The current penalty for doing 1 illegal task seems rather harsh if you have reached Revered reputation. (especially for Opportunist/Criminal career)
Doing another 400 DW to get back seems....kinda overkill.
60 or 70? sure, even 100.
400? for one misclick? Yeah, a little much.
-N (just for consideration)
Re: Reputation Loss by Bandall at 204.64/19:593 GCT
Perhaps this is a place where bonds can be spent. Spend X Bonds and your latest transgression is swept away in a clerical error. Suggest a sliding scale where higher reputations require less bonds than lower reputations. That would pretty much match the way it works in the "real world."
Re: Re: Reputation Loss by Dotsent at 204.66/57:635 GCT
I like this "reverse reputation loss for bonds" suggestion a lot. It could also follow the same price increase logic as extra rations: e.g. X bonds for first reverse, 2X for second and so on, reset to X once a day. This would both allow for correcting eventual misclicks and discourage folk from doing to many illegal tasks.
Re: Re: Re: Reputation Loss by Bandall at 204.67/01:094 GCT
Thank you for the positive feedback. I added this idea to my separate post on additional uses for bonds. I would appreciate feedback on the suggestions I made in that post. Someday I hope to look at the instructions on formatting, so it doesn't read like a James Joyce novel written after a three day binge.
Re: Reputation Loss by Brovnik at 204.70/69:917 GCT
Agreed the penalty is too high.
I am all for Revered status being hard to obtain in the first place, but the gain / loss seem asymmetric due to the cap at 100% (assuming that is how it is actually modelled). e.g. I can't build up an excess of rep such that a single -ve on a task will keep me at Revered.
Re: Re: Reputation Loss by GummyBear at 204.73/55:549 GCT (edited by GummyBear at 204.73/85:191 GCT)
I think we should be able to filter out high risk and illegal tasks from the list of career tasks. This will prevent accidentally clicking on them.
I also think that we should always have the option to do safe jobs that are legal for several stats, even if the rewards are smaller. Having the ability to do multiples of a task would also be nice.
That being said, I wish discreet work was less bothersome. I am not a big fan of the numerous clicking and scrolling to complete one discreet job.
I seem to remember that there was talk of a more user friendly UI with less scrolling up and down. I wonder how that is coming along.
Re: Reputation Loss by Shadow at 204.80/98:202 GCT
Added to Trello.
Re: Reputation Loss by Grahm at 204.93/71:879 GCT (edited by Grahm at 204.93/71:945 GCT)
Possible patches:
a) higher (invisible to players) granulation of reputation
b) slowly recovering "current opinion" stat - works on top of reputation, like an additional slowly-recovering shield. It starts e.g. at 2, and is decreased by 1 every time you get sent to jail. Once it reaches 0, your reputation takes a hit. It recovers 1 point per day or per 20 DW? Numbers I've given are off the hat, but you get the idea.
c) reputation_armor of sort? there are plenty of possibilities:
- hire some PR guys to cover your next reputation loss (single use) - for credits - hire some PR guys to cover your rep losses for a given time (day/week/etc) - for bonds - hire some PR guys to recover from your last loss of the reputation - for bondsConvenient additions:
a) let us hide illegal tasks?
b) let us turn on/off some warnings about starting an illegal task
Re: Reputation Loss by Shadow at 204.96/82:810 GCT
Just my 0.02cr: I do not think reputation with any affiliation/faction should improve at all when one does nothing.
Re: Re: Reputation Loss by Grahm at 204.97/02:472 GCT
In the idea I've given it's not the reputation that's being recovered. It's that shield on top of the reputation.
Re: Reputation Loss by moritz at 205.06/90:089 GCT
Another option would be to introduce more ways to gain reputation.
Things like spending credits on charity, significantly boosting a station's economy, and maybe other things.