Not Implemented Align neutrals to match faction standards for staging up and down from Combatant/Special Forces states.

Chiraka said:

Yes ,I think there should be rewards but the current PV is only working for the mechanics to participate. The overall idea is to bring balance to everyone, rewards aren't addressed in this PV but should definitely be discussed. Please include a PV if there was one already created so i can check it out. The way the system work right now is that neutrals are temporally joining one side it even says imperial combatant/special forces. At that point you should follow the same rules is all this player voice says. The benefit of being neutral is being able to flip sides without having to go through the 7 day process. As with switching side though it would reset you just like it does for anyone else but what's even the point of not joining a side at that point. Thanks

Click to expand...

Agreed here. I'm down with rewards for neutrals participating, but things intimately tied to the GCW as rewards or neutral features don't make sense when they're only able to temporarily join a side, not fight for their own side.

Advocating for neutral versions of things directly tied to GCW should only occur if they are worked into a fully formed third faction, under which all three factions can attack one another freely as SFs. Without that, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to try and shoehorn in things like neutral static bases or neutral-controlled cities. It would make an even bigger mess of the flagging mechanics to try and give them that kind of GCW stuff.


Considering the amount of dev work turning neutrals into a third faction would be, it's not likely to happen. It's also not appropriate for the setting: yes, there were neutral factions, but the battle for control of the Galaxy was always between the Alliance and the Empire. That was always clear.

This PV is clearly not created or supported in good faith as the same people calling for these changes were against changes that would only effect neutral players. I very much doubt it would have been created if the cadre of neutrals weren't that great at pvp, or they weren't grouped up into a guild.

Regardless, I think you are going about this the wrong way. Instead of nerfing (not fixing, let's be honest with your intentions) neutrals, buff the others. 1 min flag up and down for rebs and imps, no flashing. If we wanted to approach this from a realism standpoint, like a previous post did with a comparison to viet cong, this would make sense for non-uniformed factioned players to not give out some big warning that they're about to attack you either.

While we're at it, let's remove the intel pad and give SF flagged players an incentive to stay that way regardless of what they're doing. Say if you're flagged you get an opportune chance buff, helping you get drops in pve. Currently with the intel pad people still would not flag SF just running around because they will be pretty much instantly hunted. Without the intel pad people would be more open to being flagged all the time, but it is a double edged sword because the intel pad can make pvp that otherwise wouldn't happen. That said the biggest fights seem to have either been orchestrated between the two parties or at city invasions anyway.

Or, you can change nothing since this complaint has an expiration date. The people "abusing" this, as it's been put, only do it for more pvp, not just to have some kind of advantage. Their intent was to be able to flag reb if there were imp players or vice versa, but only rebs are flagging up at their active times. If no third faction is created, they will go reb or imp when officer ranks with permanent sf flagging are released for the permanent flag as well as the buffs that come with the rank.

If anything, you should advocate for a third faction with officer ranks so you can gang up on these evil neutrals with the opposite faction. Then everyone will be happy.

If they're only doing it for "more PvP," not sure why they would argue against changes to flagging down. Flagging down is the number one, most fool-proof way to reduce the amount of PvP you experience. It falls behind only... Well, logging out of the server.

Chiraka said:

Yes ,I think there should be rewards but the current PV is only working for the mechanics to participate. The overall idea is to bring balance to everyone, rewards aren't addressed in this PV but should definitely be discussed. Please include a PV if there was one already created so i can check it out. The way the system work right now is that neutrals are temporally joining one side it even says imperial combatant/special forces. At that point you should follow the same rules is all this player voice says. The benefit of being neutral is being able to flip sides without having to go through the 7 day process. As with switching side though it would reset you just like it does for anyone else but what's even the point of not joining a side at that point. Thanks

Click to expand...

Creating a PV for changing the way the mechanics work to make it so Neutrals have more negatives and no positives to flagging up is idiotic and makes this PV feel half baked. Neutrals join up as FACTIONAL HELPERS, they get 0 benefits from this. It really seems like that A.) you haven't played as a neutral or pvp'd on the ground and B.) that this really just a way to force people on the server to have to join rebel or imp.

Also this is hilariously funny with the "Oh well they should be added," Should be doesn't mean crap and you're the one trying to get backing for your PV. You should have included these rewards in your PV cause as it stands right now the support for this PV is made up of people who don't like a specific group of players and would see the rest of the people who like playing neutral so they can fight with both their imperial friends and rebel friends in game punished for your displeasure.

Y'all are arguing over the importance of "flagging mechanics" Honestly they don't matter if there isn't equal rewards for everyone. This honestly feels like you're demanding a fake balance right now to try and force specific players to do what you want and trying to disguise it as "for the sake of maintaining the purity of the GCW theme of pvp". If y'all gonna continue like that, you should just make a PV asking the devs to perma flag everyone and we'll play this like EvE online or games where everyone is always perma flagged and remove the intellpad for tracking player positions. That's the only true way to keep it both fair and "Maintaining the Purity of the GCW theme" since at this time frame of the game it's active warfare between the factions.

RogerDabbit said:

If they're only doing it for "more PvP," not sure why they would argue against changes to flagging down. Flagging down is the number one, most fool-proof way to reduce the amount of PvP you experience. It falls behind only... Well, logging out of the server.

Click to expand...

I don't see too much opposition to tweaks of the flag down timers specifically. I think the opposition is rightly pointing out that this PV was posted in bad faith. When the entire PV is related to ground PVP and is being promoted in space and entertainer discords as "standing up to toxic people" and claims that this system is being "abused" I tend to look at the suggestion as a whole with a large dose of skepticism.

DEATH did go neutral solely to engage in more pvp. The tick down timer especially would have minimal impact on pvp frequency. One minute or five minute tick down period hardly matters if there's a lack of people flagging up to begin with. But this still would take development time that can be used to do more useful things. Like Zekeon and I have both identified, this issue already has an expiration date. Officer ranks offer such strong rewards that almost all serious pvp players will pick a side. The only reason this is being brought up by Chiraka and promoted is because it's being used in bad faith to attack a group of players they do not like.

TheJokerofSocal said:

Creating a PV for changing the way the mechanics work to make it so Neutrals have more negatives and no positives to flagging up is idiotic and makes this PV feel half baked. Neutrals join up as FACTIONAL HELPERS, they get 0 benefits from this. It really seems like that A.) you haven't played as a neutral or pvp'd on the ground and B.) that this really just a way to force people on the server to have to join rebel or imp.

Also this is hilariously funny with the "Oh well they should be added," Should be doesn't mean crap and you're the one trying to get backing for your PV. You should have included these rewards in your PV cause as it stands right now the support for this PV is made up of people who don't like a specific group of players and would see the rest of the people who like playing neutral so they can fight with both their imperial friends and rebel friends in game punished for your displeasure.

Y'all are arguing over the importance of "flagging mechanics" Honestly they don't matter if there isn't equal rewards for everyone. This honestly feels like you're demanding a fake balance right now to try and force specific players to do what you want and trying to disguise it as "for the sake of maintaining the purity of the GCW theme of pvp". If y'all gonna continue like that, you should just make a PV asking the devs to perma flag everyone and we'll play this like EvE online or games where everyone is always perma flagged and remove the intellpad for tracking player positions. That's the only true way to keep it both fair and "Maintaining the Purity of the GCW theme" since at this time frame of the game it's active warfare between the factions.

Click to expand...

Least productive comment award goes to...

jacksabib said:

I don't see too much opposition to tweaks of the flag down timers specifically. I think the opposition is rightly pointing out that this PV was posted in bad faith. When the entire PV is related to ground PVP and is being promoted in space and entertainer discords as "standing up to toxic people" and claims that this system is being "abused" I tend to look at the suggestion as a whole with a large dose of skepticism.

DEATH did go neutral solely to engage in more pvp. The tick down timer especially would have minimal impact on pvp frequency. One minute or five minute tick down period hardly matters if there's a lack of people flagging up to begin with. But this still would take development time that can be used to do more useful things. Like Zekeon and I have both identified, this issue already has an expiration date. Officer ranks offer such strong rewards that almost all serious pvp players will pick a side. The only reason this is being brought up by Chiraka and promoted is because it's being used in bad faith to attack a group of players they do not like.

Click to expand...

So you think the changes are fine, you just don't like who introduced them?


I don't see any reason to maintain unintuitive inconsistency for the sake of a grudge. That's why I upvoted Kazhar's linked PV on invasion changes along with the PvP kill counter. Because whichever way the devs choose to take neutrals, it should remain consistent throughout every facet of the game's PvP systems. The GCW is the core of this game's PvP. It's the only way you can permanently flag for PvP. You cannot flag permanently *as a neutral* for PvP, you have to pick a side. That's why I feel like GCW specific items (i.e. static bases) should be reserved for Imp/Reb players. Trying to make those kinds of things work for a neutral faction that can only "help" one side or another would be a mess and unworkable.


Otherwise, why bother with overarching factions at all? Just make it Guild vs. Guild and remove all pretense. I am not opposed to an alternate reward track for neutrals who PvP, though. It just needs to reflect the real fact that neutral isn't a third faction in a three-way GCW war. If it were, they wouldn't have to pick a side to help.

As for the "expiration" date... What's the ETA on 2.0? Do we have one? Is it a year? More? If it's more than a year, I don't see it as very relevant to this discussion, personally.

RogerDabbit said:

So you think the changes are fine, you just don't like who introduced them?


I don't see any reason to maintain unintuitive inconsistency for the sake of a grudge.

Click to expand...

See second paragraph

jacksabib said:

See second paragraph


View attachment 381

Click to expand...

Sorry my dude, I'm one of those folks who hits reply then realizes I left out half my reasoning. I edited my prior post to ask about the timeline for 2.0 reference mention of an "expiration date" for these changes.

Runihura said:

Least productive comment award goes to...

Click to expand...

Nah u took that title already

RogerDabbit said:

So you think the changes are fine, you just don't like who introduced them?


I don't see any reason to maintain unintuitive inconsistency for the sake of a grudge. That's why I upvoted Kazhar's linked PV on invasion changes along with the PvP kill counter. Because whichever way the devs choose to take neutrals, it should remain consistent throughout every facet of the game's PvP systems. The GCW is the core of this game's PvP. It's the only way you can permanently flag for PvP. You cannot flag permanently *as a neutral* for PvP, you have to pick a side. That's why I feel like GCW specific items (i.e. static bases) should be reserved for Imp/Reb players. Trying to make those kinds of things work for a neutral faction that can only "help" one side or another would be a mess and unworkable.


Otherwise, why bother with overarching factions at all? Just make it Guild vs. Guild and remove all pretense. I am not opposed to an alternate reward track for neutrals who PvP, though. It just needs to reflect the real fact that neutral isn't a third faction in a three-way GCW war. If it were, they wouldn't have to pick a side to help.

As for the "expiration" date... What's the ETA on 2.0? Do we have one? Is it a year? More? If it's more than a year, I don't see it as very relevant to this discussion, personally.

Click to expand...

I would have hoped since you edited your post that you would realize that your first statement seems like projection. I don't dislike Chiraka. I'm just calling a spade a spade.

I get the desire for consistency, rational people can disageee on how pressing the changes are. I just feel like the impact is minor and changes are on the timeline already. Rallying the troops to prioritize these changes to "fight back against toxic players" is disrespectful of the time that the devs volunteer.

If this discussion was framed and handled as a list of changes to go onto the revamp, I'd be more willing to discuss. But saying it isn't just a pet cause to punish a certain group of people would just be pretending.

jacksabib said:

I would have hoped since you edited your post that you would realize that your first statement seems like projection. I don't dislike Chiraka. I'm just calling a spade a spade.

I get the desire for consistency, rational people can disageee on how pressing the changes are. I just feel like the impact is minor and changes are on the timeline already. Rallying the troops to prioritize these changes to "fight back against toxic players" is disrespectful of the time that the devs volunteer.

If this discussion was framed and handled as a list of changes to go onto the revamp, I'd be more willing to discuss. But saying it isn't just a pet cause to punish a certain group of people would just be pretending.

Click to expand...

I edited it before seeing your response as I didn't reload the page, my bad.

My position is: regardless of the original intent, if it seems like a positive change, it should not be discarded by mere virtue of who suggested it.

Many (most?) changes to things like open world flagging are to avoid abuse of said open world flagging. All of those are done with a certain player group in mind. That doesn't mean the group consciously decided to abuse the system, it just means the devs realized a way in which the system allows players to manipulate it in unforeseen ways that are detrimental to the overall health of the game.

I could see this PV, the PvP counter, and the invasions changes as things Aconite and Co lump into 2.0 if they're accepted, specifically since it's a PvP focused update. However, if 2.0 is an indeterminate amount of time (or over a year), that seems like a long time for issues to languish that the devs and community agrees have a real impact on the server.

RogerDabbit said:

I edited it before seeing your response as I didn't reload the page, my bad.

My position is: regardless of the original intent, if it seems like a positive change, it should not be discarded by mere virtue of who suggested it.

Many (most?) changes to things like open world flagging are to avoid abuse of said open world flagging. All of those are done with a certain player group in mind. That doesn't mean the group consciously decided to abuse the system, it just means the devs realized a way in which the system allows players to manipulate it in unforeseen ways that are detrimental to the overall health of the game.

I could see this PV, the PvP counter, and the invasions changes as things Aconite and Co lump into 2.0 if they're accepted, specifically since it's a PvP focused update. However, if 2.0 is an indeterminate amount of time (or over a year), that seems like a long time for issues to languish that the devs and community agrees have a real impact on the server.

Click to expand...

Except this wasn't an issue before hand, until a handful of players that are disliked by a portion of the server started doing their PvP as a neutral guild. Which is where my issue comes from with this. There was no problem until people who are disliked by people including OP started playing as factional helpers, now they want Factional Helpers to be a faction with none of the benefits of a faction, when they were already not receiving any benefits besides being able to freely join/drop out when they want.

Which is why I find this PV to be idiotic, this has literally nothing to do with balancing especially since there's already a small community for PVP on this server to begin with that has almost no one doing it even before this "Neutral Factional Helper Exploit". All it does is force players to play how other players want them to without giving them anything in return. If the community truly felt this was needed, an actual well documented PV like the one Kazhar linked would have been written. Not a 4 bullet point "Make Neutrals a psuedo faction with no Faction benefits just because"

TheJokerofSocal said:

Except this wasn't an issue before hand, until a handful of players that are disliked by a portion of the server started doing their PvP as a neutral guild. Which is where my issue comes from with this. There was no problem until people who are disliked by people including OP started playing as factional helpers, now they want Factional Helpers to be a faction with none of the benefits of a faction, when they were already not receiving any benefits besides being able to freely join/drop out when they want.

Which is why I find this PV to be idiotic, this has literally nothing to do with balancing especially since there's already a small community for PVP on this server to begin with that has almost no one doing it even before this "Neutral Factional Helper Exploit". All it does is force players to play how other players want them to without giving them anything in return. If the community truly felt this was needed, an actual well documented PV like the one Kazhar linked would have been written. Not a 4 bullet point "Make Neutrals a psuedo faction with no Faction benefits just because"

Click to expand...

Flagging systems aren't rewards or punishments. They're frameworks for how players enter and exit PvP status. The timers, specifically, aren't rewards or punishments.

If the complaints from neutrals is having a dedicated rewards track, that is a separate issue from this one and could even be implemented alongside this one. Seems like conflating things to use the flagging system to "make up" for a lack of rewards. And besides that, do neutrals truly feel having a special flagging framework is a "reward" for being neutral? That seems... Strange to me, but I'm not everyone.

I'm a newer player, so I'm looking at it like this: if a new Imp or Reb gets into a fight, loses to neutrals, only to return from the cloner and find those neutrals have flagged down without even leaving the region, while they must either die or go find an NPC..... Do you think that *wouldn't* be confusing for a new player? Do you think the differences in timers is an intuitive feature that would make sense to new players? Do you feel confusing players new to PvP won't actually discourage them from continuing to PvP?

What's the end goal here from the opposed neutrals? How is it any less petty than the accusations against the OP? This is what I meant by a circular firing squad earlier in the thread.

RogerDabbit said:

Flagging systems aren't rewards or punishments. They're frameworks for how players enter and exit PvP status. The timers, specifically, aren't rewards or punishments.

If the complaints from neutrals is having a dedicated rewards track, that is a separate issue from this one and could even be implemented alongside this one. Seems like conflating things to use the flagging system to "make up" for a lack of rewards. And besides that, do neutrals truly feel having a special flagging framework is a "reward" for being neutral? That seems... Strange to me, but I'm not everyone.

I'm a newer players, so I'm looking at it like this: if a new Imp or Reb gets into a fight, loses to neutrals, only to return from the cloner and find those neutrals have flagged down without even leaving the region, while they must either die or go find an NPC..... Do you think that *wouldn't* be confusing for a new player? Do you think the differences in timers is an intuitive feature that would make sense to new players? Do you feel confusing players new to PvP won't actually discourage them from continuing to PvP?

What's the end goal here from the opposed neutrals? How is it any less petty than the accusations against the OP? This is what I meant by a circular firing squad earlier in the thread.

Click to expand...

You DO realize that both factions can flag down by using /pvp right?

Right??

RogerDabbit said:

Flagging systems aren't rewards or punishments. They're frameworks for how players enter and exit PvP status. The timers, specifically, aren't rewards or punishments.

If the complaints from neutrals is having a dedicated rewards track, that is a separate issue from this one and could even be implemented alongside this one. Seems like conflating things to use the flagging system to "make up" for a lack of rewards. And besides that, do neutrals truly feel having a special flagging framework is a "reward" for being neutral? That seems... Strange to me, but I'm not everyone.

I'm a newer players, so I'm looking at it like this: if a new Imp or Reb gets into a fight, loses to neutrals, only to return from the cloner and find those neutrals have flagged down without even leaving the region, while they must either die or go find an NPC..... Do you think that *wouldn't* be confusing for a new player? Do you think the differences in timers is an intuitive feature that would make sense to new players? Do you feel confusing players new to PvP won't actually discourage them from continuing to PvP?

What's the end goal here from the opposed neutrals? How is it any less petty than the accusations against the OP? This is what I meant by a circular firing squad earlier in the thread.

Click to expand...

If it takes u a whole minute to re-engage from the cloners in GCW fight for a city like Bestine/Coronet/etc , u weren't trying to actively PvP. I've already addressed the issue with people who Clone out of PvP zones to go get buffs and then come back later or just call it quits, which is why there's no point for a neutral to stay around if everyone calls it quits, since Any action a neutral does provides 0, I repeat nada to the GCW control factors.

You're talking like as though Neutrals actually get a benefit for staying around and waiting for people who ran away to come back, there's no benefit, there's no reward, neutrals get nothing out of pvp except getting to pvp in large groups instead of 1 on 1 fights and then go play other content afterwards without having to take X amount of time to travel to a location to find a recruiter and then wait 5 minutes to flag down.

It does seems highly reactionary. It's pretty obvious when someone shows up to PVP, and as is anyone can get on a speeder and flag down as they run away in a straight line. 4 minutes isn't going to change that, so it doesn't need to be changed.


The sandbox solution would be for another neutral guild to form and counter them