Piracy/interdiction changes to keep Traders in the game

[Raiko]

Seems harsh?

Compared to what though? The trader agreeing to hand over some of his cargo without running? Or the trader running and being destroyed?

From what I can tell from watching Youtube (I'm not a pirate), the normal interaction between pirate CMDR and Trader CMDR is:

Pirate interdicts and sends message.
Trader occasionally does as they're told, but normally runs.
If the trader runs the pirate attacks.
Traders who lose their shields either stop immediately or they die.
If the trader doesn't cooperate with the pirate's request to submit for scan and then drop cargo, then I think that the pirate deserves all the cargo if they can stop the trader without killing them.

I say that as a player who smuggles and trades in open, but never pirates CMDRs (I have taken some massacre missions for the SEPP faction while we're trying to establish the Explorer Nation, but I only attack NPC traders / bounty hunters and it's only for a week or two).

 

[Poltraite]

My first trip into open play ended up with me being interdicted and destroyed within minutes. I carried no cargo nor did i have any bounty on me. Someone just thought it would be funny i guess. So its solo play for me until the playing field is more level from my point of view...

 

[NeilF]

My first trip into solo play ended up with me being interdicted and destroyed within minutes. I carried no cargo nor did i have any bounty on me. Someone just thought it would be funny i guess. So its solo play for me until the playing field is more level from my point of view...

Indeed... I'm coming more and more to the conclusion maybe murder should be very very heavily penalised, while piracy is given mechanics such that it doesn't rely on "murder" as the threat/tool to obtain cargo/CR.

If there were then more dedicated PvP mechanics which offered CR rewards for kills and at least some sort of partial cover for rebuy costs, that would allow those interested in it to find it more easily, rather than jumping on any CMDR they happen to find, no matter how undermatch and unwilling to fight they are.

 

[NeilF]

Compared to what though? The trader agreeing to hand over some of his cargo without running? Or the trader running and being destroyed?

From what I can tell from watching Youtube (I'm not a pirate), the normal interaction between pirate CMDR and Trader CMDR is:

Pirate interdicts and sends message.
Trader occasionally does as they're told, but normally runs.
If the trader runs the pirate attacks.
Traders who lose their shields either stop immediately or they die.
If the trader doesn't cooperate with the pirate's request to submit for scan and then drop cargo, then I think that the pirate deserves all the cargo if they can stop the trader without killing them.

I say that as a player who smuggles and trades in open, but never pirates CMDRs (I have taken some massacre missions for the SEPP faction while we're trying to establish the Explorer Nation, but I only attack NPC traders / bounty hunters and it's only for a week or two).

I think if the pirate wins the struggle, they should get a good solid reward. Let's suggest they get 20t of something and it's a valuable something, so they get 100-300,000CR?

Simply pouring loads of the victims cargo out of the hatch just seems pointless surely? What I would be keen to see is the process of the pirate opening the hatch (after taking the shields down) does damage that requires a good lump of CR to fix...

And I do like the idea of cargo snatch limpets mentioned by someone else. Seems to streamline the process.

I'm beginning to think more and more piracy should be kept a long way away from murder. And murder should only be for assassinations etc?

 

[Raiko]

I totally agree about murders, the current crime and punishment system is not working. I think that the bounties for murdering clean CMDRs need to come from the Pilot's Federation not the factions, and the murderer needs to be made to pay the combined rebuy costs of all his victims to continue playing (with the alternative being permadeath of that CMDR).

Regarding the piracy (I like lots of your ideas from the first post by the way), I think that you need to look at it from the perspective of the "true" pirate (ie not a griefer). If you were a pirate and you successfully interdicted me (so I've already lost a perfectly fair non-lethal pvp contest, even if I chose to submit), if you're after my cargo you'd normally now use a macro to quickly send me a message telling me to stop.

You've now done your bit and the ball's in my court: I can either run, fight or submit.

If I submit to a scan most genuine pirates would appear to only ask for a portion of my cargo. But if I choose to run or fight, that's my choice and I really believe that if the pirate can keep up and get my shields down they deserve to have a non-lethal option to get all my cargo. It was my choice not to negotiate.

Griefing is easy, and needs to be discouraged, but real pirates need some love from FD and it should be easier to temporarily disable a ship and take the cargo.

 

[NeilF]

I totally agree about murders, the current crime and punishment system is not working. I think that the bounties for murdering clean CMDRs need to come from the Pilot's Federation not the factions, and the murderer needs to be made to pay the combined rebuy costs of all his victims to continue playing (with the alternative being permadeath of that CMDR).

Regarding the piracy (I like lots of your ideas from the first post by the way), I think that you need to look at it from the perspective of the "true" pirate (ie not a griefer). If you were a pirate and you successfully interdicted me (so I've already lost a perfectly fair non-lethal pvp contest, even if I chose to submit), if you're after my cargo you'd normally now use a macro to quickly send me a message telling me to stop.

You've now done your bit and the ball's in my court: I can either run, fight or submit.

If I submit to a scan most genuine pirates would appear to only ask for a portion of my cargo. But if I choose to run or fight, that's my choice and I really believe that if the pirate can keep up and get my shields down they deserve to have a non-lethal option to get all my cargo. It was my choice not to negotiate.

Griefing is easy, and needs to be discouraged, but real pirates need some love from FD and it should be easier to temporarily disable a ship and take the cargo.

I think if some of the concern/worry was taken away when a player was interdicted by another player that there's a good chance this means destruction (because of the hefty penalty for that), and combat logging was penalised, piracy would gain some footing at long last. Mechanics could be added to improve the negotiation and/or payment, and suddenly piracy is a more viable occupation!

It would suddenly become far more normal to meet these highway robbers and to have to pay them off accordingly. Once their numbers increase of course, then some areas would then become of more interest to bounty hunters looking for the pirates. And suddenly we start getting the food chain the games been trying to have for a year!

 

[Sozzac]

Interdiction is Griefing.. NPC Interdiction is gamemechanics griefing paying customers over there hardearned freetime!

 

[NeilF]

Interdiction is Griefing.. NPC Interdiction is gamemechanics griefing paying customers over there hardearned freetime!

Are you aware that Piracy is one of the cornerstone occupations in ED? Are you aware of how they (currently at least) go about their occupation?

I suspect your comment is more down to current mechanics (or lack of) for piracy more than anything else.


Murder/crime need harsher treatments, piracy needs sorting out such that it's goal is stealing cargo without basing it around murder, and PvP simple needs some zones/regular Community Goals to allow people to participate in it regularly/easily.

 

[MarkAusten]

Excellent suggestions.

Most importantly, if Frontier does not want to separate solo and open play : there should be some incentive in playing open. Perhaps slight bonus on trades, bounties ... whatever.
Otherwise most people will just haul in solo mode to minimize risk.

This I would protest about greatly. My internet connection is satellite and thus I have a 750ms average latency each way. There's no way I can play in open. Imagine trying to evade an interdiction or a pirate fight with a player if your reaction time is 1.5s behind your opponent.

No. Solo is REQUIRED and should not be penalised for all those players who also have slow connections.

Also, I'm nearly 60 so my reactions are no longer those of a young man. I'd get slaughtered in open play and there's no point in playing a game that is biased against you so that you always lose.

At least NPCs are client generated.


Fly safe commander.

 

[NeilF]

This I would protest about greatly. My internet connection is satellite and thus I have a 750ms average latency each way. There's no way I can play in open. Imagine trying to evade an interdiction or a pirate fight with a player if your reaction time is 1.5s behind your opponent.

No. Solo is REQUIRED and should not be penalised for all those players who also have slow connections.

Also, I'm nearly 60 so my reactions are no longer those of a young man. I'd get slaughtered in open play and there's no point in playing a game that is biased against you so that you always lose.

At least NPCs are client generated.


Fly safe commander.

I think the premise being talked about here is the fact, that if we consider OPEN is more of a risk to play in than SOLO, then maybe a small "balance" needs to be made to reward staying in OPEN rather than "farming" in SOLO?

At the moment I would suggest it's safer for a trader to travel from A-->B in SOLO than it is in OPEN? So imediately there's a "pressure" for a trader to duck into SOLO. I'd suggest this should be addressed in one of two ways:-
- SOLO is improved so its just as dangerous?
- OPEN gives a reward for taking that additional risk. eg: 5% extra on sales.

Personally I don't think FD would ever consider the latter, so it's a mute point TBH.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

I think the premise being talked about here is the fact, that if we consider OPEN is more of a risk to play in than SOLO, then maybe a small "balance" needs to be made to reward staying in OPEN rather than "farming" in SOLO?

At the moment I would suggest it's safer for a trader to travel from A-->B in SOLO than it is in OPEN? So imediately there's a "pressure" for a trader to duck into SOLO. I'd suggest this should be addressed in one of two ways:-
- SOLO is improved so its just as dangerous?
- OPEN gives a reward for taking that additional risk. eg: 5% extra on sales.

Personally I don't think FD would ever consider the latter, so it's a mute point TBH.

As I recall, I thought they actually came out and said they'd never do something like this. Could be mistaken.

 

[NeilF]

As I recall, I thought they actually came out and said they'd never do something like this. Could be mistaken.

Agreed... Hence my last sentence...

 

[Bromius]

Pardon me if this has been covered, but all of your suggestions seem to be to make it easier for the Pirates. Why on earth would any human ethos strive towards encouraging law abiding citizens to give in to criminals?

 

[CMDR J Evans]

FD have commented that each mode is as important as the other and as a solo player I applaud this approach. The title to the post '...to keep traders in the game' applies to those who wish to play solo as much as those who wish to play in open. There are a number of posts that say they want to play open but don't like being killed by other players, well that is what open is, if you don't want to be killed by other players just play in solo.

 

[Bromius]

FD have commented that each mode is as important as the other and as a solo player I applaud this approach. The title to the post '...to keep traders in the game' applies to those who wish to play solo as much as those who wish to play in open. There are a number of posts that say they want to play open but don't like being killed by other players, well that is what open is, if you don't want to be killed by other players just play in solo.

There is some of this. But most people who play solo aren't opposed to being killed by other players per se`, it's the inequality that supports the pirate.

Piracy on the high seas has been anathema to civilized people from the beginning of history. Piracy was one of the first agreements faced in international law. Punishing piracy was considered Jus Cogens, a peremptory norm that all states (even when at war with each other) would prosecute and punish harshly. Now with a minimal bit of effort, it's just another job and the pirates punch out and go chill at the space station with the marks they just got done robbing.

Pirates should be branded and kept from using all but independent stations. Then we'll talk about making it easier to dump my load into the criminal's cargo hold.

 

[MarkAusten]

I think the premise being talked about here is the fact, that if we consider OPEN is more of a risk to play in than SOLO, then maybe a small "balance" needs to be made to reward staying in OPEN rather than "farming" in SOLO?

At the moment I would suggest it's safer for a trader to travel from A-->B in SOLO than it is in OPEN? So imediately there's a "pressure" for a trader to duck into SOLO. I'd suggest this should be addressed in one of two ways:-
- SOLO is improved so its just as dangerous?
- OPEN gives a reward for taking that additional risk. eg: 5% extra on sales.

Personally I don't think FD would ever consider the latter, so it's a mute point TBH.

The trouble is that both those option penalise me for playing SOLO, something I effectively have to do. The risk of playing OPEN is to get squashed by other players and the reward is to play with other players. I'd love to be able to join a group like the proposed Overwatch but given the restrictions I play under I cannot do so.

The more dangerous aspect of OPEN is the other players, not the NPCs. Take away the other players in OPEN and you have SOLO. There is no real way of making SOLO 'more dangerous'.

A better option would be that any single commander can only play in one mode. Once you have committed to play SOLO or OPEN then you cannot play the other mode except as a different character. Those people wanting to play in both modes would need to buy a second character, one for each mode.

That would prevent the farming that has the OP and a lot of others up in arms against despite the fact that most of them will do such a thing in real life if it suits them, but they complain about it in a game. Go figure, as the American idiom has it.

Fly safe commander.

 

[Krezan]

Said it loads of time. Way to strong at the minute, needs nerfing before there's a civil war.

 

[SkipRat]

There are many things wrong with piracy at the moment, most of it is down to the fact that the entire game is under developed (10 year development plan and all that) and as a result has very little in the way of pirating game play in terms of those that are pirated and pirates themselves at the moment. The biggest of all, is the fact that there is zero consequences of any worth to pirating, let alone psychopathic muppet.

I personally would like to see pirates unable to dock at stations in systems (killed on sight) that they are pirating in, even to entire major factions like the Empire or Federation. Thus having to make use of the various pirate stations in various systems around the galaxy. Yes, this does mean that pirates will not be able to run the best trade routes and why should they? They are pirates after all (a consequence to being a pirate). Like any station with a single ounce of common sense would allow someone who has been killing, robbing and consistently breaking the law towards it's citizens allow anyone near their stations, they wouldn't. they would arrest/kill on sight. This then pushes the pirates to the lawless fringes/systems allowing only the best pirates to operate in the highest security systems with the biggest rewards. It would also mean that pirates can't blockade stations by sitting on the pads or re-spawn in systems that they are operating, just making more sense in game. This also means that getting your hands on the best equipment becomes increasingly difficult ad harder to find, so you have to scavenge, repair or even steal the equipment you need.

This is not to say that is unfair or stops pirating opportunities, as the best trade routes for traders could be running goods between rim systems and high security systems, with big rewards and big risks to traders in the lower security systems where the pirates operate. I also think new equipment is needed, to make pirating easier, but on the other hand have counter measures as nothing should be guaranteed.

Going back to the pirate bases, pirate bases could give missions with rewards depending on how protected/secured a system us could be given with rewards graded on how protected a system is. As your pirating rank increases, you gain access to hidden pirate bases, with better missions and bigger rewards, with bigger profits on stolen goods etc.

You may even become privateers (actually join the Federal navy or whatever), legal pirates working for one faction to undermine the others, just what like the British did to the Spanish and French shipping lanes hundreds of years ago.

Pirating is about big risks and big rewards, but right now it is an utter joke. Just no risk, no consequences to your actions.

 

[NeilF]

Pirating is about big risks and big rewards, but right now it is an utter joke. Just no risk, no consequences to your actions.

Pretty much my feelings too.

But most of the professions feel somewhat thin don't you think? If you consider say Bounty Hunting, that's not exactly a lot better. Let's consider a real world bounty hunter making their money using ED's approach. So Mr Bounty Hunter simply drives down to his local bar (any will do) and sits there as a never ending queue of people walk in, most with a big sign on their head, "Wanted". He then arrests as many of those as he feels like... Done! Another hard and challenging days work done!

You'd think the bar would get a bad name amongst these Wanted folks, but seemingly not, as next night there's another huge queue of them waiting to come in. And strangest of all, none of them even seemingly drink or go there for any reason at all! It's almost like there's going there just to be caught?



But yes, Piracy needs a huge dose of attention/love, in combination with the crime/punishment mechanics.

 

[SkipRat]

Pretty much my feelings too.

But most of the professions feel somewhat thin don't you think? If you consider say Bounty Hunting, that's not exactly a lot better. Let's consider a real world bounty hunter making their money using ED's approach. So Mr Bounty Hunter simply drives down to his local bar (any will do) and sits there as a never ending queue of people walk in, most with a big sign on their head, "Wanted". He then arrests as many of those as he feels like... Done! Another hard and challenging days work done!

You'd think the bar would get a bad name amongst these Wanted folks, but seemingly not, as next night there's another huge queue of them waiting to come in. And strangest of all, none of them even seemingly drink or go there for any reason at all! It's almost like there's going there just to be caught?



But yes, Piracy needs a huge dose of attention/love, in combination with the crime/punishment mechanics.

Yes, every profession is very thin at the moment, I hope this is down to it being a 10 year project and each area will get the love and attention in the future it deserves. As of right now, because of the huge problem with shield cell banks being completely unfit for purpose and ships being completely unbalanced, but most of all the game being so thin, bounty hunting is mainly restricted to hunting NPC's, whilst pirates can't pirate NPC's. Even then, I don't think it is always easy to fix, just like exploring. IMO, I think exploring is an utter utter joke and needs an awful lot of love and attention as it is way way to easy. Due to the lack of love an attention at the beginning they can't make the changes needed to make exploring what it should be (without having a whole load of people throwing the teddies out of the pram), extremely difficult and with high rewards for the best explorers, as at the moment just point and click and jump and repeat.

Yes I think that combat should be about rock, paper, scissors, in the respect that you will always have a weakness and not a single setup will dominate, missiles, energy weapons and kinetic weapons, will have strengths and their weaknesses (maybe add some more types for variation and difficult in ship theory crafting) and in each case you cant protect yourself against all of them, rather than the current situation of just shield banks and lasers... Anyway that is for another discussion...

But right now, shield bank combat, ships going backwards faster than what some ships go forwards complete and utter lack of correct ship balancing making things like the Viper, Cobra MKIII and Diamond back completely redundant for combat (The Imperial Eagle is a beautiful ship, but completely pointless), lack of crime/punishment mechanics is just forcing players into solo mode and this is sad.

Of course, I know FD will sort this out in the future and people need to be patient, but I just hope it gets sorted in time before the split remains permanent...

Yes, solo players have to realize that pirating is a valid part of the game and is utterly different from some jerk conducting mass murder for the giggle of it... Yes, combat logging makes you a jerk too. And no, the "it's sand box game so you can do what you want" argument is not a valid argument, as it is only ever used mainly by people justifying themselves being idiots (not pointing this at you NeilF).