ID-locking IFFs and undercover systems

[Semir Gerkhan]

Very nice change, I like It a lot.

Now if I see a guy in the Omicrons in red and with an Unknown IFF, I can shoot him without fear. If he's undercover, however, his IFF will let me know.

This clarifies things a lot and allows us to know what to RP when we come across other players.

Good job.

[Kauket]

Can you explain the undercover stuff because IDs are inrp visible?

---

[jammi]

Can you explain the undercover stuff because IDs are inrp visible?

Figuring that out will be the next point of discussion. People are welcome to use this thread to explain how they'd like a cover system to functionally work.

Speaking personally, one option would be to default rephack the FL ID to Freelancer (so running no IFF isn't possible by default), and specify that you treat players according to their IFF. Freelancers would still be able to get other IFFs by droprepping.

I suspect this is something that will only ever be addressed through recommendations (in for example the metagaming explanation thread) rather than rules though. That's because it's hard to imagine how we'd distinguish between "undercover" and "your cover has been blown", because there's so many ways that could happen based on the specific and situational RP.

I dunno. Maybe there's a way using game mechanics. A special proximity-based scanner that identifies your IFF as faked and sets you hostile to the parent faction again or something. Could even be a special perk of intel groups or something.

---

News article library, feedback and content requests.

[Deterrence Research Command]

Would that Scanner be something a bit more Expensive then or will it be accessible via the Standart Loadout or does it have to PoB Crafted like the Starfliers ?

[Karst]

People are welcome to use this thread to explain how they'd like a cover system to functionally work.

Okay, I'm going to expand on the discussion yesterday.
I've been of the opinion that other players should always be able to treat someone per their IFF.
Because contrary to what some people say, the IFF and not the ID is the actual inrp element. Sure, some IDs are obviously "official" and would be visible inrp, like corporate or military identifications.
But there are others that obviously aren't actual inrp identifying markers, like Pirate or Wild, or Nomad for that matter. There's no such thing as a "Wild ID" in roleplay, that's a gameplay mechanic. Then there's borderline cases like Freelancer, which could be perfectly legal up-to-date formal civilian papers - or it could be someone born off-the-grid with no documentation at all.
The IFF meanwhile is what characters actually see; that's the association match their computer determined for a target, and that's how they should treat them.

These changes only strengthen that more: Players should be treated according to their IFF only. Anyone who has an IFF not matching their ID is doing so very consciously and should live with the consequences, so to speak.

My GC IFF Freelancer carries this IFF because she is affiliated with the GC, and I could have no complaints if she is consequently treated as such. If I wanted not to show this allegiance, I'd change my rep accordingly.

A Gaian should be allowed to shoot a Planetform IFF Freelancer. Whether they're a full employee or not, they obviously work for that company in some capacity.

And a BMM should be able to pirate an undercover BIS that's flashing IMG IFF. If the agent reveals themselves the BMM could believe them and back down, but they shouldn't be obligated to. That's a risk the agent took when setting up their cover.

I think it's important here to leave that agency to the other player.

---

[Semir Gerkhan]

People are welcome to use this thread to explain how they'd like a cover system to functionally work.

Okay, I'm going to expand on the discussion yesterday.
I've been of the opinion that other players should always be able to treat someone per their IFF.
Because contrary to what some people say, the IFF and not the ID is the actual inrp element. Sure, some IDs are obviously "official" and would be visible inrp, like corporate or military identifications.
But there are others that obviously aren't actual inrp identifying markers, like Pirate or Wild, or Nomad for that matter. There's no such thing as a "Wild ID" in roleplay, that's a gameplay mechanic. Then there's borderline cases like Freelancer, which could be perfectly legal up-to-date formal civilian papers - or it could be someone born off-the-grid with no documentation at all.
The IFF meanwhile is what characters actually see; that's the association match their computer determined for a target, and that's how they should treat them.

These changes only strengthen that more: Players should be treated according to their IFF only. Anyone who has an IFF not matching their ID is doing so very consciously and should live with the consequences, so to speak.

My GC IFF Freelancer carries this IFF because she is affiliated with the GC, and I could have no complaints if she is consequently treated as such. If I wanted not to show this allegiance, I'd change my rep accordingly.

A Gaian should be allowed to shoot a Planetform IFF Freelancer. Whether they're a full employee or not, they obviously work for that company in some capacity.

And a BMM should be able to pirate an undercover BIS that's flashing IMG IFF. If the agent reveals themselves the BMM could believe them and back down, but they shouldn't be obligated to. That's a risk the agent took when setting up their cover.

I think it's important here to leave that agency to the other player.

I totally agree with this. I've always thought that the ID is what you are, and the IFF is simply what others see of you, your open declaration of intentions, so to speak.

That way of seeing it fits perfectly with this new mechanics. Thus, there will be factions that cannot show others that they're anything different than what they really are, and also there will be other factions, like the ones with Intel or Wilde ID, that will be able to impersonate others due to their characteristic of being based on going undercover. And then freelancers, pirates, etc, can use the IFF to show their affiliations.

I think the ID should show who your loyalty really is to, and the IFF is what you want to show to others. So yeah, inRP you should be treated based on what your IFF shows, not your ID. Of course, in the case of undercover characters, there should be ways to discover them, either through actions they carry out inRP that were incompatible with maintaining their cover, or through some game mechanics like the scanner mentioned above, or whatever else.

[Goliath]

I don't think a scanner is the way to go. I can't realistically envision a way in which it can't be abused to relentlessly bust down undercover RP some player has probably spent a good while developing. If all of that RP goes down the drain just because some guy you never met has a "spy detector", then it defeats the entire purpose of even attempting to RP with anyone else other than a small group of people you know won't resort to petty tactics.

A good player who does undercover RP will cover their tracks and be careful. That should be rewarded with continued incognito status. A player who gets sloppy and starts handing out obvious hints about their allegiances should pay the price for it - they get exposed for what or who they are. An ingame item that throws interaction out the window is definitely not a good idea.

---

[Toaster]

The issue with IDs being completely invisible inRP is that - if there are no other gameplay mechanics available to uncover them - an undercover character can't be uncovered unless they go out of their way to expose themselves. If I fly an Order ID, Freelancer IFF Sabre with no Order tech equipped, no one can ever know that I am an undercover Order agent unless I deliberately slip up. Until then I can happily spy on others and report back on forum message dumps with absolutely no counterplay whatsoever.

Unless my coffee deprived brain has missed something important, of course.

All in all, I'm for this change. There just needs to be some way to expose undercover characters.

---

Olivia Sable

[Karst]

It occurs to me that there's a very simple and elegant solution to preempt any issues with ID/IFF shenanigans going "too deep", because it has occurred to me that treating other players purely on IFF might lead to stuff like LSF IFF'd Freelancers having to be allowed into Zone-21:

- Players must treat others according to their IFF

- Players cannot determine another players true ID, unless their ID or nongeneric IFF matches their own

That means, my GC IFF Freelancer is to anyone else a Golden Chrysanthemum, except to actual GC, who would know she isn't a member.
The LSF IFF Freelancer can be checked by real LSF.
And conversely, a Freelancer IFF BDM cannot be identified except by the BDM themselves.

I don't really see an issue with undercover intels otherwise being undetectable. This is effectively already the case with Freelancers: A Freelancer could be working for anyone and there's no mechanic that would determine that. Powergaming rules already exist to prevent people from doing anything too wacky in the intel world, this ID/IFF stuff wouldn't really change that.
Undercover intel activity has its associated downsides anyway, like not necessarily being able to assert your authority, or being targeted by enemies of your cover identity. It's a give and take.

---

[Semir Gerkhan]

The issue with IDs being completely invisible inRP is that - if there are no other gameplay mechanics available to uncover them - an undercover character can't be uncovered unless they go out of their way to expose themselves. If I fly an Order ID, Freelancer IFF Sabre with no Order tech equipped, no one can ever know that I am an undercover Order agent unless I deliberately slip up. Until then I can happily spy on others and report back on forum message dumps with absolutely no counterplay whatsoever.

Unlike the problem with cloaked espionage, I think that this IFF covert espionage has a fair way to counterplay it.

Probably two characters who have something really important and secret to tell each other, wouldn't do it if someone else was present, even if he was not carrying an IFF from an enemy ID, or even if he carries an IFF from a friend one, but they don't know who he is. They would try to find a place where they could be alone, with no one in sight of the scanner.

With the cloak instead, yeah, this is almost impossible to counterplay, because the characters and their players think they are alone, but they may not be, and they have very little way of knowing it.