Pirates?

[Marvin]

In MP, what would happen if some players used old profiles and other players used new profiles? Or would the server not allow old profiles to log on?

[Vice]

Servers would use whatever they have stored for modules, they are not client dependent. So they'd use the old module format as well until updated if additional modules are added to them as well.

[Marvin]

Does that mean that, in MP, even old profiles would see new station and/or city (pirate) modules added to the database?

[Vice]

Yes, that would be the case, it just wouldn't apply in single player.

[WeirdWill]

Can only speak for myself but I wouldn't mind to have to restart in single player. But I'm fresh at the beginning in Legacy. But I think I wouldn't mind starting over anyway for new improvements.

[Arei]

As far as I am concerned I don't really mind starting all over again if I want to have a pirate profile, but I would mind missing them in my main profile and having to redo the very same things to add them in. I don't know if I'm expressing myself well... ^^'
For this reason I really prefer what Vice initially suggested: the incorporation of an IND faction that would be able to use facilities from ALC/FDN while being restricted on combat. By the way would ALC/FDN members be allowed to use IND facilities?

A member of a non-aligned faction (IND) would need to be penalized if he engaged in any sort of combat other than defensive. Which could get complicated ... how would he go about pleading his case to the local authorities, should he fire upon another ship?

That would make that person an outlaw, or even a pirate don't you think? In my opinion a pirate doesn't *need* a pirate faction to break the law and attack/rob somebody, but it's still a bit frustrating because it's true that a pirate faction and pirate bases would be a very nice addition to the game. >< But regarding the issue you're talking about I don't believe it would be hard to check if the IND player opens fire upon a threatening (red) target or not.

If I may criticize a bit more, what I believe this game lacks is a proper crime management and response: I'm not a murderous psychopath by any means, but I did open fire upon those greedy pilots from my faction that would take my money and then say they changed their mind about trading informations from time to time and the response was quite light. Everybody in the area turned hostile, but jumping away and back was enough to make everybody friendly again like nothing happened.
Sure adding law enforcers won't magically make them able to follow you wherever you jump (well, I hope so ), but stations from the offended faction (in case a player attacks a member from his own faction or a member of a peaceful faction) could be warned, and regarding the gravity of the infraction, inflict a proper response from a simple fine to a death warrant.

I guess I'll stop my little digression here because I realize my suggestions would technically create more problems than solutions Thank you Vice for being so open and discussing about future developments with the players!

[Vice]

By the way would ALC/FDN members be allowed to use IND facilities?

They could be allowed to access them, if they were to exist, but if they (IND players) decide to build on their own, whatever territory they are in would ultimately default to ALC or FDN once such modules were constructed anyway. There wouldn't really be any 'IND' tagged modules as they would largely be based on existing regional factors... plus the primary purpose of an IND non-affiliated faction would be to free the player from being bound to one territory faction only, rather than introducing an entirely separate 3rd territory faction. So it would be more of an option for the player directly rather than any kind of broad spectrum faction territory parameter. And IND players would be able to access any station in any territory anyway, regardless of territory faction tag.

In my opinion a pirate doesn't *need* a pirate faction to break the law and attack/rob somebody, but it's still a bit frustrating because it's true that a pirate faction and pirate bases would be a very nice addition to the game. >< But regarding the issue you're talking about I don't believe it would be hard to check if the IND player opens fire upon a threatening (red) target or not.

Behavior was to be one of the original considerations for a 'RDR' raider or 'PIR' pirate faction. That is, they could start out as any faction they want, ALC, FDN, or IND, then if they attacked ships randomly, their reputation would quickly drop and eventually they would be flagged with the 'RDR' or 'PIR' faction ID, indicating they were a threat based on their actions. It also wouldn't necessarily be an entirely separate territory factor, but one more related to personal actions and results. Raiders might operate in any faction space, even without their own bases, being on their own and raiding any stations as much as they might raid other ships (treating such stations they might raid as their own personal pirate bases, even if they might be tagged with a territory faction).

So in a way, such changes might incorporate a little more of the varying criminal/hero/enforcer behavior you may be looking for.

[Marvin]

... but jumping away and back was enough to make everybody friendly again like nothing happened.

That situation would definitely need to be addressed.

[Rubber Chicken]

I'm slightly dismayed that I've overlooked this thread, and how it's developed since the OP.

Not to rehash the point in the thread where Vice responded concerning his vision and goals for his game, but I'd like to weigh in on one of the points, re: only 2 available cockpits.
I would like to see more variety in the cockpits not because as it was said "There's really only two ships...", which I disagree with, but because it would make me feel more invested in the frame type I was using.
It was one of the main reasons I'd drool over the adverts for Wing Commander in Omni Magazine before I got a copy of the game. When I'd reach the points in the game where the ship type I was assigned changed, just the visual of the cockpit made it seem to me that I was flying a much different ship compared to the last and that if I wanted to succeed, I'd have to familiarize myself with the capabilities and weaknesses of that particular model.
As and aside, I'd like to ask if the civilian version cockpit be given some glass paneling in the roof to improve overall visibility.

Back to the current discussion:
I would like to see an IND. faction.
As Vice has stated a couple post above that IND player-built stations would default to the current major faction (ALC/FDN) territory holder at the time of construction.
The question I have is, will the IND-built stations 'flip' their affiliation tag if the territory is seized by the other faction?
I think this might help prevent multiplayers flying the IND tag from losing their stations to the major faction oriented players who are looking to dominate an area.
Perhaps an *, or some other indicator, can be added to the faction tag - ALC* / FDN* - to show that the station was in fact flip-able and destroying it was not really necessary to achieve true hegemony of the system.

[Raven0]

An independent faction would be more versatile than a strict pirate/raider group. Not sure about restrictions on combat though. Docking fees at both Alliance and Federation could be high enough to offset the convenience of going anywhere. Maybe we could reinstate some of the reputation system from EM?

[Vice]

The question I have is, will the IND-built stations 'flip' their affiliation tag if the territory is seized by the other faction?

No, those systems would likely remain the same and keep consistent with what they were at the time they were built. For it to be changed would continue to require its destruction and rebuilding under a new faction ID. But that does bring up something I've been considering as a likely benefit of perhaps allowing IND players to build IND tagged stations with their own options. That is, an IND player can dock at any IND built/tagged station free of charge to conduct business, but if they dock at an ALC or FDN station, they are required to pay a small docking fee. Likewise, ALC and FDN players would be required to pay a small docking fee if they dock at an IND station. This way, there is a benefit of building for IND players beyond just expanding one of the two primary faction station networks. Destroying and rebuilding would still be required to transition from one faction to the other, but having a dedicated third faction label (IND) for stations would provide some positive added functional purpose/benefit.

I think this might help prevent multiplayers flying the IND tag from losing their stations to the major faction oriented players who are looking to dominate an area.
Perhaps an *, or some other indicator, can be added to the faction tag - ALC* / FDN* - to show that the station was in fact flip-able and destroying it was not really necessary to achieve true hegemony of the system.

I can think of a couple of potential exploit risks with allowing such post build transfers based on selected faction affiliation. And IND players should not consider themselves allied with one faction or the other, but rather independent as they select. As such, it won't matter who owns the station in the end to them (built or destroyed and rebuilt), they'll still be able to dock and access any station regardless of who owns it, plus they won't be a high threat level to either main faction unless they shoot first. So if they feel any sense of risk for where they build, they can either form a temporary untagged alliance with a local faction or be more selective about when and where they build. They should not consider themselves owners and/or combat participants if they choose to be independent, but there will be other options and benefits available to them for being independent... just as there probably should be benefits for players choosing to affiliate themselves with a specific faction.

An independent faction would be more versatile than a strict pirate/raider group. Not sure about restrictions on combat though. Docking fees at both Alliance and Federation could be high enough to offset the convenience of going anywhere. Maybe we could reinstate some of the reputation system from EM?

An independent faction would likely free up some options discussed earlier. Interested in additional input/feedback on such additional factors. Split rep threads won't likely be incorporated, but fines and combat restrictions can be adjusted or left out as may be desired.

[Rubber Chicken]

Thank you Vice, for your response. It seems I missed a few prior points about how IND pilots would use stations.
Sorry if I steered the topic into a some redundancy when it comes to explaining proposed mechanics.


I do apologize for this as you did just state that a split thread type rep system wasn't a big consideration, but I'd like to post ideas that may still be usable.
Please consider this as brainstorming and pardon any disorganized thoughts and/or loopholes....

*As far as IND rep is concerned, I think that the biggest combat restriction could possibly occur if there was a global ALC/FDN/IND rep thread scale type rating.
For example:
Killing too many FDN when operating as IND will result in losing your IND status and defaulting you to ALC and vice versa.

*The possible advantage of IND would be to play both sides to one's advantage.
Example:
Reducing ALC ships in a territory strengthens FDN's control position relative to the ALC/FDN forces currently in the system and vice versa.

However, there should come a point where the factions consider your actions to be so obvious and public that an IND pilot can no longer play the double agent shell game and your tag defaults to the faction you've 'worked' for the most.
If you tick off both factions simultaneously then your status should be RDR or PIR. (Implications of that status would need to be further defined)

Redeeming yourself with a faction or regaining IND status would (as I envision it) not simply be a matter of killing the appropriate ships en-masse.
While going after RDR ships helps, as does killing your enemy's enemy, dissipation of bad rep over time (but not fully) and community service (non-combat contracts) should be the way to regain 'neutral' IND status.

War Zone combat and contracts should help cement and reinforce an IND starting status, but won't impress the other faction(s) beyond taking a neutral view of you. If you are aligned with a ALC or FDN, then it's business as usual regarding Warzone combat and rep rewards - if any.

If you chose a faction instead of IND at the start, and turn traitor, then PIR/RDR should be the default category you fall into leaving IND out of the mix.

----
Sadly that's all I have time for at the moment. Still I hope there's something in here that can be used,expanded upon, or tweaked into a usable piece of the solution.

Oh... And I'd like to see rare "DarkNet" contracts at stations. Concept: You land at (let's say) an ALC station and look at the contract board. You notice a contract that states: FDN is looking for pilots for a one-time operation from this (ALC) station. FDN will not be responsible for personal harm and will disavow any knowledge of your mission (unless it suits us). (Shows mission details and offered payout) Due to the hacked nature of this transmission, you have 30 seconds to decide.

[Marvin]

It's beginning to sound like the IND option will require its own manual. Which, considering how many players never read the current "manual" ... doesn't seem very promising (as far as it concerns players understanding the ROE).

[Rubber Chicken]

I see your point Marv.
I was only putting some ideas out.
But, let's face it. IND is basically the "faction that isn't really a faction" faction, and there's probably some issues re: reputation mechanics and other loopholes that need to be sorted.

[DaveK]

Been unavailable for a week or so, so I'm still absorbing the recent discussions here! Lots of interesting ideas on offer. I'm looking forward to how the discussion develops.

As many of you know, one of my sources of pleasure in Vice's games is trying to consistently explain how everything works with 'real' science (admittedly extrapolated at times, but we have to explain jump tech somehow! . I also try to include the background political/social/cultural setup of all three species. So here's a few first thoughts about some of the implications allowing IND players to even exist in the Evoverse in EL's time ...

Will the be IND NPC characters as well? Logically there should be some. How will they behave? Will they just potter around trading or doing contracts or exploring? Do NPC actually do contracts - have they ever done so? I guess we couldn't tell if they were exploring or not, unless they had info to trade that wasn't commonly available.

Given the background history from EM (and earlier Starwraith games) with regards the Fed/Alliance hot, warm and cold war phases, where Alliance and Fed only really came together to fight the Vonari, any player could be an Indie - as opposed to being a member of a clan. That was what the game was about - independent mercenaries making their living solo or as part of a clan and helping keep the Vonari under control. Historically, the fact that many, if not most, Indie mercs rallied to the flag to help defeat the Vonari incursions is part of the long term history of Evochron.

In the half millennium since EM it seems that the Fed/Alc Civil war hotted up and became very destructive, with systems being decimated and the economies and technological development of both side suffering devastating set backs. With the fall of the clans, mercs became the de facto fighting forces for the two factions. It might have been the other way round - mercs became so involved with the fed or alc factions that clans petered out, becoming redundant. Mercs are the main fighting force taking systems away from the opposition. Hence we are given a choice of faction to join at the start of the game. In EL, taking over opposing faction systems is a major part (for many players at least, it would seem) of gameplay. The hot civil war is still bubbling along merrily to the extent that you can be attacked on sight in a hostile system and are banned for trading or even entering stations.

So my question is; Would either faction tolerate independent pilots or would they consider them to be traitors to the ongoing cause? If they were tolerated would that be likely to extend to allowing players to build Independent stations and cities in a faction's territory? If Alc and Fed pilots could use IND stations they would in effect become sanctuaries in an opposing faction's system, allowing refuelling and repairs and the build up of an attacking force. Logically if IND pilots can dock in any faction station, reciprocal rights would have to be offered. Again, realistically would a faction really permit this?

IND players could (likely would?) group together for mutual protection and joint activities. In effect form clans. Within the background history of the sequence of games, is it likely that the two still bitterly fighting factions would allow IND players to 'own' systems or amass a large, well armed and equipped force?

[Rubber Chicken]

I suppose the same could be asked about IMG. Also, why not just call IND - IMG? What would really be the fundamental difference in the label?

As far as other factions being tolerant of independents goes, ALC Admiral Randoran McNelson, Chief of Civilian Relations and Pacification - Sapphire, went on record with the Sapphire People's News Feed and was quoted as saying, "As long as they stick to washing windows and delivering pizzas... we'll tolerate them."

[DaveK]

I suppose the same could be asked about IMG. Also, why not just call IND - IMG? What would really be the fundamental difference in the label?

As far as other factions being tolerant of independents goes, ALC Admiral Randoran McNelson, Chief of Civilian Relations and Pacification - Sapphire, went on record with the Sapphire People's News Feed and was quoted as saying, "As long as they stick to washing windows and delivering pizzas... we'll tolerate them."

A few more thoughts:

In the historical context even if some pilots decided to be IND, such pilots would be pariahs rather than welcomed everywhere - traitors, cowards, possibly spies ... unless ... they have a special role within the game that gives them credibility and hence acceptability to both factions and their citizens. Here are a couple of examples off the top of my head, not at all thought through in terms of what players are asking for or for the impact on the game code and gameplay;

This method has an ongoing commitment to maintain IND status. Pilots who focus on defending against the Vonari rather then supporting a faction's progress in the war. IND pilots would have to carry out a specified number of contracts in a warzone and/or gain a specified number of Vonari kills per specified time period to earn and keep their IND status and be acceptable to the citizens of both factions of the Evoverse; The Navy are happy because they can focus on kicking the other faction's butt - the citizens could view them a lone heroes defending the systems from Vonari incursions. Since Vonari are seen in main systems in EL perhaps more Vonari incursions would allow IND to operate in system as much as or even more than warzones, justifying their general welcome in gated systems.

This method has a target hurdle to earn permanent IND status. Pilots who have earned their right to be IND (a bit like mil service to earn citizenship in Starship Troopers but with a mirror outcome ). Pilots would have to carry out a specified number of contracts against Vonari and for their faction and/or gain a certain bank balance and/or earn a specified mil and/or civ rank. The pilots could then either be awarded 'freedom' for their achievements or could buy an IND licence for a substantial part of their savings. Somewhere in that mix Marvin might create an epic quest that players would have to complete as part of their right of passage to IND status. The hurdle could be set at whatever height makes for optimum gameplay/satisfaction.

Either way thought would still be needed as to any limitations put on IND activities, but since they would be seen as lonesome heroes there could be 'hero' type contracts available only to IND pilots to balance the activities that being IND would of necessity take away from players

[DaveK]

It's beginning to sound like the IND option will require its own manual. Which, considering how many players never read the current "manual" ... doesn't seem very promising (as far as it concerns players understanding the ROE).

Reading the manual might be one of the hurdles to gaining an IND licence

[DaveK]

Oh... And I'd like to see rare "DarkNet" contracts at stations. Concept: You land at (let's say) an ALC station and look at the contract board. You notice a contract that states: FDN is looking for pilots for a one-time operation from this (ALC) station. FDN will not be responsible for personal harm and will disavow any knowledge of your mission (unless it suits us). (Shows mission details and offered payout) Due to the hacked nature of this transmission, you have 30 seconds to decide.

A very neat idea - any ideas as to what such contracts might look like?

[Rubber Chicken]

Oh... And I'd like to see rare "DarkNet" contracts at stations. Concept: You land at (let's say) an ALC station and look at the contract board. You notice a contract that states: FDN is looking for pilots for a one-time operation from this (ALC) station. FDN will not be responsible for personal harm and will disavow any knowledge of your mission (unless it suits us). (Shows mission details and offered payout) Due to the hacked nature of this transmission, you have 30 seconds to decide.

A very neat idea - any ideas as to what such contracts might look like?

One Idea I had was a variation of the Distress Call - Destroy Inbound Asteroids mission.
"Faction A (system owner) has assembled an emergency fleet (AI) to destroy asteroids inbound to their planet's surface. Since it would be far more cost efficient for Faction B (versus bombing) to let the asteroids destroy enemy infrastructure for us, we need that fleet eliminated and the asteroids must reach their destination intact. We can then pass a portion of the savings on to you!"

----

I do like DaveK's idea of having to 'earn' IND status. It's kind of analagous to Roman gladiators seeking to win the wooden sword. Since, it seems, most other players interested in a 3rd party faction want a create-profile-and-fly type of setup, I think I might be one of the few who does like it.

After some consideration, I've been revisiting thinking of said 3rd party faction in terms of Raider/Pirate.

Advantage:
Experimental technology gleaned from the wreckage of a prototype Vonari ship allow Raiders/Pirates to transmit false Friend/Foe signals to all local ships and bases.
*The drawback is that ships and bases can still ID you visually by your ship's 'mugshot'. Get too close to a major faction ship and they might still turn hostile to you. Dock at stations without cloaking or owning a station licence, and they might also turn against you. "Welcome to Walbase! Get your s*** and get out!"

Neutral:
ALL Raider/Pirate actions only serve to reinforce the system owner's control.
*Reason: Local propaganda instantly associates any action against the system owner as enemy d-baggery and reinforces patriotism in the populace. "The enemy is too cowardly to not fight dirty! They have to hire pirates to do their dirty work!"
Any action against the system owner's enemy is propagandized as a heart-warming good Samaritan story.
*Secretly the system owner is willing to let you skim local shipping as long as they can occasionally hire you to covertly handle their less-than-ethical aspects of the war. Hence, the reason local stations and ships have a chance of not becoming hostile even if they visually ID you.

Disadvantage:
Disadvantageous starting point. (~Still has adequate planets/resources)
* "How did the Raiders/Pirates come across that aforementioned "prototype Vonari False RFID system"?", you ask. Well, it's because the R/P home system is in the backwaters of uncharted space next to a system acting as a light/medium garrison for our neighbors from Hell, the Vonari.
That nifty bit of Von RFID tech is all they've been able to get their hands on however.
Otherwise, the system's base econ only allows residents to eek a living. Tech level is barely enough to leave for other systems without seeming like rowing a wooden boat from Norway to England without a follow-on ship of support crew close by.
The major faction only keeps enough of their people there to keep their flag on the pole and Von incursions can happen.

Well, that's what I have so far. I hope some of it is closer to being on-point.

[WeirdWill]

My impression or imagination was that you are an "indy" per default. You have to choose a faction but you're not in military service or otherwise conscripted to take part into a war. I see it more like a citizenship or Nation you were born into.

You may choose to join the military mission and missions for them which could even award you with military ranks and ships. And the setting is actually described as some sort of cold war with battles on the frontier and not a full fledged ongoing war
(because the attrition is too high after a long period of fighting). They even work together against the Vonari if necessary.

That's why I thought about giving Alliance and Federation pilots access to territories of the other faction with some penalties e.g. need to pay high docking fees, no access to euipment, bullied by having to pay fines to the military (or getting attacked) and of course not being allowed to join their military. The advantage would be trading and It could allow you to do missions which aren't all in-sector and you have to travel through the "other" factions territory.

And if you choose to do military service for your faction it's over and you will get attacked by sight.

But such a setting would require pirates to keep it interesting.

[Marvin]

Errand of Mercy: Spock claims to be a merchant of trillium. After "confirming" the claim, the Klingon commander lets Spock go about his business. What could be a better guideline for IND? Otherwise the manual is beginning to rival War and Peace in thickness.

[Rubber Chicken]

Otherwise the manual is beginning to rival War and Peace in thickness.

....And we're still only in the 'throw it at the wall and see what sticks' phase!


It's been a few days since Vice has weighed-in on the subject. Perhaps he's already working on his own vision of the solution or maybe he's contemplating the discourse we are having on the subject and picking the bits he likes best.

[DaveK]

Hmmmmmm ... I will confess that the following is intended to be a little contentious - I'd really like to hear a missing part of the discussion - exactly why people want to buy EL (or in he past EM) for what it is (was) and then immediately want to change it into another of their favourite games or add a large chunk of another of their favourite games. And I also want to see how easy it is to use colour to split complex sentences into easier to follow chunks. (PM me with your comments please ) Note to Vice - the evil smiley doesn't work

We've had the arguments for:

I would love to fly a cap ship (buy Battlecruiser 3000AD or whatever it's called - (I did; great experience despite the bugs, great fun but not a solo merc game))
I would love to stomp around in a battle mech fighting other battle mechs (there are several excellent games that let you do just that)
I would love to be able to play the NPC enemy and be a baddy in the game

... and so on ...

From what I remember in EM discussions, some/many players wanted the 'having/being pirates' / 'being Vonari' / 'flying cap ships' etc added to EM because the Clans/Indie split wasn't deep/wide enough (and wasn't working as intended) because (as well as the argument above, which seems to come down to ... I really want be a cap ship pilot / play a cap ship strategy game / play a mech warrior game) ...

the clan structure was too diffuse for the number of players spread (in RL) across the (RL) world time zones (leading to several one person clans (an oxymoron?) created for economic reasons, I suspect) ...

We had quite a few loooong forum discussions about why the (free-form) clan system wasn't working and a consensus formed around having far fewer 'factions' (replacing the clans at that time) being available to 'concentrate' the players' options. Several options were presented and discussed (with 'red'/'blue' or even (gasp) Fed / Alc being suggested) ...

Vice went with the replacement of Clans with Fed/Alc factions - you are on one side or the other - and I have to respectfully disagree here with WierdWill's comment - My impression or imagination was that you are an "indy" per default. You have to choose a faction but you're not in military service or otherwise conscripted to take part into a war.. You do have to choose a side in EL. EM --> EL history explains the downfall of clans as a result of the rise of Fed/Alc factions; basically you are either Alc or Fed because Mercs (as opposed to Indies) have become the de facto 'pointy end' of Fed/Alc conflict. Being neutral is simply not an option - you cannot create a pilot profile other than as Fed or Alc.

We now have (as was intended) real combat between Alc and Fed factions. And - overcoming a very big problem issue with EM clans - there are no worries about opposition territory being attacked and destroyed when real players are offline because NPC are also Fed/Alc and do the attacking defending whether players are there or not (and spectacular NPC battles near stations are a not uncommon firework display).

I can see a cyclic argument here -

1: we want more player faction options (involving combat) than are available to extend player experiences ...
2: Vice creates more faction options ...
3: the faction membership gets too spread out (in RL) to make player combat feasible (time zone dilution) ...
4: we want fewer player faction options than are available to extend player experiences...
5: Vice creates fewer faction options ...
6: GOTO 1 (with fond memories of 1980's BASIC spaghetti programming )

So if anyone can unpick this cycle, I'd be very interested (and very happy! ) to hear their thoughts. I spent all my EM playing time either as an Indie or as part of a Clan (HB) that effectively was a group of Indies helping all and sundry in MP who needed help, advice or fuel.

I love the idea of being NOT (FED OR ALC) (ie being IND) but I strongly suspect that to make it happen it needs to be explained and justified within game history to the community and (more importantly) to Vice

[Marvin]

Per my previous post, if you were born on Vulcan then, by circumstance, you would be part of the UFP (United Federation of Planets). You, therefore, could not trade with Klingon planets ... be you part of Starfleet (military) or just a member of the UFP (civilian). Organia, being unaffiliated, was open to both the Klingon Empire and the UFP. Ergo, a civilian Vulcan could ply his wares unmolested.

As to where that gets me ... I have no idea.