Hi team, dynamic relations can be hilarious at times

[chip56]

It will take time for the rep from missions to adjust. Any missions that were available before the patch will still offer the same rep increase, so it only effects newly created missions

No, that was in a game that i started on the beta. Exactly to ensure i could check if the xenon spam and rep swings are not left overs from before.

[Psynix]

Since i'm used to have good relations with everyone, i too need to get used to the DR yet.

The only real issue i have with them is that when i tried to get good relations with a faction, i noticed that they did not rise anymore.

So do i understamd that right that the reason for that seemingly is because my relations with the Pirates along with the Corsares are already at ist lowest (and therefore stuck) which means all Enemy Factions of them can not rise anymore because they are now stuck with them?

Which means i now have to track down the Dukes HQ to be able to send Agent there along with also getting better relations with the Pirates (which is a bit easier at least) and only when both like me more i can raise my standing with for example the Argons again (which are one of those that are stuck)?

Did you try using an agent to influence and increase notoriety? You can see how much of an improvement it will make. Im not sure about Pirate & Dukes relations being tied together, Im with enemies of both of them.

I think even in lore wise, Dukes & Pirates dont get along. Someone please correct me if Im wrong.

I did various (at least 10 each) Missions for Boron and Argon and also sent an agent to boron but the rep does not budge anymore (its at 98% at third highest level or something like that). The agent menu told me beforehand how much my rep will go up but after the mission was complete the rep did not change at all.

The only explanation i have is because of my bad reputations with Pirates and Dukes which are at lowest level with i think about 90% and seems to be stuck there as well (as in not getting any lower).
In some post i read that rep can get stuck for various faction if one faction is already at its highest or lowest. And while i think i understand why it happens it still does not make sense to me that i have to get better rep with pirates/dukes to get the argons/borons to like me better

Concerning the lore there are actually explanations in the in game encyclopedia where its stated that pirate and dukes are allies. The only they have actually

[Klord]

I did various (at least 10 each) Missions for Boron and Argon and also sent an agent to boron but the rep does not budge anymore (its at 98% at third highest level or something like that). The agent menu told me beforehand how much my rep will go up but after the mission was complete the rep did not change at all.

Sometimes faction reputation is capped at a certain level until you become enemies with said factions enemies.
Ex: Argon and Boron rep soft capped at 98% third highest level no matter how many missions you do or agents used until you become enemies with Split and Paranid. It only starts to rise when you get to negative reputation levels with Split and Paranid.

I was in top reputation level with Argon and Boron. But had to become enemies for some time to gain rep with Split. I badly wanted to buy that Acinonyx Prototype. I personally dislike this reputation system. Its need a bit of tweaking IMO.

[Psynix]

Sometimes faction reputation is capped at a certain level until you become enemies with said factions enemies.
Ex: Argon and Boron rep soft capped at 98% third highest level no matter how many missions you do or agents used until you become enemies with Split and Paranid. It only starts to rise when you get to negative reputation levels with Split and Paranid.

I was in top reputation level with Argon and Boron. But had to become enemies for some time to gain rep with Split. I badly wanted to buy that Acinonyx Prototype. I personally dislike this reputation system. Its need a bit of tweaking IMO.

Oh thx for the Info! Its still a bit strange though since i was actually enemy with the split for a long time so i guess the Boron should have been able to rise? On the other hand i have max reputation with the paranid since the end of the story mission (even though i chose Boron route - which actually dropped Boron reputation quite a lot which seemed odd to me).

Anyone has any ideas how to efficiently DECREASE faction rep aside from destroying ships? I don't have enough firepower yet to do much damage - even with an M6 this could take a while...
It seems agents can only increase faction rep as far as i noticed.

I still try to understand the rep system and see if i can work with it.
I would honestly feel bad to lash out at it when the mods did invest so much time in FL. I'm grateful for all their hard work!

[laux]

Anyone has any ideas how to efficiently DECREASE faction rep aside from destroying ships? I don't have enough firepower yet to do much damage - even with an M6 this could take a while...
It seems agents can only increase faction rep as far as i noticed.

There are also espionage tasks in the Diplomacy menu.
With these, lowering your rank should work well.

[Midnightknight]

There are also espionage tasks in the Diplomacy menu.
With these, lowering your rank should work well.

Not sure about that. I failed a thief mission in astreus HQ and was promoted in argon and broron rep ... So looks like this leads to weird behaviors.

[ExE22]

I realize that I'm probably in the minority here but I really like the dynamic relations feature. It transforms the diplomacy-aspect of the game from being nothing but a long, steady grind of getting all of the various factions up to whatever level I want / need them on into an active and changing component of the game.

While with the old system you could just maintain your positive relationships when you'd reached them through entirely passive means (basically not killing the faction you want to stay friendly with) now you need to take an active hand in managing your faction-relationships and cannot (as far as I can tell at least) stay very friendly with every single race at the same time.

This adds new challenges and layers to the game. You need to think ahead in terms of where you put your infrastructure, you need to have a plan for aquiring the upgrades/equipment/factories you can't get from the races that hates your guts (be it through the diplomatic agents, your own factories, stealing from transports etc.), you need to be prepared for a more hostile universe with not just pirates and xenos taking shots at you but entire races and so on.

The implementation might have a few rough edges although I've not experienced any of the massive and disproportionate reputation-swings that have been described here (could be be because my relationships with the various races are pretty far into the extremes, either they love me or want my head on a stick). All in all I really like both the concept and the implementation and I hope any changes to it ends up being more along the lines of tweaks and minor modifications and not a step back towards the X3 TC/AP relations-system.

[Klord]

Anyone has any ideas how to efficiently DECREASE faction rep aside from destroying ships? I don't have enough firepower yet to do much damage - even with an M6 this could take a while...
It seems agents can only increase faction rep as far as i noticed.

You can try capping their Supply TLs. Ask the said factions TL to move in to an unknown sector (I prefer the one adjacent to Legends home) and cap it. In addition to decreasing the reputation, you will train your marines & earn some credits.
By this way, you avoid any collateral damage as well. Because you dont have to kill any sector police.

All in all I really like both the concept and the implementation and I hope any changes to it ends up being more along the lines of tweaks and minor modifications and not a step back towards the X3 TC/AP relations-system.

I agree with this. Its need tweaking to make it less punishing. That would fix the frustration. If Teladi can stay friendly with all factions, why cant player be?

[Cycrow]

The Teladi are not actually friends with anyone except for NMMC. They are neutral with everyone else, ie Rank 0

[Klord]

The Teladi are not actually friends with anyone except for NMMC. They are neutral with everyone else, ie Rank 0

I would rather be neutral than be hostile.

I have a query,

If I claim a sector, does it have any implications on reputation.
Ex: I use the unclaimed sector adjacent to Legends home to capping TLs. If I claim the sector for myself, will I get major reputation drops for capping ships there from the respective faction?

In other words, what are the pros and cons of claiming sectors. Thank you.

[Thurak]

I am late to the party and so I haven't read all six pages here, please forgive me if I don't contribute anything new...

I just want to say that the dynamic relations in this form will probably drive me away from a game I otherwise enjoy very much (great work!).

As a Boron I want to be able to be friends with everyone.

I don't think a negative impact on Split relations should happen at all when I transported a Boron dude around half a galaxy away.

I am not opposed to a bit of juggling relations, but at the end I need a way to do missions and also have positive relations with all major races. It's really not optional for my enjoyment of the game.

[chip56]

Right now i am trying with modding it myself to half the rep malus for enemies. That feels better. With most of the missions giving reasonable notoriety in 1.1 it feels like a bit of work to juggle but doable.

[Snafu_X3]

It has been stated several times by DEVs that the relationship gains/losses will be tuned for better gameplay in forthcoming patches, including the imminent next one

[Korventh]

Please, devs, make this dynamic relations thing OPTIONAL. It's really frustrating to no end to play like this.

Also until the patch arrives, if anyone wants, here is my modified Globals file - it disables dynamic relations so you can enjoy the game as a pacifist.
https://pastebin.com/qW6cAYfD

[Ramdat]

I modded my game and I can't earn achievements now which also sucks.

You could use Steam Achievement Manager to unlock the achievements in Steam at the same time they are unlocked in-game. It would be fairly troublesome though, and a real shame that such a thing is needed. I don't understand the decision to prevent achievements from modified games, especially considering they've made a big effort to improve modding support, it is easy to cheat achievements, and this is a singleplayer game.

[Korventh]

[quote=Ramdat post_id=5054476 time=1621124529 user_id=469984]You could use Steam Achievement Manager to unlock the achievements in Steam at the same time they are unlocked in-game. It's fairly troublesome though, and a real shame that such a thing is needed. I don't understand the decision to prevent achievements from modified games, especially considering it is easy to cheat achievements, this is a singleplayer game, and they've made a big effort to improve modding support.[/quote]

I wouldn't want to mess with tools like that as they seem to be in the grey area like that card farming bot. Basically, you risk your steam account using stuff like that.

[Ramdat]

I wouldn't want to mess with tools like that as they seem to be in the grey area like that card farming bot. Basically, you risk your steam account using stuff like that.

Yeah, I didn't either. But, it's an unfortunate reality that external tools like that are the only viable method to get achievements if you've modded a singleplayer game that specifically added extra modding support.

They added in-game achievement tracking to FL, but it is missing the point of achievements. They are saved in-game, per-instance, and thus they are more difficult for the player to track/remember, and lack the permanence and community of Steam's achievements.

[Thurak]

Please, devs, make this dynamic relations thing OPTIONAL. It's really frustrating to no end to play like this

I am totally frustrated as well, but I don't think they need to throw out everything here. If they would more the negative impact away from ranks, but move it over (more) to missions that would help a ton, imo. Why? They then could make peaceful missions have no impact at all (what you want), while for example a soldier transport mission might actually hurt relations with the enemy a bit. That would be okay for me as long as I can become friendly with everyone mid and long term. And would be informed about the negative impact on the mission screen (similar to how you can see the enemy faction for fight missions).

[tim-ski]

After much experimentation, I've reached the conclusion that the "98%" reputation caps are the root cause of much reputational instability:

For example, while my Argon rep was +4, Split rep was capped at +6, and Split missions could be taken with minimal impact on Argon rep. However when my Argon rep dropped to +3, my Split rep reached +7 with the next Split mission. One more Argon mission recovered Argon rep to +4 Argon without reducing the Split rep back below its previous cap. The next Split mission then dropped Argon rep dramatically, to -3.

So in this example, the dramatic adjustment in Argon reputation is a function of an earlier un-capping Split reputation, and not specifically the mission I just completed. This is why it is almost impossible for anyone to explain why taking a given mission caused a sudden reputation reduction, because invariably such a mission is just the first chance the game had to adjust to an earlier rebalancing.

The relationship between reputation caps is still confusing, and presumably can be gamed: Having uncapped Split +6 by reducing Argon rep, I can recover at least the Argon rep I had before without re-capping the Split, and thus the net impact is +1 Split above what had been a cap. Ergo there is no fixed relationship between the two reputations, and likely extremely careful manipulation of reputational changes and caps can allow very high reputations to be maintained between enemies.

I suspect the reputation system is trying to operate on too many dimensions at once - potentially allowing gains with one formula, while calculating loses from another formula. That's improbable to balance, and far more likely to confuse than to feel dynamic. The solution logically lay in abandoning the hard caps completely, and simply relying on the fact that an action for an enemy will always cause in a small negative rep, making it hard to maintain the highest rep with everyone. But I'm unsure how well that plays for factions with many enemies.

[blazenclaw]

For example, while my Argon rep was +4, Split rep was capped at +6, and Split missions could be taken with minimal impact on Argon rep. However when my Argon rep dropped to +3, my Split rep reached +7 with the next Split mission. One more Argon mission recovered Argon rep to +4 Argon without reducing the Split rep back below its previous cap. The next Split mission then dropped Argon rep dramatically, to -3.

So if I'm reading this right, the caps are not symmetric? If having Argon 4 prevents Split 7, then one would imagine S7 should prevent A4, but you found it does not. That's... interesting. Was this on 1.0 or 1.1 beta?

Edit: Either that, or as the OP of this thread said, it could well be that the mission reward while at Split 7 returns a far greater magnitude than at Split 6. If you still have a save, test what happens when you're at Split +7 / Argon +3, then do the mission for Split; does that drop your Argon rep down to -3 as well?