Rep hit balance for killing pirates attacking my colonies

[contributor]

So far I've experimented most with smugglers and spies, but I decided it was time to give ship-to-ship combat a try. I though being a military officer was decent way to start that. No venturing into enemy territory to knock heads, just knock those that venture into mine.

So far, I've taken two missions to go patrol a friendly Cadar planet (yes I'm playing Chowdar) to catch a pirate from another faction. I've been relatively successful both times but then when I disable the ship I don't get very clear options. From playing ST RPG I guess that I have to destroy the ship to complete the mission which I do and I take something in the realm of 20 rp damage from the pirates faction! Of course I can't waste that salvage so there another 5 rep and then I lose 3 more for completing the mission. That's 28 rep in one crack. I suppose 5 of it was avoidable. Interestingly I have rank (3) and edict (1) from Cadar and I'm doing this at the behest of a contact. Given all that, it seems a bit over-the-top. It seems like the context needs to be taken into account a bit more or I need to have some other options. For example, If I disable the ship, I should be able to sweat them out until they hand over the captain to our firing squad. De-captainization would allow us to complete the mission without scuttling the whole ship, but still context should be more generous in the destroy scenario too.

There are other weird things about being military too. Why, when I'm flying as a military officer in a Cadar quadrant and I run into a smuggler from a faction that we are in a trade ban with do I only get options to retreat, attack or bribe him? Shouldn't I get the option to search him or accept a bribe and then if he doesn't if he doesn't comply decide if I'm going to attack him?

[fallen]

contributor - we have completely simplified combat missions. If you defeat the ship in combat, no option presented will result in mission failure. Having to "know" the secret after combat is the worst kind of game challenge, so its gone.

If the option isn't presented, then generally it means that the enemy captain is sending all the signals that its a "hard no".

[contributor]

Then can I change this to an RFE that we get mission confirmation as soon as we disable the ship? As it is now it going to be confusing for some new players. Mission info should come up immediately or people will be left hanging.

"We've disabled the ship and their captain has been turned over to us for execution. The mission is a success!"

Also I can understand that inherent "no" thing, but I think it is something that will dig at a lot of players. They won't know the inherent answer and so it will come across as a bug, or insensitivity to context, or an oversight in the code. Even if we were told "they're ignoring our hails" it would help flesh out the picture. The player is inherently sensitive to the context because it is mimicking real life. Now it doesn't have to follow real life (because its a game after all!) but where the contrast is jarring or random or inexplicable it will cause frustration or a break in immersion.

[fallen]

Ok, took #STF-3686 for this RFE.

[fallen]

Fixed for next - a big obvious banner is added that you've successfully completed your mission.

"We have successfully completed the aims of our mission. No further action is needed for this mission step, and we may deal with the enemy as we please."

EDIT: heck, adding it to failure. Add it to the preamble with:

"This risky combat is tied into the success or failure of a mission we have committed to complete. We must win this combat by any means necessary to complete the mission step."