Yes PVP is unfair.

[Swordfish_01]

I disagree. If you really think that crime doesn't go unpunished you are looking at life the wrong way. Of all crimes committed only about 20% get caught and punished. Why should the Galaxy be any different? If there is absolute punishment for every crime there is no incentive for it. You would make space a Utopia.
If FD wanted to help New Commanders, they would have done so a long, long time ago.

 

[CMDR Bloodhawk]

for the noob the rebuy is 0. (they get the same ship back for free)
if all you do is gank noobs it will soon add up and become a less attractive game style.

At least the noobs would know there was a repercussion for the action.

I could literally kill 10,000 noobs and it wouldn't even tickle my credit balance. It's just not a great system to be frank

 

[Artie]

The idea of punishing more the behaviour of those players killing newbies or significantly weaker players just because they can sounds good. If it is the intention. If the intention is to bring PvE players from solo or closed groups like Mobius to Open, well... it will work just partially or not at all. The main point of PvE players is that they do not want to be involved in PvP, unless it's their will. So increasing penalties for murders will lower the risk that PvE player will enter PvP in open, but it doesn't eliminate it. From the view of PvE player there isn't any difference if person who just killed him suffered a low or high penalty - damage was already done.

If there should be PvE only players brought to Open more, there needs to be slightly different mechanics like PvP is just on mutual agreement, with some exceptions like that PvP is always "turned on" in conflict zones, when target has bounty on his head (above some treshold) or he declines to drop some cargo (which needs improved mechanics for piracy, like that cargo scan has additional function like "declare piracy" and target has certain amount of time to drop cargo in value at least of X% of his whole cargo). It needs more thinking about it, but you get the idea. But if the proposed theoretical solution isn't targeted to PvE players too much, good enough.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Hello Commanders!

We're also looking at further improvements with AI ships. Not sure when these will come through, but I can personally and painfully attest to increased risk of AI at the higher ranks, which should help authority ships.

It sounds very much like MoM™ has been working her magic on her minions.... Sounds wonderful and terrifying at the same time!

 

[Bakkster]

Do folk think that additional, relatively severe in-game penalties for illegal ship destruction where there was a large disparity between rank/power of murderer to victim would be a worthwhile thing?

Yes, criminal ganking should be dissuaded.

As an example suggestion: a high combat rank player in a combat capable ship boils a low combat rank player in a trade vessel. In addition to a bounty, the murderer is unable to dock at high security systems and suffers an increased insurance premium excess for an amount of time.

However, I think highest rank should be used, rather than trade rank. An Elite trader who's Harmless shouldn't get a free dissuasion against being attacked. He should be treated as the Elite he is, he's not getting ganked just because he's not a bounty hunter. Any Elite ranked trader worth their salt knows they need an iron ass.

 

[Bumbles]

Do you (or any other folk, feel free to respond), feel that there should be no additional penalties for lopsided encounters? That the world should remain uncaring and cold as is (don't worry folk, this isn't a trick question - there's no right or wrong answer!)?

Basically, I do (I did buy game with dangerous in the title, after all) but Your Ideas of making improving the AI and making system security levels more distinct as you mention earlier in the thread would do more to help rather than just penalizing players with no real in-universe explanation. Making sure that the starting systems have High security and making it genuinely difficult for player to get away with any crime (improving response time would be vital for this, definitely put it in the game) would give beginners a relatively space region to get to grips with the game and let the go to more lawless and dangerous regions of space at their own pace. You could also make it so missions to hunt down and collect the bounties of notorious criminals (including players), list their crimes and a way track their location. It would give players who were so inclined a reason and opportunity to punish player criminals a spice up bounty hunting.

Finally, could you give more of an explanation as to what interstellar bounties are?

Hopefully at some point we will get interstellar bounties back!

 

[sewerratuk]

Allow traders to insure their cargo?

This should be put in. It should also be insured against piracy, not just ship destruction.
The premium could be on a sliding scale so if you are caught out in an anarchy system the premium is high +70%?? and steadily reducing from there to 10%?? for the safest systems

Would this make traders happier to be confronted by pirates and more inclined to hand cargo over? Thereby, reducing the numbers of smaller trades ships being destroyed

 

[Nazdakka]

Hello Commander Bumbles!

I'm interested in your opinion. Even though these penalties would only be applied in cases where there was a very clear mismatch of ability *and* a crime was committed, you think it would be a deterrent to player versus player activities.

Do you (or any other folk, feel free to respond), feel that there should be no additional penalties for lopsided encounters? That the world should remain uncaring and cold as is (don't worry folk, this isn't a trick question - there's no right or wrong answer!)?

I think extra penalties for lopsided encounters are fine, assuming it's well implemented.


Also, a couple of questions:

- Have you considered the impact of numbers on your definition of 'lopsided'?
- Should this system also impose penalties on CMDRs based on the behaviour of their wingmates? If we've got a wing of CMDRs cruising around ganking weak opponents, should the penalty fall on the CMDR who struck the killing blow (the way that other ED systems tend to work) or should it be spread to other participating CMDRs?

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Hello Commanders!

Usual caveat: no guarantee, no ETA! This is just another thought experiment.

A quick question regarding player-versus-player (not AI) in open:

Currently there is no real difference between crime against AI and crime against humans.

Do folk think that additional, relatively severe in-game penalties for illegal ship destruction where there was a large disparity between rank/power of murderer to victim would be a worthwhile thing?

As an example suggestion: a high combat rank player in a combat capable ship boils a low combat rank player in a trade vessel. In addition to a bounty, the murderer is unable to dock at high security systems and suffers an increased insurance premium excess for an amount of time.

Continued offences of this nature increase and prolong the punitive measures.

Would a system like this help reconcile the two factions of the PVP and PVE, or would it not really address the issue?

Thoughts?

I always thought human players were treated different to ai lore wise otherwise what is the point of the hollow box?.

Hence it would not be that much of a stretch lore wise to have humans treated a bit differently (like made men in the mafia perhaps... Even if they destroy a regular Joe the penalties for someone taking you our without a damn good reason would be higher than killing any normal person.

So no, as long it was done well I would not mind

 

[shambles1980]

I could literally kill 10,000 noobs and it wouldn't even tickle my credit balance. It's just not a great system to be frank

are you really the typical type of person that does that though?

 

[Nazdakka]

Finally, could you give more of an explanation as to what interstellar bounties are?

In previous game versions you could be wanted by entire major faction, such as the entire Federation.

 

[CMDR Bloodhawk]

are you really the typical type of person that does that though?

Quite the opposite, but most high-level "griefers" are in my wealth class.

 

[KellyR]

Personally, I think the two factions won't be reconciled because of fundamental differences in what they perceive the purpose of the game to be (or, to put it another way, why they play the game.) The discourses surrounding the two outlooks are different at a basic level.

That said, I feel that PVP ganking in starter systems, for example, should basically be a capital crime, regardless of jurisdiction. Perhaps the response could be based on the differential between the two ships and the regularity with which the CMDR engages in such behaviour. For instance, someone hanging around Cleve Dock in Eravate in an FdL shooting up some number of newbie startwinders should expect automated, swift and lethal retribution from station defenses when they try to dock anywhere - there's no place in any game for that kind of behaviour, in my opinion. If, however, the same player were to do it in a starter sidey themselves, the response might be more muted.

Alternatively, every time the offending player started in open, they could be automatically referred to CQC. That would at least ensure a fair fight with players expecting to be shot at for no reason other than that they were there. (I'm only half-joking.)

I think that killing noobs in a cobra or higher in a starter system should get you a docking denial everywhere except anarchies. I would say even in anarchies except anarchy systems have no law at all. That's why they are an anarchy. CQC? I don't do CQC

Just because I have "Elite" as a combat rank, doesn't necessary mean I'm a "Elite" pilot. Yes I can kill NPC's, other players? Not so much.

Base it of CQC rank instead........

And what about the people like me who are helpless in CQC and always will be? Because we don't do CQC.

But I do have to say that there is one pilot that is on my KOS list and if I see him one of us will be facing a rebuy even if he is in a Sidewinder and I'm in a Python; unless he combat logs or manages to high or low wake out. He is one of the Smiling Dog Crew who have been killing Commanders as part of the blockades they've been doing. I don't care what the legal ramifications are. If I see him, I will engage him without warning and give no quarter nor ask for any.

 

[paulca]

1. Preventing wanted commanders from docking at stations belonging to a faction that have a bounty on you is a fantastic idea. Seems like a no-brainer to me. The reasoning for this is that if you want to be a criminal, if you want to go around killing anything and everything, then life should be slightly tough for you.
2. The bounty you receive should have a few factors. Right now I believe it is 6000 credits. It should factor in the ship you're attacking and the combat rank of the target (player only - who cares about NPCs?).
3. When you become wanted as a result of killing another player, cops should be on you like blackflies on your plate at a picnic. Once wanted, supercruise should be a true danger. To further this, I'd love to see some sort of notoriety tier system. Sort of like Grand Theft Auto. This is not an original idea. I've mentioned it in the past on other places and I've also read it a few times. GTA implements a good system for this. Borrowing some elements of it seems like a good idea to me.

This is pretty much the Eve model, generally anyway, Eve is lot more complex and in some ways even stricter. Take a happy shot at anyone in "High security space" without due provocation (theft for example) and you sign your death warrant. It is usually over in seconds.

This makes the core systems in Eve 99% safe, especially for newbies once they learn the baiting scams. However it divides the community and creates extremes on both sides. You have large groups of people who use real money to fund their military endeavours "out on the rim" of space and spend their days in player run, player policed space blowing each other up and lots of fairly frail 0-experience of PvP PvE only players in the core systems doing industry and mining and stuff like that.

I found as a solo player or even in small moderately minded groups a lot of game play outside of High Security was spent hiding in stations or creeping around in stealthy ships trying to avoid the gate camps and pirates, you could drop your guard for a minute or someone could warp in and warp scramble you, then finish you off at their leisure. All it took was one 6 year old (game time) pirate player or a small group of any pirate players to be patrolling around your are of space and you can't do anything, not unless you want to fit up for combat and fight. That doesn't work as in Eve you kinda have to specialize your character, so if you specialize in combat you spend you time pirating and getting into clan wars. If you specialized in industry and PvE careers, you hide when the former show up. This would be less of a problem in ED as there is not concept of skills or specialization, except by what you actually learn in the game play.

I'm not saying it's a good idea or a bad idea, but just putting across a parallel you can look at to see how similar "heavy handed" approach to crime went.

 

[Lheim]

I've been in favour of increased consequences for PvP - or at least ganking, for a while now.

Proposed it before, but it bears repeating: Put in some kind of un-erasable pilot's federation bounty, perhaps based on the value of destroyed property.

 

[Skuli]

Hello Commanders!

Usual caveat: no guarantee, no ETA! This is just another thought experiment.

A quick question regarding player-versus-player (not AI) in open:

Currently there is no real difference between crime against AI and crime against humans.

Do folk think that additional, relatively severe in-game penalties for illegal ship destruction where there was a large disparity between rank/power of murderer to victim would be a worthwhile thing?

As an example suggestion: a high combat rank player in a combat capable ship boils a low combat rank player in a trade vessel. In addition to a bounty, the murderer is unable to dock at high security systems and suffers an increased insurance premium excess for an amount of time.

Continued offences of this nature increase and prolong the punitive measures.

Would a system like this help reconcile the two factions of the PVP and PVE, or would it not really address the issue?

Thoughts?

I wonder if the murderer should have a major-faction-wide bounty increased by the amount of the victim's insurance rebuy? Or at least a significant percent therein. Some nefarious players would, of course, deliberately dart out in front of players to be "rammed to death" and force bankruptcy, I suppose.

Ultima Online had a fairly workable system involving murder; each murder inched you closer to an "outcast" status where you'd be attacked immediately upon entering any lawful and guarded region. I believe something along these lines could be very workable. Kill too many people in friendly Fed space and you're kill-on-site by ANY federal station, security, or outpost?

How about an additional 5% insurance rebuy penalty (for one week) for every cold-blooded murder committed by a commander? That could get expensive quickly, although it might only encourage combat logging.

Oh, maybe murderers could be refused station services like repair and refuel?

 

[Colonel Kenney]

If BOUNTIES are placed on people's heads by people and make it worth while ( know there could be cheats to allow people to rack up bounties and collect and share the money) there could be an active game element of ACTUAL bounty hunting players. It could be profitable too.

If they could do it right to prevent cheating.

Would be something like a person couldn't collect a bounty on someone if they were ever on the person's friends list before or personal group. Problem is there is no way of policing bounty scams.

Possibly I put out the contract for the kill via bulletin board - someone wants the job - I choose whether I agree to it or not. They complete the contract they get paid. I can check the person's history before I allow them to accept the contract. If they are a known criminal I don't let them take it.

 

[Bumbles]

I've been in favour of increased consequences for PvP - or at least ganking, for a while now.

Proposed it before, but it bears repeating: Put in some kind of un-erasable pilot's federation bounty, perhaps based on the value of destroyed property.

ALL PVP? come on, Penalizing people for Interacting with each other won't help the game.

 

[relayer]

I think that killing noobs in a cobra or higher in a starter system should get you a docking denial everywhere except anarchies.

Agree with the above. Just throwing my vote in here for Sandro. Bounties could be handled by the Pilot's Federation so your ranking with a Power wouldn't help you. [someone proposed] an escalating scale (if it could be pulled off) of "good citizen --> outlaw" and increasing penalties, particularly the ability to dock at any but anarchy stations.

Another thing: penalties & status should be attached to the pilot, not a ship, so no more SuicideWinder tricks; otherwise, any suggestions for penalties could be gamed into uselessness.

 

[shambles1980]

sticking to my guns on both party's pay the insurance cost if the murdered party was not PP hostile or wanted.
With the caveat of "report crimes = off" For the clean non hostile person, nullifying it..

not perfect.
but better than what we have, and i imagine easy to implement.

After that fix combat logging.