$$$". Well, I am not a math expert but a lorry can carry around 2300blk if carries no weapons, that is 230 cans of fuel. Fuel cans sell at $790 in SS but sometimes can reach $1k. That is a huge 44 lorry squad to earn $10 Million. If someone dedicates his complete gang to moving lorries after all the work required to have good reputation with all factions deserves our respect. No effort? That must be fuels current price. Then you wait for price rise, then sell. I have seen fuel prices reach $2K per unit. Take this number and recalculate your profits. JoniBoy said: If someone dedicates his complete gang to moving lorries after all the work required to have good reputation with all factions deserves our respect. No effort? Yes, there is a lot of time and effort towards getting positive rep with all factions. The upkeep for some players is not that difficult to maintain. Respect??? for manipulating the game mechanics??? Sorry, but No. My point of no effort means once rep immunity is secured, there is no effort whatsoever in clicking the "Do It" button from the squad screen. Once done, the mega millions await once the squad arrives. This brings up the old "If the game lets you do it, it must ok", as to why these things continue to be abused. "If Sam didn't want us to do it, he wouldn't have allowed it to happen", this is the next quote that pops up. Since Sam is wanting to correct this issue, it's obvious that this was not his intent by allowing travels to be done of this type. The issue will be fixed and Sam will get the right info in place to make the proper changes. So relax a bit until he posts any updates.
HexGrid Posted Oct 21, 2015, 6:22 pm	*The X Man* said: JoniBoy said: *The X Man* said: PvtParty said: What is broken?? Earning $10 Million+ per travel/transport with no risk and no effort. Sounds a bit broke. Only thing not broke is the player(s) "$$$". Well, I am not a math expert but a lorry can carry around 2300blk if carries no weapons, that is 230 cans of fuel. Fuel cans sell at $790 in SS but sometimes can reach $1k. That is a huge 44 lorry squad to earn $10 Million. If someone dedicates his complete gang to moving lorries after all the work required to have good reputation with all factions deserves our respect. No effort? That must be fuels current price. Then you wait for price rise, then sell. I have seen fuel prices reach $2K per unit. Take this number and recalculate your profits. JoniBoy said: If someone dedicates his complete gang to moving lorries after all the work required to have good reputation with all factions deserves our respect. No effort? Yes, there is a lot of time and effort towards getting positive rep with all factions. The upkeep for some players is not that difficult to maintain. Respect??? for manipulating the game mechanics??? Sorry, but No. My point of no effort means once rep immunity is secured, there is no effort whatsoever in clicking the "Do It" button from the squad screen. Once done, the mega millions await once the squad arrives. This brings up the old "If the game lets you do it, it must ok", as to why these things continue to be abused. "If Sam didn't want us to do it, he wouldn't have allowed it to happen", this is the next quote that pops up. Since Sam is wanting to correct this issue, it's obvious that this was not his intent by allowing travels to be done of this type. The issue will be fixed and Sam will get the right info in place to make the proper changes. So relax a bit until he posts any updates. While we are all nit picking on opinions about what was a normal game mechanic until some players who would not spend the time or effort to do the same got all huffy and decided to circumvent a public forum or any discussion with the player community. We could possibly get those marshals that never seem to help noobs as the mission statement states, seems like an allowed exploit to me. Follow your mission statement or hang up the stars, imho. PS. if you think making 10 mil on a 2-3 day lorry trip is to much, what's the DW cost of buzzers and other high price items that can be scouted and sold in the same 2-3 days of play by most advanced players.
Krakhedd Posted Oct 21, 2015, 6:47 pm	*sam* said: edit:  I'm still discussing the best way to do this... the mechanism listed above probably isn't the best way. Perhaps you should listen to more than just one player when considering or making changes?  Especially one player, whose intentions don't help the game or the community at all, just help himself.  Or, even worse, as in this case, try to get what he wants, by preventing another player he sees as the only stone in his way, from playing a perfectly legitimate, time-consuming, and not-nearly-as-lucrative-as-he-suggests, game.
Krakhedd Posted Oct 21, 2015, 6:50 pm	*The X Man* said: PvtParty said: What is broken?? Earning $10 Million+ per travel/transport with no risk and no effort. Sounds a bit broke. Only thing not broke is the player(s) "$$$". I need tips, please!!!  That's way beyond what I am averaging right now.
Krakhedd Posted Oct 21, 2015, 6:59 pm	Yeah they get five free gangers and most of the ones I see, don't do a thing to help noobs. I even caught one (and wish I'd have taken a screen shot) saying he doesn't have the time to escort noobs. Well, since that's a critical Marshall function, if you don't or can't do that, then, why do you have stars at all?
*Splurs* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 7:22 pm	Marshalls get 5 free gangers? Where do I sign up? That is on a completely different topic though. Does it really only take 2-3 days to get from TX to SS/Elms? Even if you were and if you were filling a squad full of lorries, as I am guessing the only way to make 10 mil, that is 1/3 of your gang, I know if I was in BL with 20 gangers I would be able to make that kind of cash easily. put 20 in SS and it would be a piece of cake to make the cash. Not to mention if it is all about fuel to SS then what about the return trip? Seems like a week long endevour just to get the lorries back to TX. Maybe we should make a daily limit of how much cash you make. Some people just want to do this in game move items and make money, some people want to kill everyone. It seems this game is following other online games, where a minority of people complain about something, it gets nerfed because it is "Overpowered" and ruins it for the majority, while the minority flourish because they have fixed what was irking them, or making it harder for them. I dont want to sling personal insults at anyone, and dont have time for those that do the reverse, I am always happy for a debate on the impacts it will have, and to have Sam come in and declare it was going to change soon (yes he may of backed off that at the moment) but not put it up to the general publics view before already making up his mind I would call foul on that.
*sam* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 7:33 pm	Krakhedd said: *sam* said: edit:  I'm still discussing the best way to do this... the mechanism listed above probably isn't the best way. Perhaps you should listen to more than just one player when considering or making changes?  Especially one player, whose intentions don't help the game or the community at all, just help himself.  Or, even worse, as in this case, try to get what he wants, by preventing another player he sees as the only stone in his way, from playing a perfectly legitimate, time-consuming, and not-nearly-as-lucrative-as-he-suggests, game. 1... this change was not triggered by who you think it was - it was merely following a comment from a normal player 2... free travel without any risk of encounters is totally out of whack with how I want the game to be, sorry if you don't agree. This is the reason I jumped on this particular point so strongly.. it was due to my beliefs, not due to any behind-the-scenes machinations which you imagine are going on
*The X Man* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 7:54 pm	*sam* said: 2... free travel without any risk of encounters is totally out of whack with how I want the game to be, sorry if you don't agree. Thank you! Now I don't have to go around poking people in the eye  This is more how travels and transport were most likely meant to be done S788664. It's in the SS region and it's an ambush too! The same is done around BL too with larger odds against. Yes, as fun as it looks!
JoniBoy Posted Oct 21, 2015, 8:21 pm	*sam* said: 2... free travel without any risk of encounters is totally out of whack with how I want the game to be, sorry if you don't agree. This is the reason I jumped on this particular point so strongly.. it was due to my beliefs, not due to any behind-the-scenes machinations which you imagine are going on Well, if that is what you are willing to achieve, and your statement is pretty clear, I think that what we players have to do is give you ideas of how to make this in a way we like it and makes sense. I already gave an idea: - There is a band of guys who are psychopaths, or possessed by deamons or any other reason that makes them not want to truce, never. You may find them anytime and anywhere. We could also make them especially nasty regarding combat rating or car builds. Or even more, they leave no survivors, there is no footsquad after a lost encounter with them (well, that might be a bit too nasty).- I was atually thinking in something similar to "the Reavers" from "Firefly". There are other ideas in this thread like the reputation system wont allow you to be friends with everybody that also makes sense. Just ideas, but please, makes no sense that you cannot truce a friendly gang just beacause you already truced one. I think the forums should become a bit more positive and try to help Sam make reality the ideas he is willing to implement rather than discussing who makes Sam do whatever.
*goat starer* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 8:42 pm	Master TMO said: Just going to toss my under-informed 2 cents in: I like the idea of tossing a risk/reward variable into the enemy's truce calculations: ((Value of cargo)+(Value of cars))/CR, where the Value is calculated at the average price across all of Evan.  That shouldn't be too hard to calculate.  It wouldn't even be too hard to do some sort of localization formula, maybe since each gang is only active in some towns, make it the average value across those towns, or max value, whatever.  That's infinitely adjustable and really depends on how complex Sam wants to make the economy. Some gangs in each faction might be more treacherous than others, ie - more likely to attack their own faction.    Civs gangs in general might be less treacherous, while Pirate gangs tend to be more treacherous, etc. The wealth of the player gang might also be taken into account.  If all the gangs know that Bob is rich (and not just money, fleet and lockups and camps all count), then he's likely to be a larger target for some of them. I've only been playing about 6 months though, and not traveled out of the Northern Triangle, so there is a ton about this game that I don't know yet.  Some or all of these might be already in the game, or invalided by something else. 6 months and you still make more sense than most of this lot. Older players have all developed a range of 'techniques' to use foibles of the game. Some of these are ok... Some are exploits. When sam closes one they all have a good cry... And in the past have managed to undo good changes (sniper nerf anyone?). This is not an ideal fix.. But it is a fix.
*goat starer* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 8:45 pm	Hey Sam..l what do you count as a 'normal player'? Am I one?
*Bigspenner* Posted Oct 21, 2015, 10:57 pm	I think running unarmed and armoured trucks shouldn't help reduce encounters as its unrealistic, given the towns are small and the populations would see a convoy leave the reality is that and unarmed and unescorted lorry full of treasure would be almost guaranteed to be intercepted. so to use this technique while clever at finding a way around a problem is just inconsistent with the game world. I guess this is to do with tiny cr sneaking under the radar so I am guessing the fix must be to change the tolerances for How likely an encounter is specifically around the CR variable and leave the rep factor alone. No one would run a 40 CR unarmed truck if they lost every second one because it couldn't defend itself. I think a fix for this is needed even if no ones currently doing it just in case.
Master TMO Posted Oct 21, 2015, 11:37 pm	*Bigspenner* said: No one would run a 40 CR unarmed truck if they lost every second one because it couldn't defend itself. The Risk vs Reward multiplier would fix it.  A 40 CR travel car has a low value, so while the Risk is low, the Reward is too, and would make it not that tempting a target. A 40 CR empty Lorry would likely have a higher Reward, and so would make a more tempting target. A 40 CR full Lorry would have a huge Reward, vs such a tiny Risk, and would most likely be pounced on by all but the least Treacherous of alliance mates.
*Bastille* Posted Oct 22, 2015, 1:30 am	*StCrispin* said: it wont change my game either since I have no Rep anyway.  But its the wrong "Fix" The problem is how the rep system works.  Not how players play.  If the System in place allows a player to be loved by everyone, then fix it so being loved by one makes you enemy of their enemy. This is like fixing a bleeding Artery by chopping off the arm rather that sewing the hole shut. In the end it really just hurts New Players.  Most Long time players can escape a pack of 4L Sunrises in a 3.2L Hearse with 4 Flat Tires.  Conversely (I know from personal experiences) a new player would be hard pressed sometimes to survive in an opposite situation where they had the 4L and were chased by a Hearse with 4 flat tires! I agree that addressing this is probably the best solution, or start there of. As mentioned above by many, imposing a one truce limit will adversely affect intended game play. I really don't want to have to fight Reds 3 times in one trip (or anarchists... or raiders really), would be bad. Having to kill 3 x as many Merchant BHs or Slavers though, as they are my enemies... Oddly I never get jumped by Slavers or Merchant BHs and they are meant to hate me. I just don't play enough anymore to be anyones target and my rep is balanced by default, just fighting the fights I get. I try to go out of my way to make the aforementioned hate me, and it always balances back with raider and anarchist attacks. This is the thing that should not be. Your factions enemy should be at you all the time and never should you be friends with both. The factions system, IMO, is what needs to be addressed here. That is probably a lot easier said than done and will require lots of readdressing as new loopholes are found.
*Bastille* Posted Oct 22, 2015, 1:31 am	goat starer said: Hey Sam..l what do you count as a 'normal player'? Am I one? No... don't be silly
*Bastille* Posted Oct 22, 2015, 2:01 am	PvtParty said: OK, here's one option to stop that... Rather than just CR/rep, use the value of the load to adjust the likelihood of an encounter. In a hostile environment, it is possible that friends will turn on friends if the payout is a large enough. Grimm Sykes said: Value based on what? Fuel is only 21 a can in TX, thats not very valuable. even in gateway it's worth less then half what it's worth in SS. Doing this would be like turning the game upside down, where the harder texan area would be easier to get out of with fuel, and pulling into noobville up north would be the hardest thing. How about this for a sensible suggestion... Master TMO said: I like the idea of tossing a risk/reward variable into the enemy's truce calculations: ((Value of cargo)+(Value of cars))/CR, where the Value is calculated at the average price across all of Evan. That shouldn't be too hard to calculate. It wouldn't even be too hard to do some sort of localization formula, maybe since each gang is only active in some towns, make it the average value across those towns, or max value, whatever. That's infinitely adjustable and really depends on how complex Sam wants to make the economy. There is some good stuff coming up in this thread. Might address some stuff thats been buried for years.
HexGrid Posted Oct 22, 2015, 4:23 am	Base it on mileage for the squad maybe.
*goat starer* Posted Oct 22, 2015, 8:50 am	*Bastille* said: goat starer said: Hey Sam..l what do you count as a 'normal player'? Am I one? No... don't be silly  I havebeen here a while.... i must be contributing to the average
DirkNotSoGently Posted Oct 22, 2015, 9:08 am	goat starer said: *Bastille* said: goat starer said: Hey Sam..l what do you count as a 'normal player'? Am I one? No... don't be silly  I havebeen here a while.... i must be contributing to the average Now that's a scary thought
Grimm Sykes Posted Oct 22, 2015, 9:29 am	HexGrid said: *The X Man* said: JoniBoy said: *The X Man* said: PvtParty said: What is broken?? Earning $10 Million+ per travel/transport with no risk and no effort. Sounds a bit broke. Only thing not broke is the player(s) "$$$". Well, I am not a math expert but a lorry can carry around 2300blk if carries no weapons, that is 230 cans of fuel. Fuel cans sell at $790 in SS but sometimes can reach $1k. That is a huge 44 lorry squad to earn $10 Million. If someone dedicates his complete gang to moving lorries after all the work required to have good reputation with all factions deserves our respect. No effort? That must be fuels current price. Then you wait for price rise, then sell. I have seen fuel prices reach $2K per unit. Take this number and recalculate your profits. JoniBoy said: If someone dedicates his complete gang to moving lorries after all the work required to have good reputation with all factions deserves our respect. No effort? Yes, there is a lot of time and effort towards getting positive rep with all factions. The upkeep for some players is not that difficult to maintain. Respect??? for manipulating the game mechanics??? Sorry, but No. My point of no effort means once rep immunity is secured, there is no effort whatsoever in clicking the "Do It" button from the squad screen. Once done, the mega millions await once the squad arrives. This brings up the old "If the game lets you do it, it must ok", as to why these things continue to be abused. "If Sam didn't want us to do it, he wouldn't have allowed it to happen", this is the next quote that pops up. Since Sam is wanting to correct this issue, it's obvious that this was not his intent by allowing travels to be done of this type. The issue will be fixed and Sam will get the right info in place to make the proper changes. So relax a bit until he posts any updates. While we are all nit picking on opinions about what was a normal game mechanic until some players who would not spend the time or effort to do the same got all huffy and decided to circumvent a public forum or any discussion with the player community. We could possibly get those marshals that never seem to help noobs as the mission statement states, seems like an allowed exploit to me. Follow your mission statement or hang up the stars, imho. PS. if you think making 10 mil on a 2-3 day lorry trip is to much, what's the DW cost of buzzers and other high price items that can be scouted and sold in the same 2-3 days of play by most advanced players. It's not that hard to make 10 million in a single day speed scouting out of SS with 2000 CR squad, so how is making 10 million in 3 days wrong when making 10 million in 1 day is ok?
*Bigspenner* Posted Oct 22, 2015, 9:37 am	Are you arguing that it should be fine to do something completely unrealistic in the game world and that's better that a more consistent game world? or are you arguing scouts should be less rewarding? or are you just arguing for the sake of it to demonstrate your enormous intellect? Whats wrong is simple it doesn't make sense and so should be changed. In a game world like Evan if unarmed trucks left a town they would get attacked its simple. forget rep anarchists and pirates would loot you.
Grimm Sykes Posted Oct 22, 2015, 9:41 am	Had a brainstorm... vehicles have fame, why not give a squad fame as well, but initiate 2 types of fame, combat fame and trade fame. if a squad has fame trading, and the vehicles in it are famous, the risk could also be greater Look there goes Juans Famous lorry squad, call everyone to come intercept it...
Grimm Sykes Posted Oct 22, 2015, 9:44 am	*Bigspenner* said: Are you arguing that it should be fine to do something completely unrealistic in the game world and that's better that a more consistent game world? or are you arguing scouts should be less rewarding? or are you just arguing for the sake of it to demonstrate your enormous intellect? Whats wrong is simple it doesn't make sense and so should be changed. In a game world like Evan if unarmed trucks left a town they would get attacked its simple. forget rep anarchists and pirates would loot you. No, i'm just saying the whole economic system is broken and unrealistic. PS: and it's not because "I" broke it 6 years ago
*Bigspenner* Posted Oct 22, 2015, 10:04 am	I am sorry I understand what you are saying now and that is: Lots of things are broken so we shouldn't fix any of them. Wise words Grimm! Grimm Sykes said: *Bigspenner* said: Are you arguing that it should be fine to do something completely unrealistic in the game world and that's better that a more consistent game world? or are you arguing scouts should be less rewarding? or are you just arguing for the sake of it to demonstrate your enormous intellect? Whats wrong is simple it doesn't make sense and so should be changed. In a game world like Evan if unarmed trucks left a town they would get attacked its simple. forget rep anarchists and pirates would loot you. No, i'm just saying the whole economic system is broken and unrealistic. PS: and it's not because "I" broke it 6 years ago
*goat starer* Posted Oct 22, 2015, 10:08 am	Nobody is saying that you shouldnt be able to make 10 million dollars in 3 days... they are saying you should not be able to do it risk free. For 2 very good reasons... 1. unfettered money flow breaks the game economy and adversely affects casual and newer players 2. its really silly All Sam has done is introduce built in risk to travels and trading....entirely appropriately. *Bigspenner* said: if unarmed trucks left a town they would get attacked its simple. forget rep anarchists and pirates would loot you. that really ought to be the end of this ridiculous debate.
*goat starer* Posted Oct 22, 2015, 10:11 am	the best way to do this wuld be to reintroduce open PVP in the southern towns.... or at least Shanty...
Tallus Posted Oct 22, 2015, 10:37 am	There's an interesting point about Sam's solution, which is that it's overkill: the players abusing the system will only need a couple unpleasant ambushes to change their force packages, so all that is needed is a modest increase in the chance of these ambushes (and -- given the problem-- they need not have the disproportionate ratio of crs to make the ambush unpleasant). But yes, the lack of PVP combat I contributes to this problem.
*Splurs* Posted Oct 22, 2015, 11:14 am	I dont see how the introduction of PvP in southern towns would fix this issue. I havnt done much in the way of PvP however I was still under the impression that you needed to guess CR and rough time a squad went out to ambush them? Quote: Nobody is saying that you shouldnt be able to make 10 million dollars in 3 days... they are saying you should not be able to do it risk free. For 2 very good reasons... 1. unfettered money flow breaks the game economy and adversely affects casual and newer players 2. its really silly I can agree with some of this, however I can also see the other side of it. I am not sure how it adversely affects casual and newer players, if anything I have seen Elms and SS fuel prices quite low lately, which I imagine it is from the constant flow of fuel from south. I dont agree with the 2. Trying to argue with "its really silly" IMO is not a good stance. I do believe it isnt what Sam wanted in the game, and if thats the case then SOMETHING needs to be changed, however this is a community that should be kept content for the majority. If things get changed lets make sure they are changed for the right reasons, sure someone will say it is Sams game he can change it how he wants, and to a point that is right, however I pay for the privalidge of having a subscription, which I believe should entail me to have at least some say in the major changes of the game, as this is one of them. If the majority want it then so be it, if they don't then also so be it. I just see fixing a broken issue with another broken issue is only going to make more people unhappy. Quote: if unarmed trucks left a town they would get attacked its simple. forget rep anarchists and pirates would loot you. No I do not agree with this. If your friend was to leave town unarmed I wouldn't loot you. Some people rule out of talent some out of fear, but the bottom line is there is some kind of heirachy, and you dont screw over friends. All im asking for is some feedback from those who are paying for the game to have some say in it. treat every players views equally and make an informed decision at the end of it to see where we end up.
*sam* Posted Oct 22, 2015, 11:23 am	Obviously my original suggestion has gone at this point - the flaws are obvious following these discussions. I have just made this change: when you buy faction rep with hero points, the enemies of that faction will take exception to it much more than they previously did. This may be enough to tackle the core problem, whereby players manage to be liked by everyone? I have to say, I also really like the suggestion that pirates are an untrustworthy lot, and if you're moving about valuable, poorly guarded cargo, they are liable to go against their faction wishes and attack you anyway. This is perfectly logical behaviour.
Grimm Sykes Posted Oct 22, 2015, 11:58 am	*Bigspenner* said: I am sorry I understand what you are saying now and that is: Lots of things are broken so we shouldn't fix any of them. Wise words Grimm! Grimm Sykes said: *Bigspenner* said: Are you arguing that it should be fine to do something completely unrealistic in the game world and that's better that a more consistent game world? or are you arguing scouts should be less rewarding? or are you just arguing for the sake of it to demonstrate your enormous intellect? Whats wrong is simple it doesn't make sense and so should be changed. In a game world like Evan if unarmed trucks left a town they would get attacked its simple. forget rep anarchists and pirates would loot you. No, i'm just saying the whole economic system is broken and unrealistic. PS: and it's not because "I" broke it 6 years ago Quite the opposite, I'm saying deal with all of them. And most importantly, deal with the core problems, not just the symptoms.
*Bigspenner* Posted Oct 22, 2015, 12:12 pm	So this does need fixing in your opinion after all then?
Grimm Sykes Posted Oct 22, 2015, 12:35 pm	Make bulk goods the same value in every town, but allow prices to go up and down evan wide. Allow for many more courier missions and types of courier missions. The reason players move fuel is because there's never enough missions to load a lorry with. and allow some of these missions to be hauling fuel, not just crude oil (which would be more volatile then crude) Running a lorry back and forth between SS and EF loaded with 2300 bulk of mail makes much more cash in 3 days then the same lorry full of fuel from TX once you take in to account repairs, gate fees and fuel for the travel itself. Allow players a primary faction and secondary faction just like the NPC have. once a player is aligned, his reps can't allow him to be adored by enemies of his factions. exceptions like civ pirate players would have a tough time getting honored by both raiders and merchants. If soemone was BL Trucker/BL trucker like i would hope to play, they could get more missions, but never drop too far below or above neutral with all but maybe anarchists. if you move lots of goods or mail, anarchists and raiders should be more attracted to your gang. with vehicle fame weighing in on the CR balance Yes all that is complicated to a degree, but it would prevent future exploits that i could imagine. if you travel without tires, bottom armor should take damage in transit, much like front armor can take damage from traveling at 45 MPH, however the damage should be applied based on miles, not just applied randomly whenever a encounter spawns. (in case you didnt know, travel damage is non-existent on squads that truce everything) I have much more to say about needed changes that would enhance the player experience but these are what comes to mind right now. One little perk that might be fun to play with one day, would be the ability to watch replays in real time, not just stop and go turns, but where movement and shooting are shown at the same time, in real time. Being able to watch the replays would appeal to the instant gratification STEAM-ers. Edit: another idea that comes to mind if changes like these were made is that if someone drove 20000 bulk of mail to elms, the gazette would mention it, and elms would have a 1/2 price day on hiring recruits, or a free rifle for every gang that drops in. Meanwhile pirate human players would know who to keep an eye on (if pvp was accepted). meanwhile raider and pirate NPC gangs would be a bit more gun-ho, maybe a extra encounter with one of them, or more CR to face with them
Grimm Sykes Posted Oct 22, 2015, 1:22 pm	also lets say your a slaver raider, and merchants and civs hate you, then you shouldn't be able to buy bulk goods in merchant or civ aligned towns as the same price that merchant or civ players can. make bulk goods cost the same n each town, but be modified by faction reputation
Master TMO Posted Oct 22, 2015, 1:40 pm	Grimm Sykes said: also lets say your a slaver raider, and merchants and civs hate you, then you shouldn't be able to buy bulk goods in merchant or civ aligned towns as the same price that merchant or civ players can. make bulk goods cost the same n each town, but be modified by faction  reputation I personally am not a fan of this solution.  Doesn't mean it's not a feasible one, it just feels like it's going backwards to me, becoming less 'realistic' by simplifying things.  I prefer to leave the complexity of a system in, but tweak the balance slightly.  People are making too much money too easily?  Then increase the difficulty slightly, or reduce the profit margin.  But making the prices the same across the board just wipes out almost any reason to transport anything.  Sometimes you do need to wipe the slate clean and start again, it's true.  I'm not sure if this is one of those instances though.
Grimm Sykes Posted Oct 22, 2015, 3:01 pm	as i said, make more courier missions available, between running missions for rep and profit, and hauling stuff to camps in trade for items, theres still plenty of reason to transport
HexGrid Posted Oct 22, 2015, 6:12 pm	*sam* said: Obviously my original suggestion has gone at this point - the flaws are obvious following these discussions. I have just made this change: when you buy faction rep with hero points, the enemies of that faction will take exception to it much more than they previously did.  This may be enough to tackle the core problem, whereby players manage to be liked by everyone? I have to say, I also really like the suggestion that pirates are an untrustworthy lot, and if you're moving about valuable, poorly guarded cargo, they are liable to go against their faction wishes and attack you anyway. This is perfectly logical behaviour. HAHA Right pirates are an unreliable lot. Like big business is honest and civs have never been crooked, rofl. This will still force some to fight their own reps which is wrong. Maybe create a new unaligned unskilled faction of the rejects of evan with a smaller CR encounter, like half the normal encounter CR. it would stop the unarmed flow of goods and shouldn't increase the difficulties for others ridiculously.
*Bigspenner* Posted Oct 22, 2015, 7:01 pm	Pirates are probably the wrong choice if you are using historical "shiver me timbers" pirates as inspiration and also modern day pirates are highly organised and cooperative whereas anarchists are a much more likelty candidate for being no ones real friend. 1. a person who advocates or believes in anarchy or anarchism. 2. a person who seeks to overturn by violence all constituted forms and institutions of society and government, with no purpose of establishing any other system of order in the place of that destroyed. 3. a person who promotes disorder or excites revolt against any established rule, law, or custom. Both definitions 2 and 3 would suggest they would happily steal from an organisation or group irrespective of deals other groups have done. Id make Anarchists no ones friend if it was me as they by definition are not supportive and actively rebel against faction, organisation and the rule of law (faction standings and relations) If this happens to be your own faction and you don't lie this change as not liking this change would be rubbish roleplay anyway. HexGrid said: *sam* said: Obviously my original suggestion has gone at this point - the flaws are obvious following these discussions. I have just made this change: when you buy faction rep with hero points, the enemies of that faction will take exception to it much more than they previously did.  This may be enough to tackle the core problem, whereby players manage to be liked by everyone? I have to say, I also really like the suggestion that pirates are an untrustworthy lot, and if you're moving about valuable, poorly guarded cargo, they are liable to go against their faction wishes and attack you anyway. This is perfectly logical behaviour. HAHA Right pirates are an unreliable lot. Like big business is honest and civs have never been crooked, rofl. This will still force some to fight their own reps which is wrong. Maybe create a new unaligned unskilled faction of the rejects of evan with a smaller CR encounter, like half the normal encounter CR. it would stop the unarmed flow of goods and shouldn't increase the difficulties for others ridiculously.
*goat starer* Posted Oct 22, 2015, 7:47 pm	Splurs said: I dont see how the introduction of PvP in southern towns would fix this issue. I havnt done much in the way of PvP however I was still under the impression that you needed to guess CR and rough time a squad went out to ambush them? Quote: Nobody is saying that you shouldnt be able to make 10 million dollars in 3 days... they are saying you should not be able to do it risk free. For 2 very good reasons... 1. unfettered money flow breaks the game economy and adversely affects casual and newer players 2. its really silly I can agree with some of this, however I can also see the other side of it. I am not sure how it adversely affects casual and newer players, if anything I have seen Elms and SS fuel prices quite low lately, which I imagine it is from the constant flow of fuel from south. I dont agree with the 2. Trying to argue with "its really silly" IMO is not a good stance. I do believe it isnt what Sam wanted in the game, and if thats the case then SOMETHING needs to be changed, however this is a community that should be kept content for the majority. If things get changed lets make sure they are changed for the right reasons, sure someone will say it is Sams game he can change it how he wants, and to a point that is right, however I pay for the privalidge of having a subscription, which I believe should entail me to have at least some say in the major changes of the game, as this is one of them. If the majority want it then so be it, if they don't then also so be it. I just see fixing a broken issue with another broken issue is only going to make more people unhappy. Quote: if unarmed trucks left a town they would get attacked its simple. forget rep anarchists and pirates would loot you. No I do not agree with this. If your friend was to leave town unarmed I wouldn't loot you. Some people rule out of talent some out of fear, but the bottom line is there is some kind of heirachy, and you dont screw over friends. All im asking for is some feedback from those who are paying for the game to have some say in it. treat every players views equally and make an informed decision at the end of it to see where we end up. Nope... I can send a big squad out hunting players with auto balance on and just wait. I can also look at other players event logs to get a good idea when they travel. It's easy And saying 'it's silly' is fully explained by bigs point in the same post (and a lot better argument than making some #### up about pirates that you saw in a Johnny depp movie). Your last comment is moronic. Your best friends might not but we are talking about all the gangs of Evan. Big would.... Desperate degenerates would.. People who gain some benefit from your services might think twice but if the reward was great enough they would. You seem to think that there is some possible circumstance where you are such good mates with everyone that nobody would feel their loyalty tested by an easy target...that you can be friends with the people the Reds are at war with and yet they still like you enough to not take a cargo from you. You are either being deeply disingenuous and self serving or you live in some kind of bizarre utopia.
PA Racers Posted Oct 22, 2015, 10:10 pm	If running vehicles with no armor and tires is an issue why not set same limits that are used for camp defenses? I cant use my buggy in a camp defense even though its fully armored, so that needs adjusted anyway! Should be allowed to use my scout vehicle in a camp defense should I choose too.
NotSure Posted Oct 23, 2015, 12:02 am	JoniBoy said: *sam* said: 2... free travel without any risk of encounters is totally out of whack with how I want the game to be, sorry if you don't agree. This is the reason I jumped on this particular point so strongly.. it was due to my beliefs, not due to any behind-the-scenes machinations which you imagine are going on Well, if that is what you are willing to achieve, and your statement is pretty clear, I think that what we players have to do is give you ideas of how to make this in a way we like it and makes sense. I already gave an idea: - There is a band of guys who are psychopaths, or possessed by deamons or any other reason that makes them not want to truce, never. You may find them anytime and anywhere. We could also make them especially nasty regarding combat rating or car builds. Or even more, they leave no survivors, there is no footsquad after a lost encounter with them (well, that might be a bit too nasty).- I was atually thinking in something similar to "the Reavers" from "Firefly". There are other ideas in this thread like the reputation system wont allow you to be friends with everybody that also makes sense. Just ideas, but please, makes no sense that you cannot truce a friendly gang just beacause you already truced one. I think the forums should become a bit more positive and try to help Sam make reality the ideas he is willing to implement rather than discussing who makes Sam do whatever. Reavers would totally rock in this game! I want em!
*Longo* Posted Oct 23, 2015, 8:03 pm	I will start out and say I didn't read all 5 pages of this discussion. I would just like to add that this "fix" would be a bad idea, and an alternative "fix" should be considered. Also like to add if you destroy your Civ faction to be able to truce Anarchists down south, for instance, this "fix" should not effect your faction trucing efforts. Doing something like this changes the entire way you play the game, and it may make hauling goods easier down south, but pretty much bans you from SS (unless you want your gangers to get beat up and injured in town and get 100% gates returns) Allow Faction bounty hunters to move around a bit....that Civ Killing anarchist gang who truces through the South might occasionally run into some Civ bounty hunters that he cannot truce. Problem solved. Just like the original system with the pirate player occasionally being hounded by bounty hunters. Have a nice day. -Longo
*Bigspenner* Posted Oct 23, 2015, 8:29 pm	Longo in case you didn't see it this was the eventual solution. Possibly the not reading left you with part of the story we all do that sometimes *sam* said: Obviously my original suggestion has gone at this point - the flaws are obvious following these discussions. I have just made this change: when you buy faction rep with hero points, the enemies of that faction will take exception to it much more than they previously did.  This may be enough to tackle the core problem, whereby players manage to be liked by everyone? I have to say, I also really like the suggestion that pirates are an untrustworthy lot, and if you're moving about valuable, poorly guarded cargo, they are liable to go against their faction wishes and attack you anyway. This is perfectly logical behaviour.
*StCrispin* ce.services.mh@gmail.com Posted Oct 23, 2015, 10:18 pm	*The X Man* said: PvtParty said: What is broken?? Earning $10 Million+ per travel/transport with no risk and no effort. Sounds a bit broke. Only thing not broke is the player(s) "$$$". And this is the core of the issue.  Some people are upset that certain people are rich and can afford to outbid them on sponsorships. So since one or more rich people are playing within the confines of the game mechanic allowing faction reputation,  to make money transporting goods, the people who aren't as rich want that game mechanic changed to remove an impediment to them. I want the game mechanic changed as well but for the altruistic reason of making the game function in a logical manner.  Its not trucing that's broken, its how reps can be gained with diametrically opposed factions when realistically the opposed faction should be opposite in "Like-ability"
*Bigspenner* Posted Oct 23, 2015, 10:35 pm	Obviously so what is your point, don't fix it or do fix it, or are you just arguing because you are bored? Sam is attempting to fix something that doesn't work as it doesn't fit the idea of the game world. Just say good plan lets fix it and we can all move on. Occassionally positive suggestions can be a better approach you should attempt one. Its daft that you can be friends with everyone anarchists and civs cant both be your allies in a post apocalyptic world and so the reps system needs a tweek. the hero points change that Sam has implemented may or may not fix it we shall see. if not I am sure he will welcome all suggestions.
*StCrispin* ce.services.mh@gmail.com Posted Oct 23, 2015, 10:35 pm	*sam* said: Krakhedd said: *sam* said: edit:  I'm still discussing the best way to do this... the mechanism listed above probably isn't the best way. Perhaps you should listen to more than just one player when considering or making changes?  Especially one player, whose intentions don't help the game or the community at all, just help himself.  Or, even worse, as in this case, try to get what he wants, by preventing another player he sees as the only stone in his way, from playing a perfectly legitimate, time-consuming, and not-nearly-as-lucrative-as-he-suggests, game. 1... this change was not triggered by who you think it was - it was merely following a comment from a normal player 2... free travel without any risk of encounters is totally out of whack with how I want the game to be, sorry if you don't agree. This is the reason I jumped on this particular point so strongly.. it was due to my beliefs, not due to any behind-the-scenes machinations which you imagine are going on We all agree with #2.  What we disagree on is how to create an environment that meets the intent, yet doesn't slap on some artificiality to do it. Or at least I think we all agree with #2, even people capitalizing on the existing system.
*StCrispin* ce.services.mh@gmail.com Posted Oct 23, 2015, 10:37 pm	goat starer said: Master TMO said: Just going to toss my under-informed 2 cents in: I like the idea of tossing a risk/reward variable into the enemy's truce calculations: ((Value of cargo)+(Value of cars))/CR, where the Value is calculated at the average price across all of Evan.  That shouldn't be too hard to calculate.  It wouldn't even be too hard to do some sort of localization formula, maybe since each gang is only active in some towns, make it the average value across those towns, or max value, whatever.  That's infinitely adjustable and really depends on how complex Sam wants to make the economy. Some gangs in each faction might be more treacherous than others, ie - more likely to attack their own faction.    Civs gangs in general might be less treacherous, while Pirate gangs tend to be more treacherous, etc. The wealth of the player gang might also be taken into account.  If all the gangs know that Bob is rich (and not just money, fleet and lockups and camps all count), then he's likely to be a larger target for some of them. I've only been playing about 6 months though, and not traveled out of the Northern Triangle, so there is a ton about this game that I don't know yet.  Some or all of these might be already in the game, or invalided by something else. 6 months and you still make more sense than most of this lot. Older players have all developed a range of 'techniques' to use foibles of the game. Some of these are ok... Some are exploits. When sam closes one they all have a good cry... And in the past have managed to undo good changes (sniper nerf anyone?). This is not an ideal fix.. But it is a fix. Funny, when I made this same suggestion over a year ago you called me stupid and were totally against it.
*StCrispin* ce.services.mh@gmail.com Posted Oct 23, 2015, 10:41 pm	*Bigspenner* said: I think running unarmed and armoured trucks shouldn't help reduce encounters as its unrealistic, given the towns are small and the populations would see a convoy leave the reality is that and unarmed and unescorted lorry full of treasure would be almost guaranteed to be intercepted. so to use this technique while clever at finding a way around a problem is just inconsistent with the game world. I guess this is to do with tiny cr sneaking under the radar so I am guessing the fix must be to change the tolerances for How likely an encounter is specifically around the CR variable and leave the rep factor alone. No one would run a 40 CR unarmed truck if they lost every second one because it couldn't defend itself. I think a fix for this is needed even if no ones currently doing it just in case. Its 22 CR for a Lorry with 5/5/5/5/5/5 armor all around The coupling of a 22 CR Lorry with a ATG+HMG BPU means you SHOULD only be outnumbered 2 to 1 when you get an encounter.  But there are weird times (or common times for me...) where you get 18 vs 3 odds...  or like I got last week, 21 vs 3
*StCrispin* ce.services.mh@gmail.com Posted Oct 23, 2015, 10:50 pm	*sam* said: Obviously my original suggestion has gone at this point - the flaws are obvious following these discussions. I have just made this change: when you buy faction rep with hero points, the enemies of that faction will take exception to it much more than they previously did.  This may be enough to tackle the core problem, whereby players manage to be liked by everyone? I have to say, I also really like the suggestion that pirates are an untrustworthy lot, and if you're moving about valuable, poorly guarded cargo, they are liable to go against their faction wishes and attack you anyway. This is perfectly logical behaviour. Nice start but many people don't even bother with Hero points (or at least I don't).  When I had 4 positive reps not counting the guys who truce at neutral (best I ever managed), I got it all from scouting and killing people.
*StCrispin* ce.services.mh@gmail.com Posted Oct 23, 2015, 11:25 pm	*Bigspenner* said: Occassionally positive suggestions can be a better approach you should attempt one. I've suggested fixes for this for years.  Most of those suggestions have already been re-suggested by other players in this thread.  but IMO rebalancing the reputation system to not allow you to be friends with everyone is the best idea.  If Im an Anarchist, then any faction that is enemy of my faction should also be my enemy.  Unless something crazy changes that, and then it shouldn't be faction wide, maybe only gang specific.
*goat starer* Posted Oct 24, 2015, 12:15 am	*StCrispin* said: goat starer said: Master TMO said: Just going to toss my under-informed 2 cents in: I like the idea of tossing a risk/reward variable into the enemy's truce calculations: ((Value of cargo)+(Value of cars))/CR, where the Value is calculated at the average price across all of Evan.  That shouldn't be too hard to calculate.  It wouldn't even be too hard to do some sort of localization formula, maybe since each gang is only active in some towns, make it the average value across those towns, or max value, whatever.  That's infinitely adjustable and really depends on how complex Sam wants to make the economy. Some gangs in each faction might be more treacherous than others, ie - more likely to attack their own faction.    Civs gangs in general might be less treacherous, while Pirate gangs tend to be more treacherous, etc. The wealth of the player gang might also be taken into account.  If all the gangs know that Bob is rich (and not just money, fleet and lockups and camps all count), then he's likely to be a larger target for some of them. I've only been playing about 6 months though, and not traveled out of the Northern Triangle, so there is a ton about this game that I don't know yet.  Some or all of these might be already in the game, or invalided by something else. 6 months and you still make more sense than most of this lot. Older players have all developed a range of 'techniques' to use foibles of the game. Some of these are ok... Some are exploits. When sam closes one they all have a good cry... And in the past have managed to undo good changes (sniper nerf anyone?). This is not an ideal fix.. But it is a fix. Funny, when I made this same suggestion over a year ago you called me stupid and were totally against it. I assume you can back that up with a link? Erm... Is that a no then? Just some more made up stff you and Krakk concocted in the playground? Sir! Sir! Goat is a racist... He worships the devil... He did naughty things with a hamster... Really crispin... Grow up.
Tallus Posted Oct 24, 2015, 12:18 am	I was actually enjoying the opportunity to review linear algebra. And also enjoying not having to play through tiresome 3-4 hour travel encounters. Serious convoys take far too much of a RL time commitment. Being able to truce through a route because you've rep balanced make it possible to play a merchant's game.
*goat starer* Posted Oct 24, 2015, 12:20 am	You are justifying an exploit because you are lazy and like maths?
ninjamonkey73 Posted Oct 24, 2015, 12:38 am	SMH
Tallus Posted Oct 24, 2015, 1:04 am	[quote=goat starer]You are justifying an exploit because you are lazy and like maths?[/quote] No, because I liked solving the math problem better thane running the travels. Different elements of a game appeal to different people -- in general this is good because it widens the player base. I'm sure other people like other elements.... And, evidently, there are people who prefer that everyone play the game 'their' way.
*Bastille* Posted Oct 24, 2015, 4:26 am	*StCrispin* said: *sam* said: Obviously my original suggestion has gone at this point - the flaws are obvious following these discussions. I have just made this change: when you buy faction rep with hero points, the enemies of that faction will take exception to it much more than they previously did.  This may be enough to tackle the core problem, whereby players manage to be liked by everyone? I have to say, I also really like the suggestion that pirates are an untrustworthy lot, and if you're moving about valuable, poorly guarded cargo, they are liable to go against their faction wishes and attack you anyway. This is perfectly logical behaviour. Nice start but many people don't even bother with Hero points (or at least I don't).  When I had 4 positive reps not counting the guys who truce at neutral (best I ever managed), I got it all from scouting and killing people. There is some truth to this, but a good start all the same. We can use a button to see the effects. Might give us some clue as to where to go next. Tallus said: I was actually enjoying the opportunity to review linear algebra. And also enjoying not having to play through tiresome 3-4 hour travel encounters. Serious convoys take far too much of a RL time commitment. Being able to truce through a route because you've rep balanced make it possible to play a merchant's game. Being a merchant, playing a merchants game, does not mean you will not have targets. Wanting to run convoys around the continent without fear of attack is not what this game is about. If you want to run goods you need to play the game not just get a free pass. You can outsource the work if you really need to. Being able to simply truce your way through is not as the game was intended to be. I fully understand running 10+ vehicle convoys, been doing it for years. Sometimes its nice to have no encounters, but it should never be a given. You should never be able to rely on it. Cut back to 3 trucks and some defenders if you don't have the time, don't rely on a loophole.
Tallus Posted Oct 24, 2015, 5:20 am	It is true, as the rep system stands, "merchants" have an incentive to fratricde, basically because there are few merchant/civ raiders, and because you can buy back your rep with courier missions. It was not clear to me that this kind of cutthroat behavior wasn't intended -- it's a rough world out there... nor does it seem clear that pirates and privateers could not be deterred. Regardless, the big issue that will come up will be: why should i pay attention to rep at all if I can't use it to truce? As it stands now, the impact of good rep seems fairly marginal aside from the ability to get truces. it would be a shame to further devalue this dimension of the game... not least because rep balancing is one of the incentives to move away from Somerset and establish a multitown presence for your gang.
Tallus Posted Oct 24, 2015, 5:45 am	As a more general point, I'm not sure it's a good idea to be doctrinaire about what, exactly, the game is or is not "about." Is it really meant to be "about" Buzzer farming and slaughtering untold numbers of raiders? Should we be resigning our encounters when the Buzzer flips? If I run convoys of 10+ vehicles, should I limit the number of Napalm Guns so that there is some suspense? Is the real problem we're seeing here not really about rep at all, but the fact that, ironically, PVP has been squished out of the game and onto the forums?
*Tango* Posted Oct 24, 2015, 7:23 am	If you feel you have something to contribute to the original discussion please do. This is straying off topic.
*StCrispin* ce.services.mh@gmail.com Posted Oct 24, 2015, 10:23 pm	goat starer said: *StCrispin* said: goat starer said: Master TMO said: Just going to toss my under-informed 2 cents in: I like the idea of tossing a risk/reward variable into the enemy's truce calculations: ((Value of cargo)+(Value of cars))/CR, where the Value is calculated at the average price across all of Evan.  That shouldn't be too hard to calculate.  It wouldn't even be too hard to do some sort of localization formula, maybe since each gang is only active in some towns, make it the average value across those towns, or max value, whatever.  That's infinitely adjustable and really depends on how complex Sam wants to make the economy. Some gangs in each faction might be more treacherous than others, ie - more likely to attack their own faction.    Civs gangs in general might be less treacherous, while Pirate gangs tend to be more treacherous, etc. The wealth of the player gang might also be taken into account.  If all the gangs know that Bob is rich (and not just money, fleet and lockups and camps all count), then he's likely to be a larger target for some of them. I've only been playing about 6 months though, and not traveled out of the Northern Triangle, so there is a ton about this game that I don't know yet.  Some or all of these might be already in the game, or invalided by something else. 6 months and you still make more sense than most of this lot. Older players have all developed a range of 'techniques' to use foibles of the game. Some of these are ok... Some are exploits. When sam closes one they all have a good cry... And in the past have managed to undo good changes (sniper nerf anyone?). This is not an ideal fix.. But it is a fix. Funny, when I made this same suggestion over a year ago you called me stupid and were totally against it. I assume you can back that up with a link? Erm... Is that a no then? Just some more made up stff you and Krakk concocted in the playground? Sir! Sir! Goat is a racist... He worships the devil... He did naughty things with a hamster... Really crispin... Grow up. LOL your always there to provide me with a chuckle. I could find a link but you know as well as I how much of a pain it is sifting through thousands of peoples posts to find something written 1 or more years ago.  So I'll concede this one and say "bravo Goat-o your right-o!  im just inventing wondrous ponderous fabrications like charie in his chocolate factory" But really though, how U been?  Havent been on much myself till late.
*StCrispin* ce.services.mh@gmail.com Posted Oct 24, 2015, 10:28 pm	*Tango* said: If you feel you have something to contribute to the original discussion please do.  This is straying off topic. I suspect everyone who cares has already vented their views by now.  Im guessing this discussion has mostly run its course. Should this maybe be closed?  I would think this is better discussed in the discussions forums rather than the Developer section anyway.
*goat starer* Posted Oct 25, 2015, 12:40 am	*StCrispin* said: goat starer said: *StCrispin* said: goat starer said: Master TMO said: Just going to toss my under-informed 2 cents in: I like the idea of tossing a risk/reward variable into the enemy's truce calculations: ((Value of cargo)+(Value of cars))/CR, where the Value is calculated at the average price across all of Evan.  That shouldn't be too hard to calculate.  It wouldn't even be too hard to do some sort of localization formula, maybe since each gang is only active in some towns, make it the average value across those towns, or max value, whatever.  That's infinitely adjustable and really depends on how complex Sam wants to make the economy. Some gangs in each faction might be more treacherous than others, ie - more likely to attack their own faction.    Civs gangs in general might be less treacherous, while Pirate gangs tend to be more treacherous, etc. The wealth of the player gang might also be taken into account.  If all the gangs know that Bob is rich (and not just money, fleet and lockups and camps all count), then he's likely to be a larger target for some of them. I've only been playing about 6 months though, and not traveled out of the Northern Triangle, so there is a ton about this game that I don't know yet.  Some or all of these might be already in the game, or invalided by something else. 6 months and you still make more sense than most of this lot. Older players have all developed a range of 'techniques' to use foibles of the game. Some of these are ok... Some are exploits. When sam closes one they all have a good cry... And in the past have managed to undo good changes (sniper nerf anyone?). This is not an ideal fix.. But it is a fix. Funny, when I made this same suggestion over a year ago you called me stupid and were totally against it. I assume you can back that up with a link? Erm... Is that a no then? Just some more made up stff you and Krakk concocted in the playground? Sir! Sir! Goat is a racist... He worships the devil... He did naughty things with a hamster... Really crispin... Grow up. LOL your always there to provide me with a chuckle. I could find a link but you know as well as I how much of a pain it is sifting through thousands of peoples posts to find something written 1 or more years ago.  So I'll concede this one and say "bravo Goat-o your right-o!  im just inventing wondrous ponderous fabrications like charie in his chocolate factory" But really though, how U been?  Havent been on much myself till late. So that is no then Tell you what.. If I just made myself look like a prick what I would do is suggest someone closed the thread.... Oh.... Lol