Wanted problems when in the throws of combat

[Ozric]

The model logic obviously. I'm assuming you can program or have at least a little knowledge of structured logic to be able to follow the model, otherwise you wouldn't be a very effective software tester. If you can't follow it:

Now you're getting personal!

Each ship has a warning counter, go over a limit you get a bounty. Each ship has a hit counter, if a ship is hit more than a certain limit by anyone, the person hitting them gets a bounty. The police can broadcast warnings bases on the hit and warning state for each ship. The warning level and hit level decays slowly. No-one 15-20 km away would be affected as it is ship local. The police tolerance (ie level of warnings before a bounty) is a tunable parameter that could vary based on rep, government type etc...

I've not seen this model in any of the other threads.

I must be missing something, you said "The easy solution is to make the timer global to everyone... all warnings are broadcast to everyone in the vicinity" and now you're saying that it's only individual to the ship that hits the police? If you mean the ship hit counter has a limit that is cumulative regardless of the attacker, then you still go back to the gang tactics don't you? Also with the tolerance part how would you determine the tolerance? If it's on the first ship that hits them, then you can plan tactics around that, or if it's per ship then someone who would normally take 2 hits to trigger a response, could only take one if someone else had already hit it.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I feel that bounty hunters receiving fines for taking out wanted criminals is unfair, and using a K-W scanner should be interpreted as a positive intention no matter what jurisdiction they are in.

What happens if you are a Federal Assassin. You would have a large Bounty with the Imperials, but the Federation certainly wouldn't want you to be freely blown up in their own jurisdiction.

 

[TheArtist]

Make NPCs avoid player fire?
Seems simple and I assume it's what they should be doing anyway but what do I know

Learn to aim? Even more simple! Fireing is your responsibility, so simply be sure when you shoot. Heck, how hard can that be?!

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

If the AI or player is silly enough to fly into my foray of bullets, he should not be protected !

Spoken like a true american! Killed by friendly fire...!

 

[CnlPepper]

Ozric, the fact you took that personally says more about you than me.

I'm talking solely about this model, the one you quoted: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=80494&p=1313452&viewfull=1#post1313452

 

[Ozric]

Ozric, the fact you took that personally says more about you than me.

Does it? Yes I suppose it probably does, you saying that I'm not effective at my job because I don't fulfill your criteria. Anyhow I guess your response settled that discussion.

The simple answer has already been suggested a few times here. Don't change it and learn to control your fire.

 

[bitstorm]

Make NPCs avoid player fire?
Seems simple and I assume it's what they should be doing anyway but what do I know

Another solution is to only apply a negative effect after sustained fire for X seconds.

This is actually the correct solution, it seems common sense doesn't it! But y'know.

Another option might be the ability to pay fines without visiting a station.

 

[bitstorm]

I dunno,

Just been in a bunch of fights hunting pirates. First one I was careless and hit the security forces, each fight after that I entered in a wanted state.

And do you know what, all it really did was increase the difficulty a bit and made the fights a helluva lot more interesting.

Go figure.

To the people crying out for nerfs, is this what you really want.

As I've said in multiple threads ED's combat has been praised in reviews. Friendly fire is whole extra layer in combat, it's one more thing to manage and it's what differentiates a furball with friendlies from a one on one, it literally adds variety and makes combat more interesting. =/

 

[parva]

I have no problem with the friendly fire but what I don't understand is:
I shoot and a police vessel comes in my site get hit by that beam and I get a 100cr bounty - fine no problem with that
BUT why does all other police vessel wants to kill me now?! I have just a 100cr bounty! Look the guy there is a real murderer he has 45k cr bounty - nope we shoot the guy with the 100cr bounty first... strange priority.
I don't shoot guys with such a low bounty but keep an eye on them.

 

[Kaspur]

Does it? Yes I suppose it probably does, you saying that I'm not effective at my job because I don't fulfill your criteria. Anyhow I guess your response settled that discussion.

The simple answer has already been suggested a few times here. Don't change it and learn to control your fire.

Oh, come on. I am, like you, a software tester (not in games though) and would agree with you that a lot of developers have a very strange idea about the outside world (being anyone beyond the door of their office), but in this case I think he is right to assume that you know at least a little bit about programming. Since knowing both the programming and the users side makes a tester a lot more efficient at their job and something that all tester around me know or learn.

If I were doing the UAT on this feature I would think one of the following:
- What is this rubbish, why doesn't it comply with the requirements that friendly fire in a combat/dogfight zone should be handled with some (artificial) intelligence?
- Why didn't anyone make any requirements?
- Why didn't anyone ask the User (with capital, because not necessarily a real user) to participate early on in development?

Shots are being fired everywhere and being hit by a few shots doesn't even do that much damage or damage at all (only shields). Getting hit accidentally by friendly fire is what happens and the authorities shouldn't freak out if they get hit by one or two shots (especially since it isn't that big of an impact on their health).
To me (present since premium beta) the lack of intelligence in the NPC surroundings is the big immersion breaker right now. Up until Gamma it was not a point (because Test), but I would have expected the release version to be a bit more alive.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I have no problem with the friendly fire but what I don't understand is:
I shoot and a police vessel comes in my site get hit by that beam and I get a 100cr bounty - fine no problem with that
BUT why does all other police vessel wants to kill me now?! I have just a 100cr bounty! Look the guy there is a real murderer he has 45k cr bounty - nope we shoot the guy with the 100cr bounty first... strange priority.
I don't shoot guys with such a low bounty but keep an eye on them.

Yesterday I made the mistake to try and pay my 200cr bounty at a station instead of an outpost. I think the electricity bill for the stations lasers shooting me down was a lot higher than 300cr I was just about to pay.

 

[hurricanepilot]

I'm thinking that it might be better to come at the problem from the other end and allow commanders to set their ships up such that their weapons only fire when they have a clear line to their target.

 

[CdrTwisted]

How about you can deliver a maximum of 1pc damage to a clean ship in a 24 hr period without becoming wanted?

That would stop the idea of swarm style exploits due to the 32-player maximum in an instance - a ship could only receive a maximum of 32pc damage without someone being fingered for it.

And it would still encourage players to watch who they're aiming at, as 1pc isn't much.

 

[deej]

Persistance is bad. Carting around data on who did what/when/where is expensive.

A simpler solution would be for FD to nominate a percentage (and not tell anyone), but let's say 92% shields for this example.
A ship won't care who knocked them down from 100% to 92%.
If your next hit drops it to 91% then your wanted.
Swarms won't matter, who ever drops it under the threshold is wanted and is anyone else that fires on that ship below its threshold is also wanted.

Basically you giving every ship an x% buffer before they "react", which i think is more than enough, when you realised that shields do recharge.

 

[Dejay]

That would stop the idea of swarm style exploits due to the 32-player maximum in an instance - a ship could only receive a maximum of 32pc damage without someone being fingered for it.

Isn't the whole "death by 32 players pin pricks" thing ludicrous? 1/31 is > 3% so it would be easy to avoid.

 

[Phrygian]

Okay, maybe it's just me, but.........

If you're trying to break up a fight and the cops are around trying to break it up as well and you accidentally elbow one in the face, do you really think they're going to say it was nothing, give you the stern face, and say don't do it again now be off with you? No. They're going to arrest you, in a manner that would probably involve considerable restraint, for waving your elbows around in a threatening manner, not to mention BELTING A COP, irrespective of whether you broke their nose or just knocked their hat off.

We've all got radars. We should use them.

 

[gofast1993]

Do you ever imagined in the case when they pass through your line of fire? This happened to me twice yesterday and they flagged Wanted to me for it!

[video=youtube;dm8mTq8JpJA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm8mTq8JpJA[/video]

Some kind of degree of tolerance system really need to be considered!

 

[CnlPepper]

Phrygian: I'm not sure I agree with your premiss. But it may just be the way the cops are where you live. Here in the UK they tend to use their judgement as to whether you intended to strike them or not and their response would greatly depend on the magnitude of the infraction. They would generally warn you for minor mistakes. You see this behaviour in British "police, camera, action" videos all the time - "I'm warning you, do that again and I'll arrest you" is something you hear quite a lot! Then the drunk numpty does it again....

 

[Oethe]

I would like this but I do not think it is required. I think the rep issue that makes them attack you when you are not wanted is more important.

 

[Ac1dCl0ud]

How about you can deliver a maximum of 1pc damage to a clean ship in a 24 hr period without becoming wanted?

That would stop the idea of swarm style exploits due to the 32-player maximum in an instance - a ship could only receive a maximum of 32pc damage without someone being fingered for it.

And it would still encourage players to watch who they're aiming at, as 1pc isn't much.

Great Idea

 

[Riepah]

No. They're going to arrest you,

Yeah. They're not going to try and beat you to death if you put up no resistance, though. That's why a fine makes much more sense for a stray shot than a bounty does.

 

[ALLCAPS]

Just make it so that you have to deal substantial damage to the ships shields (or hull if shields are down) to have the action be taken as aggression. Getting hit with a handful of bullets, or a couple pulse laser beams should maybe net you a fine (reckless discharge of weapon) of 200-1000c, doing say 10-15% of shield (or less hull) should be assault.

There has to be something done about it. The police are allowed to accidentally hit us and we get nothing for it, we should be allowed to accidentally hit them.

 

[Apec Valorian]

One can argue about whether stray shots should result in a bounty, fine or no action at all.

One can not, however, argue about whether the current implementation is consistent: It isn't. NPCs accidently hitting clean ships suffer no consequences at all. Players accidently hitting clean ships immediately become wanted - essentially a death sentence. It is my considered opinion that one of these - or both - must be changed, and same rules should apply for both NPCs and players alike.

I also think that ideally every stray shot should be penalized, but that in trivial cases the penalty should not be effectively a death sentence.