Yes PVP is unfair.

Honestly I don't think so. Would say 95% of bad guys would not care about these kind of "punishment". Money is mostly not an issue anymore since Robigo smuggling. Not able to dock on specific station - as well not a big deal. Here some ideas...

Protect Traders:
- Trader should buy protection by a NPC wing to travel through space.
- Police should react much faster then currently (within 10 seconds) if your crime function is "on".

Punish Bad Guys (only for special cirmes, griefing):
- Create NPC special forces (which are really, really strong) for special crimes.
- Wanted status should be live for 7 days, even if you die (or switch ship and let the station kill you by the station)
- Install a bounty hunting modul, which allows every player in open detect and hunt the bad guys (with information about the bounty) - even if they are not in your friends list.

That this don't collide with the normal PVP fightings, players could activate a kind of "Yes, ready for PVP" status, which is visible for other players.

Indeed, losing credits will not be a strong deterent for some. And you point righly that having strong NPC's wings hunting down terrorists/psychos and losing docking rights
over large area of civilized space would be more effective. It seems to me that some fans of "PvP" as understood of shooting any hollow square/triangle on sight have an issue
with the game handing them consequences from such actions. Strange, I would have though that such players were RP badass.

No one here wants to remove PvP, just make it so that illegal murder of CMDR's cost the offender enough to discourage it. Not forbit it, just making it costly in terms of credits and
in-game gameplay consequences.
 
Last edited:
I'm not wanted and am happy to be attacked and often PvP. How is the above going to deal with people who actively want this play style?

Deal with people who actively want PvP engagement? Don't just deal with them, support them!
1) Offer a couple of areas for TV entertainment where PvP is entirely OK, indeed the rebuys are even covered to a large degree by the TV companies... eg: In empty space. An ansteroid field. Around a dead platform.
2) Actually use game mechanics to create PvP conflict; Missions to escort/attack convoys. Missions to perform fighter defense at a platform, or fighter assaults on platforms. Or around capital ships. Indeed even base some CGs around these!

Meanwhile heavily penalise the illegal murder of CMDRs!
 
Last edited:
And that is the problem with the trade system. Who would trade food, you get so little for it. Most places without any agriculture would disapear as no one would take any food to them as there is zero profit in it. The commodities really need an overhaul. Maybe making the internal cargo weight and volume based. Would make more sense and would make trading in other stuff applicable.

If there is a wealth of surrounding Agricultural systems supplying similar produce then profits are not gonna be good. Industrial is good trading to Agricultural systems but you will never be guaranteed best profits.
If you want to find a good profit making system, go for one which has no rivals, has a good Allegiance / Government and obviously Economy.
Players just seem to think that there is just an instant win when trading with a certain type of station but you really have to look at the details to even make 1,000cr per ton.
Cross border trading between powers is profitable. What is legal to one and not outlawed in the other is generally best profit. This comes down to Governments and not global. Find and win.

Best profits from Agriculture come from Narcotics, illegal in some but not all. Regular goods pale in comparision to say Industrial or others. There isn't an open, without thinking or working the system legitimately, legit 1,000cr run from Agricultural systems.
Most others have these...so they seem neglected.

I'd love to see an ebb and flow between commodites so all can have their moment of good profit and not be consigned to never being traded. 150 to 1,000 profit does not compute. Everyone will go for 1,000.
So, the same goods get traded all the time.
I've never had any reason to run poor profit goods beyond the mission system where the profit gets a boost and it's not really relative and not reflected in the station's market.
 
Last edited:
The only thing I really get from this thread is a lot of strange ways to obstruct a certain gameplay: Player vs Player.

The moment you give players the option to shoot other players, you will experience player death that is sometimes not "fair".
No obstacle, mechanic or penalty is EVER going to change this. You can put in any mechanic and there will still be unfair deaths, or people who think they are griefed.

Even in EVE with the insta-responding police in high-sec you can get ganked. And thats in a game with severe death-penalties... you loose EVERYTHING on explosion unless you bought insurance.
EVE does one thing right though, and thats the criminal rating. It keeps repeat offenders out of certain systems based on this rating.
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Security_status

In my mind it all really comes down to one question: What is Elite Dangerous?

Is it a cooperative game - with focus on PvE?
Is it a competetive game - with focus on PvP?

Right now it tries to be everything, and I believe that is a problem resonating from the game modes, but thats a discussion for some other place.

TLDR; Add some sort criminal rating that works with the systems security rating. So you have a more easy way of telling "badguys" from the "good guys".
 
The only thing I really get from this thread is a lot of strange ways to obstruct a certain gameplay: Player vs Player.

It's not about obstruct, it is to add actual CONSEQUENCES to a hostile act within non-lawless space and actually ADD gameplay for those that want to play as criminals.
 
I apologie as well if I have been passionate about supporting PVE. I for one believe in a different kind of future where conquering space is the common bond that keeps humans working together rather than killing each other.

I just thought of something. Did you see the movie "The Martian"?

Most everyone was pulling for and cheering when he got rescued. How would this occur in Elite Dangerous?

A pirate would interdict the ship on it's way to rescue him and steal the cargo. Bad Ending!

A phycho would just interdict the ship and destroy it. Bad Ending!

I believe in a future where we would work together to have the story end with our Martian getting rescued.

This is the difference in our mindsets.

I agree in principle but I also think that co-op shouldnt be contrived. For there to be heroes there must also be bandits. The present crime system has much to be desired and I'll agree with that but we should also seek for ways where we as players have a great choice.. pirating and being an all round at should be a fair way to play. Maybe I'd like to find player bandits and bounty hunt them.

I imagine situations where there is no get out cluase of solo or pg.. and we require a much greater connection. You might need my services one day.. and I you.. imagine you calling upon me to escort you through dangerous space or me requiring a vast quanitity of cargo delivered somehwere.. There might be other players and groups who decide what we are doing and what we are carrying might not be in their interests.. There is lots gameplay potential to be had under these circumstances.

I'll reiterate though, I would hate for the game to be utterly group controlled by some uber thing that goes on in EvE. Its wise for Sandro to seek ways to unite us as players.. I'm prepared to give, are the other side?
 
Last edited:
I was thinking about this earlier today. The conclusion I came to was that the real issue is actually with the existing laws/rules in game.

Right now, there's just nothing like the appropriate disincentive to actually be a law abiding citizen. So it's hardly surprising that some players act like lager louts on a holiday to Spain.
IMO, we need a serious update to the laws applied in game. I put a thread up about anti-piracy in the suggestions forum.
A few highlights that spring to mind:
- Introduce a new status of "warning" for a player, such that accidental damage to a ship doesn't result in being insta-hunted
- If a player does kill a non-wanted ship, make them wanted, but not just in the system in question, in ALL systems of the same major faction, i.e. (alliance, fed and empire). That's quite a specific suggestion such that a player could go hide in an anarchy system, or say work for a PP power that is of another major faction)
- If a player becomes wanted give them say 48 hours or a week to pay the fine (payable ANYWHERE). If they don't, a bounty is issued
- Make the fine a serious fine, instead of the pathetic ones we have now. Eg. the cost of a targets insurance + 10%
- For players with a high bounty, allow them to be seen and spotted as they go past NavBeacons as controlled by any of the major powers (again, NOT in an anarchy system)
- For a wanted player have their insurance INVALIDATED until they've cleared their wanted status by fully paying off the fine

The above would be a genuine way to push players towards being a lawful society. Sure, still want to be a pirate, you can, but that means normally basing yourself in an anarchy system.
 
Last edited:
.... I'm prepared to give, are the other side?

Well, both sides have people willing to work things out, I've seen some great ideas from both PvE and PvP people in the SOG mega threads.
It's the extremists on both sides that become an issue, either not willing to give or just wanting to take cheap shots at each other.
 

Yeah I do find myself in conflict with commander Braben but I suspect a wisdom will prevail. These times are a changing.. you only have to look at the exceptional community support. I no longer hold grievances despite not receving my god powerz! muahaha, couh cough, *climbs on to a wheel chair*

Well, both sides have people willing to work things out, I've seen some great ideas from both PvE and PvP people in the SOG mega threads.
It's the extremists on both sides that become an issue, either not willing to give or just wanting to take cheap shots at each other.

Ignore folk who make it personal.. lots of cool people either side of the debate.. ;)
 
Deal with people who actively want PvP engagement? Don't just deal with them, support them!
1) Offer a couple of areas for TV entertainment where PvP is entirely OK, indeed the rebuys are even covered to a large degree by the TV companies... eg: In empty space. An ansteroid field. Around a dead platform.
2) Actually use game mechanics to create PvP conflict; Missions to escort/attack convoys. Missions to perform fighter defense at a platform, or fighter assaults on platforms. Or around capital ships. Indeed even base some CGs around these!

Meanwhile heavily penalise the illegal murder of CMDRs!

Well that's the crux of the issue Neil. There never has been an effective security system in place accross the galaxy, anarchy is as safe as core systems (maybe even safer) and there is no meaningful consequence to being the bad guy. This coupled with the role of a pirate being for the most part completely ignored since day one People have moved on from bothering to pirate to just mindless killing. There;s no notoriety in the game, no way of establishing and tracking bad guys so that the community can deal with them and make an actual interesting feature of it and the game is crying out for content and we have one on a plate being completely ignored, its criminal. Finally we have dev posts like this that offer solutions that seem horrifically convoluted and so complex that you just know they are not going to work as intended. .


I said earlier today that I imagine a round of tea in the FDEV's office goes something like this;

1. Establish average temperature of tea across the entire planet
2. Establish average temperature of the office
3. Calculate the difference between the findings of points 1 and 2
4. Make tea using cold water
5. Hire industrial chillers to reduce the office temperature by the difference found in point 3
6. Serve cold tea that is X degrees warmer than the new office temperature
7. Wonder why everyone is looking at you as if you are mad and leaving.
 
Ignore folk who make it personal.. lots of cool people either side of the debate.. ;)

damn you no, we have to be at war with each other and argue. i am a care bear and you are a psycho griefer

:p

(repped :) )

seriously tho..... what ever happens, and there is a lot I hope to see happen in ED, some that we will all want, and some that would be a bit like marmite, I truly hope to god solo and private never gets taken down. If it did I am not sure what I would do to be honest.**

**game wise of course
 
Last edited:
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.

I think that sounds like a good idea, perhaps I would even take it one step further by saying that people who repeatedly do this get specially marked to be hunted by, well, bounty hunters. So that when you target them it doesn't only say Wanted but something like Most Wanted or something similar.
 
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?

Yes most definitely. Murder must be the most heinous crime and there must be consequences beyond just a local faction bounty. The penalty should apply throughout human space, Federation, Empire, Alliance or Independent. The only place they can run to is an anarchy system.
 
Crime and punishment, A response to Sandro Sammarco.
I considered creating a new thread for this. but I will post here for what it is worth.

Law and order vs Bounties.
Initially, bounties need to be separated from bounties. Bounties are paid out to players for "killing" a wanted player, and that is fine. They, however should not be used for the purpose of punishment. For that we need a separate law and order system.

Criminal actions and consequences.
I have in the past proposed a points based system. Points are given on the basis of the criminal actions of players. Higher values of points increase the penalties applied to the player in terms of system responses. I proposed a 12 point framework. 1-3 points would have the local system or faction frowning upon you, it would increase the likelihood of you being scanned at stations and being pulled out of supercruise. 3-6 points. These would remove your ability to dock at stations where the points were issued. 7-9 points would extend the docking restrictions to all minor faction controlled stations in all systems controlled by the faction. 10-12 would remove the ability to dock in stations controlled by the major faction that the issuing parties are affiliated with. Independent systems would only apply the restrictions up to 9 points. The points would be removed over time, and encourage players to minimise random player killing. Points could not be accrued for player kills in Combat zones. Points would be allocated along these lines. Docking and other minor infractions would be exempt. Smuggling, firing upon a "clean" player, or interdicting a clean player would garner 1 point. Player killing (Clean) would get 3 points.

System security levels.
Security levels should mean something. High security systems should have massively lethal responses for "criminal" players. The response should be swift, to the point of only having "fuel scoop and jump" amounts of time before the player is interdicted, there may be an “escape option” through bribery however. Players interdicting other "clean" players will face an almost immediate security response, The security forces will know as soon as they drop in who is "most wanted" and initiate an attack immediately. In medium security systems will have a commensurately lower response, where the security forces will randomly scan players based upon suspect behaviour and “gathered intelligence”, once detected you will have a short period of grace to escape the system, or possibly pay a bribe. Interdiction of "clean" players will elicit a slower response and the security forces will scan players to determine levels of criminality. Low security systems will have little or no security response. Even with maximum points only specific stations may refuse a player's docking request based upon the controlling faction, the reputation of the player and whether the points have been issued by the station.

Encouraging players in open to venture into hostile space.
Alongside these changes I suggest a new set of missions for traders. High value, High Risk, haulage missions into low security systems and high reward smuggling missions issued in low-security, anarchy systems. These would be along the lines of "Deliver 100 tonnes of Platinum to Station X in this Anarchy system" the reward would be perhaps 2, 3 or 5 times the normal profit for a similar, low risk mission. To add spice, pirate factions would be able to post similar missions, under pseudonyms, on bulletin boards, then ambush the player when they attempt to complete the mission. The reward might also encourage traders to employ wings to assist with the missions, or they might try to slip in without being intercepted. They might view submitting to the pirates when caught and complying with their demands as the cost of doing business. This structure could also add to the role of bounty-hunters, by taking a mission to a high-risk system to try and engage pirates, or signing up into a wing to provide security for a trader in the same hope. Even having bounty-hunters hanging out, cold, looking for high-value targets.

Bribery, corruption and reputation.
A new facet to the game. Adding the possibility of paying bribes to security ships in order to reduce, temporarily, your wanted status could be added. The availability of this would be tied to the stability and security level of a system. Highly contested systems, even with high security levels could provide access to stations provided your wanted status is low enough and you are willing to pay a sufficient bribe. Your reputation as pirate could provide you with access to stations or facilities that are otherwise nor accessible. Such stations might designate "clean" players as hostile and not provide docking rights or reduce access to station facilities.

The real key to this system is that your criminal record is persistent. Dying may remove your bounties, but will have no effect upon how many points you have gained in your career as a miscreant only time will remove your criminal history.
 
What about adding some kind of feature to trade vessels that allows them to "strike the colours" which would indicate that they were willing to surrender/drop cargo/negotiate with whoever interdicted them and would disable or reduce the their drive ability but would also create harsh penalties for the attacker if they were destroyed. This would fit in somewhat historically as well as it was a major crime during the age of sail to fire on a ship that had lowered her flag. That way, if you are a random murderer you get the harsh penalties for breaking galactic law but pirates can still get cargo and even have time to communicate after an interdiction, and the trader could know that if they were just murdered while in this mode the attacker would be facing immediate consequence.


I think this is a great idea.
I also think the talk about making system security level more important is a really good direction to take. Historically you didn't even go to an anarchy system in the original Elite until you were in a tougher ship.

The issue I currently have with PVP is that if you aren't set up for it (i.e: you are just playing the game normally) then PVP is just a random destruction interruption to your day. If it were safe for PVPers to do whatever they like in Anarchy systems then it would be focussed more there and people who need to would stick to safe systems.

We might also want to consider enticements for trade ships to enter PVP zones too so piracy isn't killed off.
The way community goals sometimes work indirectly to pull in traders with escorts is a great example of this.

I'd kind of given up hope that we could get everyone playing together but some of the ideas in this thread might make it happen :)
 
Last edited:
I'm not wanted and am happy to be attacked and often PvP. How is the above going to deal with people who actively want this play style?

Sorry for not responding sooner. You get Rep for asking a very good question. Given what I had laid out combat zones could well be left out of the punishment. Also anarchy systems could be left out too leaving lots of space for the PvP players to have their fun.

If both parties left the report crimes toggle off then it would also not be an issue, what happens in PvP stays in PvP type of thing. :)

Not perfect but you have to start with an idea.
 
Since alpha 2014 i hear the lame excuse of if you kill ppl you drive them to solo and there will be NONE left.


Well boys and girls , i can safely say , there are more ppl as ever in open and i having a blast blasting others.

thank you.
 
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: MJC
Hello Commander Bane Six Echo!

Personally I'm not a fan of pushing the rebuy cost onto the criminal. Not that it's a bad idea. It makes sense in many ways, but for me, trivialises ship destruction, which is part of the intended risk of flying a ship in Elite: Dangerous. It also further stretches the difference between AI and players (which as a general principle I'd like to minimize), unless we had free re-buys from AI murders.

But point taken on the imbalance of cost resulting from criminal activities.

Well do expand on that, I'd love to be able to kill the guy that killed me and get my rebuy back from him to kind of equal out the Karma. While I agree with you that Humans and NPCs need to be on the same level as far as gameplay, I also would like to put in the fact that right now Humans are MUCH better than NPCs and that NPC police are a joke. They are slow to react and are generally just cannon fodder for people working the BGS. Why not have police just "spawn in" when a criminal (which has over a 6k CR murder bounty) interdicts a clean player that is below master rank and make these NPC's difficulty and numbers equal (or similar to) the criminals so that the innocent ship has a chance to get away?

Right now players can sealclub noobs and traders all day because there really aren't any repercussions from police or the starports for doing so. Player bounty hunters and enforcers like my group simply don't have the tools to get into these lowwakes fast enough to kill the criminal before they kill the innocent player. Why not give players the option to have a distress beacon that anyone trying to get into their wake can jump into, like a wing beacon?

I think it's awesome that you're discussing this with us.. This is something my group has been waiting on for about a year now. Thank you!
 
Back
Top Bottom