The Dance of Pirate and Traders. Advice for both parties

[Jack Schitt]

As someone else said: you can ALWAYS avoid getting killed as part of an interdiction by simply selecting a neighboring system and hyper jumping away. You cannot be mass locked when trying to hyper jump; it only applies when trying to enter local SC. So traders should be able to escape pirates 100pct of the time. Pirates won't like that, of course, but it really is that simple.

The problem with high-waking (I hate that term but it seems to have entered the lexicon) is that a well-equipped pirate wing is going to have at least one wake scanner and will quite possibly follow you and attempt a second, less forgiving interdiction. Even if they don't, there's no guarantee you haven't gone on a KOS list. Either of which breaks the defacto covenant between predator and prey, and leads to actions being dictated by player behaviour and not by in-game logic. Again, it's bad game design leading to limited and divisive player actions.

I know FD are on the record as saying that the lack of mass lock for hyperspace jumps is by design, and it does sort of fit with the earlier single-player Elite games in which hyperspace suffered no mass lock and either took 10-15 seconds (Elite) or was instantaneous (Frontier / FFE). But in multiplayer ED, where supercruise and hyperspace are both features of the same FSD engine, it still feels to me more like a bug than a feature. But it's one that has alas been retroactively embraced by both players and developers. There certainly wasn't a sniff of this in the DDF proposal, where hyperdrive charging time was stated to be limited not only by local mass but also by incoming weapons fire.

 

[ElectricZ]

It's been pointed out in many threads, and in this thread too that Elite: Dangerous is just not set up for proper PVP. All of the people on the forums trying to make a positive difference from both the trader and pirate perspectives are fighting a losing battle as long as this is the case. The people who frequent the forums can encourage each other to play by "the rules," but what percentage of of players in ED read the forums at all, let alone will decide to comply? While you're sitting here reading this, dozens or even hundreds of CMDRs are shooting wildly at any hollow square they see, gleefully LOL'ling as the debris of their clueless victim spirals across their screen. Then there are a bunch of CMDR's out there wanting to live the pirate life, investing in cargo scanners, hatch breakers, and FSD interdictors that all turn out to be worthless because their targets log on them, they never see any messages from the pirate, or just don't have any idea of what's going in in general.

People who try to play by "the rules" are only going to have a good experience if they meet someone else who plays by those same rules. Every other encounter is just going to lead to frustration. Trying to get everybody on the same page in the forum is a noble gesture, but since only forum readers will see it, there's a vast portion of the population which never will and will perpetuate the behavior that makes everyone so mad. For PVP piracy to work, the rules have to be set in the game and apply to everyone equally, and the game as it is just can't handle that. Again, there have been a ton of threads on how to fix it, ranging from getting rid of solo to incentivizing open play to PVE/PVP only areas etc. etc. but they all depend on Frontier making the change.

 

[Defacto]

I don't think that the lack of delay for highwaking makes sense. In the old Elites, you could, as long as you had better FSD's than your opponent, jump after them and arrive at the exit point several hours before they did. This isn't a possibility today. It's easier to chase after someone low-waking, so surely, low-waking away should be easier?

For the whole random murders, crime and such stuff, here is my opinion:

The life as a trader in pirate-infested space should be harsh. However:
- The life as a pirate should be more profitable, but even harsher,
- There should be regions of space where security forces have enough authorithy and power to defend traders to a reasonable degree - ''pirate-infested space'' should not be any location with an active CG.
- Pirates should not be able to (generally) profit if they pay money to clean their bounties. A player expecting to profit from piracy should also expect to constantly have a bounty on their head somewhere. Choosing to live a life of piracy should be profitable, but it should also have serious consequences, especially if you rack up not just Assault bounties, but also murder and smuggling bounties.
- There should not be methods to easily loose your bounty (or turning it dormant) without paying the costs of cleaning it.
- For extremely large bounties, other measures than paying credits need to be taken to clean the bounty.

Piracy right now is in a ridicilous position. Simple NPC farming earns you a lot more money, especially if you compare to NPC piracy instead of Player piracy. At the same time, however, the bounty system and system authorithy ships are completely toothless. The bounty system was ''the feature'' that was supposed to stop random player killing for no reason from being a common occurence. This was repeated several times.

Piracy is supposed to be high risk-high reward. Right now, it's moderate risk-low reward.

 

[Battleship Kickass]

Removed. Too much mod editing.

 

[Robert Maynard]

The problem with high-waking (I hate that term but it seems to have entered the lexicon) is that a well-equipped pirate wing is going to have at least one wake scanner and will quite possibly follow you and attempt a second, less forgiving interdiction. Even if they don't, there's no guarantee you haven't gone on a KOS list. Either of which breaks the defacto covenant between predator and prey, and leads to actions being dictated by player behaviour and not by in-game logic. Again, it's bad game design leading to limited and divisive player actions.

I know FD are on the record as saying that the lack of mass lock for hyperspace jumps is by design, and it does sort of fit with the earlier single-player Elite games in which hyperspace suffered no mass lock and either took 10-15 seconds (Elite) or was instantaneous (Frontier / FFE). But in multiplayer ED, where supercruise and hyperspace are both features of the same FSD engine, it still feels to me more like a bug than a feature. But it's one that has alas been retroactively embraced by both players and developers. There certainly wasn't a sniff of this in the DDF proposal, where hyperdrive charging time was stated to be limited not only by local mass but also by incoming weapons fire.

The lack of mass-lock when engaging hyper-drive is, in my opinion, a necessity for those who are not fitted out for combat. Without that chance to escape, the Type-9 could well be destroyed every single time it was interdicted. The interdicted player would be at the mercy (or lack thereof) of the interdictor. I doubt that many players truly like being totally unable to direct the outcome of their being interdicted - as would probably be the case if there was no option to hyper-jump out of the system quickly.

 

[Jockey79]

Yes, traders need pirates.

Okay, that made me laugh.

I live in a market town in the UK, we have traders come here twice a week - every week and have done for longer than I have been alive.
I can tell you now, traders do not "need" pirates, in fact the ones I've seen all my life have never had there wares stolen from them while in transit from market town to market town.

In all of known history, no trader has ever *needed* a pirate, in fact they have gone out of there way to avoid them.

Oh, and I have a video for you;

[video=youtube;XtYHkP3wCqM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtYHkP3wCqM[/video]

I love the part when he says, player pirates have NPCs to steal from.

Game balance is not around any sort of player interaction, game balance is determined by PvE.
Yes, piracy needs a massive over haul - the system as it stands is awful and those NPCs carry rubbish.
But player traders have never been "balanced" by pirates, players or NPCs.

Traders are balanced by prices crashing if they over trade an area.

 

[Defacto]

The lack of mass-lock when engaging hyper-drive is, in my opinion, a necessity for those who are not fitted out for combat. Without that chance to escape, the Type-9 could well be destroyed every single time it was interdicted. The interdicted player would be at the mercy (or lack thereof) of the interdictor. I doubt that many players truly like being totally unable to direct the outcome of their being interdicted - as would probably be the case if there was no option to hyper-jump out of the system quickly.

Yes, a fully hauling-oriented ship would be at the mercy of pirates if the pirates are using Anacondas that slow the Lakon's FSD's and carry enough firepower to destroy the Lakon before it escapes. I fail to see the problem in this. They would not be totally unable to direct the outcome - they might use equipment that increases their survivability, such as shields, shield boosters or armor upgrades. They might use equipment that lowers their opponents' firepower, such as chaff and ECM. They might use their friends in combat ships. Having friends in combat ships is a good thing to have when you're flying with the largest pure freighter in the game, loaded to the brim with expensive goods, in pirate-rich space. Or they might have personal abilities, such as good knowledge of how their ship handles and how to negotiate with pirates. All of this would allow them to direct their outcome after being interdicted.
If this even was a problem, then why do so many open traders still fly without shields?

The only thing that I could see happen in the current state of things, would be that the pirates would be forced to pick on smaller ships, such as Type 6's or Asps, since any Lakon 9 would be capable of escaping.

Another thing that I do not like is how the current masslock system tilts things in favor of large ships. I think we should get a better system.

 

[khaitom]

As a trader there's no guarantee you aren't going to be killed on sight if you submit to pirates. Why should pirates always get an automatic win?

 

[Jack Schitt]

The lack of mass-lock when engaging hyper-drive is, in my opinion, a necessity for those who are not fitted out for combat. Without that chance to escape, the Type-9 could well be destroyed every single time it was interdicted. The interdicted player would be at the mercy (or lack thereof) of the interdictor. I doubt that many players truly like being totally unable to direct the outcome of their being interdicted - as would probably be the case if there was no option to hyper-jump out of the system quickly.

Yeah, I'm not saying it isn't necessary. With the game working as it does right now, it's more or less essential in PvP encounters for those traders who absolutely will not comply with pirates, even if it does run the risk of dropping you onto a KOS list. What I'm saying is that it wasn't there in the design proposal, but the implementation has forced its acceptance as a valid mechanic. FD's argument that it was always by design holds no water at all as far as I'm concerned. Unless someone can clearly prove otherwise (and I appreciate that's a difficult ask) I will continue to regard it as a bug or oversight that fortuitously happens to fit in with the current set of game/metagame rules.

A little OT, but personally I think a better solution would be to allow ships to charge their FSDs with their hardpoints deployed. For a laugh I fitted out a T9 with some beam turrets, upgraded thrusters and a top-rate shield and shield boosters. I had to sacrifice a lot of its cargo space for shield strength and manoeuvrability, but its ability to swat NPC Eagles and Vipers like annoying gnats was a joy to behold. The two main problems were that I had to constantly swing the ship around to bring the most effective turrets to bear on the most threatening target, and I couldn't engage the FSD until I'd killed everything and retracted the weapons.

This thing would have been useless in PvP of course, for the reasons above. But if the hardpoints on the T9 were moved to give better turret coverage laterally and to the rear, and we could charge our FSDs with the guns still firing, savvy haulers could trade some cargo space for a little bit of defensive firepower and speed, and possibly turn interdictions into something a little less one-sided and a lot more interesting for both parties.

But again, that's proposing the addition of game features to mitigate problems caused by the lack of other features. The best solution would be to start addressing the initial lack of features, and the ball is firmly in FD's court on that one. Unfortunately they've spent the last several months bouncing it on the spot rather than actually hitting it anywhere, and there's no umpire to force them to play.

 

[Katkon]

The problem with high-waking (I hate that term but it seems to have entered the lexicon) is that a well-equipped pirate wing is going to have at least one wake scanner and will quite possibly follow you and attempt a second, less forgiving interdiction. Even if they don't, there's no guarantee you haven't gone on a KOS list. Either of which breaks the defacto covenant between predator and prey, and leads to actions being dictated by player behaviour and not by in-game logic. Again, it's bad game design leading to limited and divisive player actions.

I know FD are on the record as saying that the lack of mass lock for hyperspace jumps is by design, and it does sort of fit with the earlier single-player Elite games in which hyperspace suffered no mass lock and either took 10-15 seconds (Elite) or was instantaneous (Frontier / FFE). But in multiplayer ED, where supercruise and hyperspace are both features of the same FSD engine, it still feels to me more like a bug than a feature. But it's one that has alas been retroactively embraced by both players and developers. There certainly wasn't a sniff of this in the DDF proposal, where hyperdrive charging time was stated to be limited not only by local mass but also by incoming weapons fire.

I agree that the inability to mass lock when engaging a HJ "feels" like a bug, even though it is an explicit design decision. That being said, it is a current feature. And while I agree that a well-equipped and coordinated pirate wing should be able to somewhat counter that as you mention, I have yet to come across such a wing - in my nearly 2 years of playing. So, bottom line: I can always escape a battle I don't want to participate in. The only exception would be if I was tackled by someone with a ton of burst weaponry that I wasn't able to counter.... This does make PVP feel very consensual - for those with a bit of experience. For new players, not so much!

 

[Defacto]

Okay, that made me laugh.

I live in a market town in the UK, we have traders come here twice a week - every week and have done for longer than I have been alive.
I can tell you now, traders do not "need" pirates, in fact the ones I've seen all my life have never had there wares stolen from them while in transit from market town to market town.

In all of known history, no trader has ever *needed* a pirate, in fact they have gone out of there way to avoid them.

Oh, and I have a video for you;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtYHkP3wCqM

I love the part when he says, player pirates have NPCs to steal from.

Game balance is not around any sort of player interaction, game balance is determined by PvE.
Yes, piracy needs a massive over haul - the system as it stands is awful and those NPCs carry rubbish.
But player traders have never been "balanced" by pirates, players or NPCs.

Traders are balanced by prices crashing if they over trade an area.

Exactly - what trader in reality would not go out of their way to avoid pirates? They're a cornerstone of balancing the trading mechanics.
Price changes because of overtrading is one thing - but that has nothing to do with risk/reward. Choosing between trading in an anarchy and a democracy is (or should be) a risk/reward assesment. Choosing between filling your hold with bulk goods or expensive metals is a risk/reward assesment. Choosing between trading in Similar system A or Similar system B depending on which system is overtraded is also a part of trading, but it is not a risk/reward assesment and it can't be the only thing that drives a system with risk/reward assessments.

And I don't see why you bring in player interactions. I've always found this discussion to be strange - Player piracy and NPC piracy should be (to the degree that it is possible) equal threats. How else would you balance Open and Solo play? That people choose between Open and Solo, not based on what mode they objectively prefer, but in which mode they'll have the least difficulty, is something that I think makes the game worse for everybody - even the ones doing it.

Advice to pirates: Play EvE.

Advice to traders: Alt F4 then laugh. (it's even more fun than dicting THEM in Sideys (Or so I'm told)).

As I understand it, doing that can get you banned. Instead, you can exit through the menu. You'll have to wait 15 seconds, but it isn't bannable.
Also, this is apparently not combat logging, by some kind logic I am yet to comprehend.

 

[DaveB]

So, you scurvy bilge-rats found a system where you'd kept your noses clean enough to sit down in the same bar as honest traders, huh? Fair enough, so long as you're buying the beer I'm not going to start anything.

Honestly, though, you pirates - I feel your pain. You've got the expense of running a combat capable ship, making little to no profit on even a successful run and the psychos out there meaning that everybody thinks you're planning on blowing them anyway so where's the percentage in complying with your demands?

Like most traders if I don't know different I assume an interdictor is out to blow my ship, not merely extract a tax on my current cargo. Get on the comms, guys. Have a voice attack macro or something to send it easily without taking your hands off the controls in the middle of the interdiction dance but DO send it.

Like a lot of traders I fly something with teeth, not a stripped out shell to use every spare internal space to cram in more cargo cans. Just because I run out the guns as soon as we hit normal space don't assume I'm about to open fire on you and kick things off prematurely. It's just a matter of caution because I have no reason to trust the guy who's here to rob me, do I? Look on the bright side, if I'm deploying my weapons I'm not charging my drive so if nothing else its a sign that I'm not going for the boost/boost/highwake thing just yet. I'm sticking around and if I've got my guns out but I'm NOT firing, you've got time to get on the comms again and open negotiations.

Once we've got to that point, do negotiate honestly. I will. What's the point in a doublecross on either side? It will kick off the fight we're both trying to avoid and will probably end up with one of us on the others KoS list. For the same reason, don't confuse weapons fire with emphatic persuasion. If I fired on you, you'd consider me to have withdrawn from negotiations and the fight would be on, right? Remember that I will view it exactly the same way.

And when you encounter those psychos that are spoiling things for you pirates so much, blow 'em to dustbunnies without a second thought. Give me a shout if I'm in the neighborhood and I'll come and help, provided you keep your hands off my cargo hatch afterwards - at least for that run!

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

…

Oh, and I have a video for you;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtYHkP3wCqM

…

WOW. That video should be the load screen for Open Mode.

And sadly it really shows that FD and DB have no clue about PvP…

 

[Anson22]

One thing that seems to fall through the net with these Pirate v Trader discussions is the Multirole commander. I carry cargo but I also do missions, including Pirate extermination missions. It perhaps gives a me slightly different view of the world than the pure trader. Sadly, my part of the galaxy is inhabited almost exclusively by NPC's - the occasional commander passing through tends to be motivated to avoid contact or to be friendly.

My experience of interdictions is that the NPC's - even if they ask you to drop cargo - tend to shoot almost immediately. So now, when I'm interdicted I submit to avoid damage to my ship. Then I immediately accelerate up to normal cruise speed and deploy hardpoints. At that instant I pause and wait to see what the 'Pirate' NPC will do. If they don't open fire, then I won't either. So, to all of you genuine Human pirates out there, if you come across me in your travels, the fact that I've deployed hardpoints is a defensive measure - you don't need to start shooting unless I turn towards you - I won't fire on you first. Call it a 'moment of pause' in which you can start release of cargo negotiations with me. When waiting for a reply from me, please remember that typing a response on the communications system takes time!!! A little patience by both parties could see an amicable solution

So, my advice to Traders: -

1, Upgrade your ship defensively first. A class power distribution; Mil-Spec Bulkheads; Improved shields; Improved power and thrusters; I know it goes against the grain with most gamers not to be buying bigger guns but as a trader defence is important because it buys you time to either escape or fight back.

2, Build up friendly status with the local systems and whichever power's area you are trading in. I can't prove it with actual measures but I'm pretty sure from experience that the Feds or the ISS turn up more quickly to rescue you in a fight when you're on friendly terms! Combined with the time buying defensive approach above, the police could take out the pirate for you and you could be collecting a bounty instead of getting fried!

My advice to Pirates: -

1, Choose who you interdict carefully - a T6 may be a 'Fish in a Barrel' but a well specc'd Cobra is not.

2, Give that time I've suggested above to seek an amicable release of cargo - a fire fight is counter productive and if it goes on too long you will find the plod on your case too!

Fly safe everyone

 

[Roybe]

Pirates you need to get on with outreach!

Not to the traders...but to the PVP people out there...and those you have within your group.

Help them understand that PK works against your goals. I see this all the time. Pirates try to explain 'We don't want to kill you!'....we traders understand that. You just want to mug us!

It's not the traders job to hunt down and kill PK players...it's our job to avoid them! It's the pirate's job to keep their reputation clean, and not be PK players.

PK players...there is no reason you guys can't play...but it would be nice if you guys played fair also! Do not announce yourself as a Pirate...be honest about your intentions...A quick macro that announces 'I am going to kill you!' would be ample warning to any player.

 

[Anopheles]

Advice to pirates: Play EvE.

Advice to traders: Alt F4 then laugh. (it's even more fun than dicting THEM in Sideys (Or so I'm told)).

Advice to you: read the op.

 

[Battleship Kickass]

Removed.

 

[DaveB]

WOW. That video should be the load screen for Open Mode.

And sadly it really shows that FD and DB have no clue about PvP…

No, it shows that FD and DB are not building a PvP focused game. ED was never intended to be primarily PvP focused and it isn't. That's the whole reason we have megathreads of hardcore PvPers getting salty over the fact that the game wasn't built with that play style primarily in mind. It would look very different if it had been, both in terms of technical architecture and gameplay. That's not the point of this discussion though and let's stay off that subject so we don't risk this one getting merged into the pit of despair too. We can continue that discussion over there if you really feel the need.

 

[bigian12]

I have never liked the way interdiction works in game, choose your target and pull them out, this allows you to keep pulling the same person over and over again. Interdiction should be more like a general AOE as in a pirate has to drop to normal space, activate his interdictor and hope an unsuspecting trader is pulled out of supercruise. This way it is less discriminatory but also more fun for the pirate as he/she and his/her wing can be ready and waiting and you can pull more than one player and npc from supercruise. As it stands ,when you are in supercruise you can't see what is going on in normal space ,so with this kind of interdicton you wouldn't know it is happening until it is too late. The new kind of interdictor would have a certain range bubble and anyone who flies into this bubble is pulled out. This way would be so much better as a pirate can't choose his victim but can potentially capture more.

 

[CMDR Ellegon]

And pure PKers tend to use the same arguments to justify theirs which generates a colossal amount of distrust of anyone calling themselves a pirate. As a result, all pirates, "real" and "fake", are usually lumped together. There are people that roleplay the pirate perfectly. This is usually where I say that it's the minority giving them a bad name, but unfortunately, it isn't; it's the majority giving the minority a bad name.

The VAST majority of people that have interdicted me have been after an easy kill.

I've had maybe 50-60 interdictions with other CMDRs. Maybe, maybe 6 or 7 of them roleplayed as we'd expect a pirate to be. The rest simply started gunning me down.

^ This plus Shield Cell Batteries is the problem. Even in a trade fitted Anaconda with heavy weaponry, shields and shield boosters (total of 784 MJ of strenghth), I cannot really fight back, just flee - the PK will have stashed SCBs, which I cannot do if I want to have any cargo space. So I take the reduced "interaction" and play in Mobius.

To the "pirate whiners" that blame the existence of Solo for all issues: without Solo and Private Groups the Kickstarter would likely have failed. The old-time Elite fans that made up the majority of the backers (especially the high level ones) mostly did not want any kind of MMO.