Proposal Discussion Proposed changes to the bounty/crime punishment system

About a week has passed since the infamous infiltration to Mobius. In addition to that within this time-frame there was an attack on charity streamers.
We've seen a lot of threads discussing these events, however, most of them were simply cursing the actions of the known player group, or proposing the counter actions.
However, within these threads these are the consequences of these events that are discussed. While one can think that it is important to respond to these actions, I think that actually it is more important to implement the ways to prevent such events from happening. I have not seen any thread specifically devoted to the discussion of how to prevent this from happening again, to discuss what has made such actions possible first hand. And understanding of the latter is going to shed the light on the possible solution.
And I believe that all players (both PvE and PvP) are going to benefit from this solution.

I think that these are the serious flaws in the crime and punishment system that has led to this unfortunate result. We have three major factions in the game (that are spread through a large number of the systems) and countless minor factions (that are represented in several systems at best). I would like to note that the last noticeable changes to the bounty systems were implemented in 1.3, and nothing major has changed since then.

Let's retrospectively look at the bounty system, and the changes to it. If I remember it correctly prior to 1.3 the bounties were issued by both major and minor factions depending on the jurisdictions were the crime was committed. Immediately after committing a crime it was possible to dock at the station in the system and pay off this bounty. It was very common that a player would attack/destroy another player, go to the station, pay off the bounty, and they were clean again, so that a player who wanted to have revenge had to commit a crime now. This lead to the modifications to the crime punishment system that are covered in detail here:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=141640

So what are the changes we are talking of? Namely, major factions no longer issue bounties, i.e. all bounties are issued by minor factions only. Bounties have a certain duration starting with 10 minutes for such crime as an assault to 7 days for a murder. The values of the bounties remained unchanged, i.e. 6000Cr for destroying a ship. So the total bounty that is issued for the destruction of the ship is 400Cr for assault and 6000Cr for the murder, i.e. the total of 6400Cr. This is the bounty for any ship that is destroyed, be it a basic Sidewinder that costs ~30k Cr, or a combat Imperial Cutter with the price of ~1b Cr. The price of the ship is totally irrelevant. It should also be noted that the cargo that might be in the cargo hold of the ship does not affect the bounty issued for the ship's destruction. This adds up to the loss (insurance costs). On a side note, I would like to mention that although there is a field "Cargo Insurance" in the right UI panel, however, there is no way to insure the cargo in the game. So the full value of the cargo is lost, which in case of the ships like Cutter with the cargo hold of ~700t might easily reach 7-9M Cr.
So if this bounty is issued in most of the cases it affects one system only. There are players who simply avoid visiting this system for the duration of the bounty, however, there is a known workaround to this issue, which is also widely used. It is only needed to go to the station controlled by the faction that has issued the bounty, buy a Sidewinder there, and make the station destroy you. According the current implementation of the crime punishment system, the bounty is paid off with the insurance in this case. This means that the destruction of any ship in the game costs less than 10k Cr.
This means that if a Cutter full of cargo is destroyed this leads to a loss of ~15-20M Cr for the ship and 7-9M Cr for the cargo.

I guess everyone can see a major flaw here.

Now I am going to cover the actions of the security ships. These are triggered if the ship that is assaulted has "Report crimes on me" set to ON. In the case a distress signal is sent to security ships, and they jump to the normal space in the instance of the ship that is being assaulted. They scan the ships in the area and start attacking those who are wanted. Seems nice, however, it is nice on paper only. Actually, it takes too long for security ships to jump in this instance. By this time the ship that was attacked has either already jumped out, or is destroyed. Moreover, the security ships responding to this distress call are random, so it is likely that if someone uses a Cutter to attack others, security is going to have Vipers deployed. What can these vipers do to this Cutter, which has 2000-3000MJ of shields? Nothing. It can jump out to SC without any consequences, there is nothing that would prevent it from jumping out.

And even if the wanted ship stays in the system it is wanted the only consequence to it is that it is being interdicted from time to time by the security ships, which in most of the cases are small ships that cannot deal real damage but to annoy.

This is another major flaw.

So I think it is of key importance to implement the changes to the crime bounty system that would significantly reduce the possibilities to commit crimes in the systems that are supposed to be secure. It is obvious that the modifications should not remove this possibility completely but to make it a very rare occurrence.

First of all, I would propose to finally implement interstellar bounties, which were announced in the dev update linked in this post, however, they are not implemented yet. The idea behind interstellar bounties was that these bounties are issued by the major factions presented in the system were the crimes were committed, interstellar bounties are issued in case a bounties exceed a certain predefined amount. These interstellar bounties should be active in all systems where there is a presence of the major faction that has issued the bounty.

Definitely, the values of the bounties should be increased, and these should depend on the impact of the criminal actions. I.e. these should depend on the price of the ship that is lost, the price of the cargo lost. This values should not be space-high though, otherwise, as this should not result in complete extermination of the crimes. So I would propose 1/10 of the insurance price of the ship. Cargo insurance should also be implemented, but this should be done voluntarily.

Then that the security response should be improved. It should be much faster. It also should be much deadlier. I would suggest doing that by predefining the ship types that respond to the distress call. I.e. if the crime is committed by the Cutter, security should deploy similar ships, i.e. Anacondas, Cutters, Corvettes. It should be noted that Cutter has the highest lock factor then security forces should deploy at least one Cutter. Security forces should come in numbers as well, i.e. they should outnumber the criminals.

On top of that to that I would propose a way to make additional improvements to the gameplay regarding the crimes committed by players against other players. For example, if a player or a group of players has destroyed a player, the destroyed ship should activate a distress beacon. Other players should be able to receive the signal from this distress beacon. This signal should contain the coordinates, where the ship was destroyed. Those who decide to respond to this distress beacon should go to the system/coordinates reported by the distress beacon, and should be able to find the debris of the destroyed ship. This should provide the name of CMDR who has committed the crime, and its approximate location. This should allow bounty hunters to attempt to claim this bounty.

Sure one can object that this is not possible as it is possible to switch game modes. To counter that I would propose locking the players with active bounties received by killing other players in Open mode. Or maybe even by allowing to pay off the bounty with the insurance only if it is claimed by another player.
 
I like it. Makes high sec really high sec, even more of a punch in systems with major factions (as i think it should be, reflecting the benefits of factions banding together), leaves low sec a place where combat can occur with less penalty.

A scaled bounty system is also nice.

I think with this they could even get rid of the whole dormant bounty thing. Just timed bounties that expire. Even make it so that getting killed does not remove the bounty, although ensure the same bounty can't be collected more than once by the same player.
 
Most of your ideas have been discussed in the 'yes PVP is unfair' thread, in which Sandro has replied numerous times talking with the community about these ideas. Obviously, in typical dev fashion, there was no guarantee or ETA as to when these changes might take place, but I absolutely agree that they need to happen, and soon. The crime and punishment system might as well not even exist!
 
i share your analysis of serious flaws in bounty system, and your intention by giving crimes/murders serious consequences to prevent meaningless destructive player-interaction.

but some of the changes you propose would bring serious problems to the game as it is.

for exampel:

The idea behind interstellar bounties was that these bounties are issued by the major factions presented in the system were the crimes were committed, interstellar bounties are issued in case a bounties exceed a certain predefined amount.

this would get a big problem for anybody doing powerplay. from my understanding changing major faction bounties in 1.3 was introduced to allow players to take part in powerplay, without being wanted in one thrid of the galaxy. have in mind, that a merit farming powerplayer will gain bounties even in space his power is alligned to, if he undermines in a system of an other powered, which has the opposite alignment, but is controlling a system with a major faction presented. as long as the empress can, for exampel, control federal systems, your proposal would lead to hudson pilots flying around with federal bounties.


Definitely, the values of the bounties should be increased, and these should depend on the impact of the criminal actions. I.e. these should depend on the price of the ship that is lost, the price of the cargo lost. This values should not be space-high though, otherwise, as this should not result in complete extermination of the crimes. So I would propose 1/10 of the insurance price of the ship. Cargo insurance should also be implemented, but this should be done voluntarily.

Then that the security response should be improved. It should be much faster. It also should be much deadlier. I would suggest doing that by predefining the ship types that respond to the distress call. I.e. if the crime is committed by the Cutter, security should deploy similar ships, i.e. Anacondas, Cutters, Corvettes. It should be noted that Cutter has the highest lock factor then security forces should deploy at least one Cutter. Security forces should come in numbers as well, i.e. they should outnumber the criminals.

both proposals would most likely unbalance the BGS and BGS gameplay a lot. as it is now, the bounty value has several effects on the BGS. npc's normally don't fly expensive ships - a change like yours would either open up for cmdrs destroying other cmdrs consensual for influencing the BGS massively. or the necessity to destroy large ships of other factions, e.g. t9/t7 instead of vipers.

10% of a npc t9 (classical target of npc piracy for influencing the BGS) would already be 5 mio minimum - on a normal "dark arts BGS night" i personally would rack up a bounty of 50-70 mio CR, to get a minor factions influence down of maybe 2%.

concerning security response - it is already like that, that, if you work on the BGS attacking ships of a faction, you can't do it any longer in a cobra or even courier, you need a vulture, FDl or better. while i'm with you, that security response is to slow in case of pvp, scaling it like you propose, would make it effectivily impossible to influence the BGS by attacking ships (and there for one of the heavy hitters gone).
i personally wonder more about the lack of consequences of my actions (e.g. hostile with the faction i back, two charity missions allow me to join their ranks in a combatzone).

now - all these things would read differently, if you'd propose them as changes only when players attack player ships. but this is something i would even like less - making "the player" more special.
 
Aleksej's proposals are correct and I do in general agree with all of it. Proper pirating should be possible in the game and this changes would make this game even more exciting.

But for these players who are seeing the essence of the game just to bully other player, the price they have to pay is far too low. Yesterday in the interview of David Braben (Lave Radio) he mentioned something to put these pilots in a separate private group with other bullies. Honestly I am not sure that this is the good way. I do like the GTA approach were you have levels of "wanted" status. But here again, anybody with a wanted status can kill himself by a station in a Sidewinder and everything is back clear (mostly).

It is a really difficult topic and griefing should be still part of the game - but with more risk and proper price tag behind. Not just money, but also kind of punishment. Whatever Frontier will do (hopefully soon), it will change the mechanics of the game and open doors for other side effects.
 
They need to lower the security respond time in high security system while in others it could stay same as it is now in high security systems. Then allow selling stolen cargo to anarchy/pirate stations without that stolen cargo penalty, so pirates have places where they would go to sell cargo they have stolen and bounty hunters could go to look for them. Also decrease trading, mission etc profits on high security systems so players would be encouraged to go to anarchy/low security systems for better profit.

And then deal bounties like op suggest, but have it, so in low security systems bounties are lover and in high security bounties are higher. Also wanted players who have bounty on federation shouldn't be able to dock at any federation station/settlement. Of course if federal system have independent factions with stations/settlements player wanted in federation should be able to dock even if system is federal (Owner of the station decide if wanted player can dock not the system status (federal, Empire, independent).
 
I guess everyone can see a major flaw here.

Yes, Powerplay. Dramatic changes to crime and punishment have an equally dramatic change to Powerplay. It's barely worth it now. It would send PP to solo.

Actually, it takes too long for security ships to jump in this instance.

This is by design. The AI could turn up in seconds if desired.

First of all, I would propose to finally implement interstellar bounties, which were announced in the dev update linked in this post, however, they are not implemented yet. The idea behind interstellar bounties was that these bounties are issued by the major factions presented in the system were the crimes were committed, interstellar bounties are issued in case a bounties exceed a certain predefined amount. These interstellar bounties should be active in all systems where there is a presence of the major faction that has issued the bounty.

RIP powerplay again; back to solo where the impacts of just shooting AI in PP undermining is pretty much like shooting fish in a barrel.

Definitely, the values of the bounties should be increased, and these should depend on the impact of the criminal actions.

Actually tying it to the security level of the system might be a better approach; right now a low-sec and high-sec have pretty much the same static bounty tiers. This is illogical.

Cargo insurance should also be implemented, but this should be done voluntarily.

I have no idea why this isn't a thing either. Wasn't it supposed to be at some point??

Then that the security response should be improved. It should be much faster. It also should be much deadlier.

RIP Powerplay for about the third time over. It would send PP to solo. This is becoming a pattern. :)

Rather than just spawn in random ships, at a moments notice; how about using the mechanics Frontier have already discussed and have a relativistic response? Where is seal team 6 in ED? Beuller?

If an elite pilot in a FDL with rails decides to bang heads, sending in two vipers isn't really going to cut the mustard, is it? In a wing situation it's just, frankly, a bit - 4 commanders arrive and they are greeted, belatedly, by a viper and maybe an eagle or two.

And the best bit? In the maelstrom, the actual target of the PVP strike, has shot at someone without letting a scan complete, or worse just accidentally rammed; and the odds are very very high that the AI will immediately attack the victim; not the 4 pvp bros!

The AI seems to have a propensity to prioritise larger targets. Type-9 loses to an FDL, every time. It's just crazy.

I would suggest doing that by predefining the ship types that respond to the distress call. I.e. if the crime is committed by the Cutter, security should deploy similar ships, i.e. Anacondas, Cutters, Corvettes.

Much better. A proportionate response; that pretty much covers it without barbaric bounties that actively prevent power play, BGS destabilizing or anything similar. Although undermining is now basically impossible, without having to jump through hundreds of systems to prevent "god" ships appearing.

Back to solo again; because there are no other commanders, crime doesn't really mean anything. It's half the reason PP happens there mostly anyway. That and it's impossible to stop undermining. You can't stop ships that aren't in the same instance.

Net result? More reasons for PP to be solo. It's absolutely not worth attempting to stop an enemy commander from killing your faction during undermining.

On top of that to that I would propose a way to make additional improvements to the gameplay regarding the crimes committed by players against other players.

To this day, do not understand why a message isn't sent sector wide when proverbial hits the fan. Surely a ship in distress is going to seek help? Nup. Silence.

This is easily highlighted during CG; when groups actually come in with the express intent of protecting shipping lanes. Use the ingame message system so they can actively accept bounties, mid SC, and go kick some butt.

To counter that I would propose locking the players with active bounties received by killing other players in Open mode. Or maybe even by allowing to pay off the bounty with the insurance only if it is claimed by another player.

Really I think the "proportionate response" both from a security reaction, and bounty perspective respond to a lot of this. Otherwise it will deep six PP and means griefing at stations will rise because using an environment based attack, means the AI will punatively strike the victim, even more so than it does now.

You also do have to consider griefers using the environment to score a kill; it's happened before with yokels in stations, colliding below the speed limit with near zero health. Now? They can do that with a cutter against someone in a cobra, and you've just bankrupted a player.

Some really good points though. Rep'd all the same.
 
Last edited:
What a great series of opening arguments :)

Personally i'm not in favour of credit fines based on rebuy costs. Why?

O It's too easy to exploit and grief players with (e.g 30M rebuy cutter on purpose loses 99% of it's hull and then gets in the way of a new player sidey boosting out of the station, newbie sidewinder then gets stuck with an impossible to pay off fine)

O for many players credits are irrelevant. Who cares if you have a 10M fine with a couple billion in the bank. The Tears and salt of the victim are more than worth it.

O Most players only last 30-60 seconds against a wing of killers, sending out a beacon to ask for help will be useless. As soon as the assault crime is reported then help should be only moments away

We also need to look at the lore of game so while I totally agree with Major faction wide bounties and greatly increased security response, that also needs to be tempered with the lore. So my alternate proposal would be

O A rising series of criminal status (Offender, Wanted, Fugitive).
O Only multiple Murder gets you to Fugtive, pirates who do not kill will be locked to Offender or Wanted. The larger difference in combat rating the less murders needed to get there
O The level of response is dependent on your criminal status
O Major faction wide responses, do we really think the empire is going to let a mass killer dock at their stations? No they would send out firstly the local militia and if that doesn't work the Navy to either kill the criminal or drive them from imperial space
O Anarchy systems wouldn't give a damn about criminal status and pirate bases actually give small discounts based on it
O The criminal rating decays over time with each level having different and increasing amounts of time. Basically, the only way to get yourself back to clean from Fugitive is either wait a long time without committing a crime or keep to anarchy systems until it times out.
O Ships destruction does not cancel out the criminal status..
O Powerplay players have a mechanism to reduce their crime status at a cost of merits and limited only to a player powers that is adjacent to their category. Kinda like a paid killer with some degree of diplomatic immunity
O When in non anarchy space, Fugitive players have a special marker on the map to donate where they were last seen.
O A slightly mischievous suggestion, but when a fugitive players ship is destroyed it "drops" one of its modules for it's killer to collect. Fugitive player then needs to rebuy the module while the bounty hunter gets to keep it as a reward ;) that way a player bounty hunter can earn more than the 1m cap, but its not exploitable due to module loss by the donor.

Basically you want to make life "interesting" for criminal players but not prohibitive.
 
Last edited:
I really wish something would be made.

I would like to play as a pirate who doesnt kill, but I´m not even bothering because there isnt bad enough penalties for it :D sounds crazy I know!

If I murder somebody it doesnt even feel like a crime. 6000cr for a murder :D Real criminals in elite galaxy are the bankers and outfitters. They are the 1% who makes us pay!
 
I think it is obvious that the current crime punishment system has failed badly. Yes, changes to this system are going to affect all the gameplay, however, it is obvious that this system has already outlived itself. The proper crime punishment system should have been released over a year ago with the release of the game. This should have been a base point for all future add-ons. The longer it is unchanged the harder it is going to change it. The flaws in the system separate the community of ED to PvE and PvP. The actions of the group resulted in requests to make an Open PvE mode. This is what I see as a big failure.

I've posted the proposed changes in hope that their implementation might allow uniting these two polar player groups. You can find this idea in quite a number of posts in the forum, and in most of the cases it is the crime punishment system that is definitely preventing this from happening.

Now I am going to answer to some of the concerns.

@Kofyeh
PP is already moved to solo/private or is completely of 0 interest to the majority of the players. Most of the players were participating in PP for the special modules only. Saving the power play (which is called "power fail" by a large number of players) might be a topic for another large discussion.

I might be wrong, however, if a wanted ship shoots at you, you fire without scanning - you get assault bounty. However, if you destroy that ship after the scan was completed your assault bounty remains (active for 10 minute). No murder bounty is added, you get Cr for killing the criminal.
But yes, other players can kill you without getting additional bounty. But still - this is your mistake, you pay for it. This is what should remain as it is. You pay for being too trigger happy.

@Shanaeri
Dealing with exploit/griefing possibility (1% Cutter ramming) was hidden in my initial post "depend on the impact of the criminal actions". The way the other ship was destroyed, the place were it has happened should be taken into account. The consequences for ramming in the speeding zone should differ from being killed by the weapon fire.

10M Cr fine, and the possibility to accumulate even more is much better than getting 6.4k Cr bounty for any ship.

I really wish something would be made.

I would like to play as a pirate who doesnt kill, but I´m not even bothering because there isnt bad enough penalties for it :D sounds crazy I know!

If I murder somebody it doesnt even feel like a crime. 6000cr for a murder :D Real criminals in elite galaxy are the bankers and outfitters. They are the 1% who makes us pay!

Piracy is what concerns me. In my opinion it is impossible to properly pirate another player unless he/she role-plays with you. I.e. after interdicting another ship you have about 20 seconds for everything. Note that you do not have time to scan the target, you have no idea whether it has something in the cargo hold or not. If you do that - the target jumps out. That's why it is much easier to destroy the ship as fast as possible.
 
Last edited:
Hmm.. Fines are irrelevant if there is no reason to pay them off. Heck, a 100m fine wouldn't worry many players. Hence I still prefer mechanics in place that make certain places a lot safer and better protected and anarchy systems "hell in space"
 
In general I agree but I think there is only one point that is really of importance and needs to addressed.

It is only needed to go to the station controlled by the faction that has issued the bounty, buy a Sidewinder there, and make the station destroy you. According the current implementation of the crime punishment system, the bounty is paid off with the insurance in this case.

If lets say the criminal is from the moment he/she receives his/her bounty stuck in his current ship, or the bounty is ship dependent this (though in this case players with billions of credits don't care and just buy their wanted ships multiple times to repeat action) we could solve many of the issues.

The problem I see is neither with the locality of a bounty nor with the amount that is issues (though it is very small) but with the fact that there is such an easy and exploitable workaround.
If you read the forum you find many post of people telling tales of players and wings including corvette, anaconda etc.[so the expensive ships] committing a crime, dock at a starport switch to their sidewinder to not have high rebuy costs and once clean start over again. This is the issue. If you would prevent the switch to the sidewinder or the cleaning via sidewinder(or alternative cheap ship) the action committed would have meaning (especially if we would assume that you would be stuck in the ship or the bounty is ship related).

This maybe does not prevent the action from happening but maybe force some players to take smaller (cheaper) ships, ships that can maybe not mass lock the trade! It would be the smallest change in my opinion yielding the biggest impact.
For those that do piracy as a primary form of making a living they either way stick to one ship they fly 90% of the time (or at least use the same ship for this role), so a RP in this area would not even have an issue with being stuck in one ship/ have one ship being filled with bounties.
And just to address them as well, the griefer would at least have to 'pay' for his actions.

And obviously it should be impossible to sell a ship that has currently a bounty.
 
Hmm.. Fines are irrelevant if there is no reason to pay them off. Heck, a 100m fine wouldn't worry many players. Hence I still prefer mechanics in place that make certain places a lot safer and better protected and anarchy systems "hell in space"

Correct, this is how the system works now. No one is bothered with the fines. Interstellar fines should have changed that. In this case a criminal would have a 100M Cr fine with Federation, and if they were docked at the station controlled by the Federation - they have to pay 100M Cr in fine.

In general I agree but I think there is only one point that is really of importance and needs to addressed.

If lets say the criminal is from the moment he/she receives his/her bounty stuck in his current ship, or the bounty is ship dependent this (though in this case players with billions of credits don't care and just buy their wanted ships multiple times to repeat action) we could solve many of the issues.

The problem I see is neither with the locality of a bounty nor with the amount that is issues (though it is very small) but with the fact that there is such an easy and exploitable workaround.
If you read the forum you find many post of people telling tales of players and wings including corvette, anaconda etc.[so the expensive ships] committing a crime, dock at a starport switch to their sidewinder to not have high rebuy costs and once clean start over again. This is the issue. If you would prevent the switch to the sidewinder or the cleaning via sidewinder(or alternative cheap ship) the action committed would have meaning (especially if we would assume that you would be stuck in the ship or the bounty is ship related).

This maybe does not prevent the action from happening but maybe force some players to take smaller (cheaper) ships, ships that can maybe not mass lock the trade! It would be the smallest change in my opinion yielding the biggest impact.
For those that do piracy as a primary form of making a living they either way stick to one ship they fly 90% of the time (or at least use the same ship for this role), so a RP in this area would not even have an issue with being stuck in one ship/ have one ship being filled with bounties.
And just to address them as well, the griefer would at least have to 'pay' for his actions.

And obviously it should be impossible to sell a ship that has currently a bounty.

A bad idea. For instance, what if I want to be a bad guy in the evening and to haunt players. So I do it in FDL. In the morning when there are very few players I want to trade, as there's nothing special to do... but I am locked in FDL for the duration of the bounty?
 
@Aleksej

Yeah, they should make it that cargo limpets go trough shields. They would still be easy to counter if you carry pdt. Oh well, lets see with coming updates.
 
My suggestion:

These laws will only be applied at systems controlled by the Federation, Imperial and Alliance police (FIAP). Activities within anarchy or other systems will incur no bounties from the FIAP.

Damage to other ships:

  • All damage to ships will now be tracked. Damage to ships with a "wanted" status will be ignored.
  • Damage to non-wanted ships will change the status of the attacking ship to "warning" and incur a passive bounty on the attaching ship equal to the cost to repair + 10%.
  • Destruction of a non-wanted ship will change the status of the attacking ship to "wanted" within that system and incur a passive bounty on the attaching ship equal to the cost of insurance to replace the ship + 10%.


Bounties:

  • Passive bounties can be repaid at any system station and full repayment of that passive bounty will clear the bounty
  • If a passive bounty is NOT fully repaid within 1 week, the bounty becomes active and is visible to all parties, including the police and other bounty hunters. An updated galaxy map will allow identification of all ship bounties within systems controlled by the FIAP. The status of the pilot becomes wanted in all systems controlled by the major faction within which the infraction was conducted. (this means that infractions conducted within say the Federation will NOT result in a wanted status whilst within Alliance or Imperial space and vice-versa).
  • Once a pilot is given a "wanted" status, his insurance becomes INVALID whilst within systems controlled by the major faction that the pilot is wanted by


Duels:
Pilots (and their wings) may choose to "duel" within another pilot (and their wings). The following will be applied

  • Pilots wishing to duel will hail each other whilst within the same system to request the duel. Pilots must both chose to either "sim-duel", or "duel for keeps"
  • If a "Sim-duel" is chosen, the pilots enter a virtual universe that appears the same as their present status, and all involved appear 10km from each other in "normal space" with no jump drive capability. Statistics within "sim-duels" will be tracked. Pilots who terminate a "sim-duel" will be considered to have lost the duel
  • If a "duel for keeps" is agreed to:



  1. The insurance for both is temporarily revoked. FULL ship replacement costs will be applied
  2. Any pilot who "combat logs" whilst within 6km of an enemy ship will incur a cost equal to their ship insurance replacement costs
 
My suggestion:

These laws will only be applied at systems controlled by the Federation, Imperial and Alliance police (FIAP). Activities within anarchy or other systems will incur no bounties from the FIAP.

Damage to other ships:

  • All damage to ships will now be tracked. Damage to ships with a "wanted" status will be ignored.
  • Damage to non-wanted ships will change the status of the attacking ship to "warning" and incur a passive bounty on the attaching ship equal to the cost to repair + 10%.
  • Destruction of a non-wanted ship will change the status of the attacking ship to "wanted" within that system and incur a passive bounty on the attaching ship equal to the cost of insurance to replace the ship + 10%.


Bounties:

  • Passive bounties can be repaid at any system station and full repayment of that passive bounty will clear the bounty
  • If a passive bounty is NOT fully repaid within 1 week, the bounty becomes active and is visible to all parties, including the police and other bounty hunters. An updated galaxy map will allow identification of all ship bounties within systems controlled by the FIAP. The status of the pilot becomes wanted in all systems controlled by the major faction within which the infraction was conducted. (this means that infractions conducted within say the Federation will NOT result in a wanted status whilst within Alliance or Imperial space and vice-versa).
  • Once a pilot is given a "wanted" status, his insurance becomes INVALID whilst within systems controlled by the major faction that the pilot is wanted by


Duels:
Pilots (and their wings) may choose to "duel" within another pilot (and their wings). The following will be applied

  • Pilots wishing to duel will hail each other whilst within the same system to request the duel. Pilots must both chose to either "sim-duel", or "duel for keeps"
  • If a "Sim-duel" is chosen, the pilots enter a virtual universe that appears the same as their present status, and all involved appear 10km from each other in "normal space" with no jump drive capability. Statistics within "sim-duels" will be tracked. Pilots who terminate a "sim-duel" will be considered to have lost the duel
  • If a "duel for keeps" is agreed to:



  1. The insurance for both is temporarily revoked. FULL ship replacement costs will be applied
  2. Any pilot who "combat logs" whilst within 6km of an enemy ship will incur a cost equal to their ship insurance replacement costs


Killing other ship shouldn't give bounty equal to the cost of insurance to replace the ship + 10%. Bounty should be much lover than insurance cost as player who killed other player won. Bounty should change depending on ship insurance cost but be like smaller than 1/10 of it.


 
[...]
A bad idea. For instance, what if I want to be a bad guy in the evening and to haunt players. So I do it in FDL. In the morning when there are very few players I want to trade, as there's nothing special to do... but I am locked in FDL for the duration of the bounty?

That's why I included or ship related.
I am well aware that exactly this would be the issue if you would be restricted to a ship.
But it should be impossible/not without consequences to be a criminal. And the sidewinder switch is more or less a mechanic to have no consequences you at least have to acknowledge that ;)

But even if it would be with being stuck. That would make you think twice of hunting player(traders). You could still hunt players in the evening with your FDL but would be forced to play on the BH side and not on the pirate side. Pirate then would really be a commitment! So nothing stopping you from still hunting players even if we would assume to restrict someone to a ship.

Obviously though there is an issue in the context of PP undermining here. And I have no idea right now on how to work around this one, since an exception simply would lead to players choosing a power and then make every piracy look like an undermining action :/

EDIT:
And nothing would prevent you from doing piracy if you so want in an Anarchy system!
 
Last edited:
So for all of you spouting off at the mouth about Fed/Alliance/Imp systems, what's the actual system ownership/pledge distribution? If you limit wanted player pilots to anarchy space only for refit/refuel/rearm or anything that's not shooting NPCs/People you're restricting them from well over 3/4 of the bubble I'd imagine.

Let's just set the whole "anarchy only for wanted players" idea and just flat out say that we need a null/low/high mechanic for security. Eve got it right in that respect, why not let their example show us the way.

Definitely, the values of the bounties should be increased, and these should depend on the impact of the criminal actions. I.e. these should depend on the price of the ship that is lost, the price of the cargo lost. This values should not be space-high though, otherwise, as this should not result in complete extermination of the crimes. So I would propose 1/10 of the insurance price of the ship. Cargo insurance should also be implemented, but this should be done voluntarily.

As for this.. C'mon man. Players care little or not at all about fines/bounties if they're out there killing, interstellar bounties or not. Jacking up the amount on the bounty won't even change a thing, neither will jacking up the cost of the fine. Forcing players to pay it might make a difference but then you're severely punishing any and all PvP given the "price increase" that's generally agreed upon in these arguments.
 
That's why I included or ship related.
I am well aware that exactly this would be the issue if you would be restricted to a ship.
But it should be impossible/not without consequences to be a criminal. And the sidewinder switch is more or less a mechanic to have no consequences you at least have to acknowledge that ;)

But even if it would be with being stuck. That would make you think twice of hunting player(traders). You could still hunt players in the evening with your FDL but would be forced to play on the BH side and not on the pirate side. Pirate then would really be a commitment! So nothing stopping you from still hunting players even if we would assume to restrict someone to a ship.

Obviously though there is an issue in the context of PP undermining here. And I have no idea right now on how to work around this one, since an exception simply would lead to players choosing a power and then make every piracy look like an undermining action :/

That's why I've proposed a bounty that depends on the losses calculated basing on the insurance (a percentage of it). This is also caused by the issue that we have only one account per player.

So for all of you spouting off at the mouth about Fed/Alliance/Imp systems, what's the actual system ownership/pledge distribution? If you limit wanted player pilots to anarchy space only for refit/refuel/rearm or anything that's not shooting NPCs/People you're restricting them from well over 3/4 of the bubble I'd imagine.

Let's just set the whole "anarchy only for wanted players" idea and just flat out say that we need a null/low/high mechanic for security. Eve got it right in that respect, why not let their example show us the way.

As for this.. C'mon man. Players care little or not at all about fines/bounties if they're out there killing, interstellar bounties or not. Jacking up the amount on the bounty won't even change a thing, neither will jacking up the cost of the fine. Forcing players to pay it might make a difference but then you're severely punishing any and all PvP given the "price increase" that's generally agreed upon in these arguments.

If you have 100M Cr and have accumulated 40M Cr of bounties that you are going to pay if you are destroyed, would you care or not?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom