The ED Open Live Stream

Arguendo

Volunteer Moderator
Naaah - bounty on ships gets cleared when whatever ship the CMDR is in gets destroyed - wether it was the ship the criminal acts were committed in or a suicidewinder.

Tying a bounty to the CMDR themselves would mean the bounty would come out of their own credits every time they got killed, and the only way to remove it would be a clear-save.
Ah, I was thinking of the bounty being tied to the actual ship they did the killing in. So if they killed someone in a Corvette, they had to be killed in that Corvette themselves to clear the bounty. Switching to a Sidewinder would mean they're still wanted, but being killed in it won't clear it.
You were talking about a completely different thing. Got it!
 
Piracy doesnt lead to the destruction of ships carrying no cargo, or exploding people inside stations, or indeed any inconvenience to the pirated player other than losing a reasonable amount of cargo, some journey time, and perhaps (at a push) a few percentage of hull and module repair.

Piracy is not the same thing as wantonly seal-clubbing. Indeed I think that Pirates should also leave the FoEP and have their own ranking structure - and the higher it is the more likely a FoEP player is likely to comply as it'll be less likely for them to be exploded for lulz.

This just sounds like a karma kind of think like Sandro mentioned.

Why can't we have hard laws that are set and players have to abide by.

Real world law for murder is life in prison or the death sentence.

Kicking players out of factions or giving them "points" for murdering doesn't sound like any sort of hard punishment to me.

The pilots federation is supposed to be a group of elite pilots that are NOT supposed to murder each other.

It's like saying it's ok to be part of the S.A.S and kill your squad mates just for fun because all you'll get is a demerit!
 
I understand your view & empathise. However neither you nor I are the game developers & that stream was an embarrassment that I do not look forward to seeing repeated on Thursday.

So ???

Just don't watch it! easy :)

I think there's this space sim game out there that has three modes of interaction ; Solo , Private , Open.

You get to choose which!

You could try playing that in Solo mode instead of watching a livestream event you have no interest in. :p
 
Last edited:

Arguendo

Volunteer Moderator
So ???

Just don't watch it! easy :)

I think there's this space sim game out there that has three modes of interaction ; Solo , Private , Open.

You get to choose which!

You could try playing that in Solo mode instead of watching a livestream event you have no interest in. :p
I can't tell if that was a "whoosh" or if you are being deliberately obtuse.
 
Ejection from the FoEP, insurance null and void, and Wanted status in all systems assosciated with where the criminal activity took place, and bounty against CMDR and not the ship :)

Those who really want to pew-pew should be able to do so, but there should be equivalent consequences. Strip them of their ranks, make them unable to openly trade or refit or buy ships in unfriendly space, but leave anarchy and neutral open to them. Let them rank up in an alternative system that recognizes tyranny and terror as valuable tendencies. Give that style of play viable in-game reason to exist, but being a rampaging, crazed, flea-bitten, pew-pew murder hobo in an Imperial Cutter an incredibly difficult thing to pull off successfully.

Interesting ideas, even if maybe a bit harsh. I mean, I can imagine circumstances in which PvP (or more in general, killing non-wanted ships) is justified by a good in game reason. For sure would create different Open gameplay then what we have now.

I think it shouldn't all be focused on creating punishment for the aggressor either, as that still might not prevent people from logging. The gameplay should ideally provide something worthwhile for everyone involved. If you want to avoid griefing, and at the same time want people to not log out of a hostile encounter, but encourage meaningful PvP against an aggressor, let there be benefits for *everyone* who has ever been killed by that aggressor *upon his death*. This could be done in part via some sort of an insurance system, e.g. getting back your insurance you had to pay for a new ship. That's alongside the bounty for the player who does the actual kill. More stakes involved means that there would be more incentive to hunt down players with big bounties, and if there would also be some sort of punishment for those big-bounty players upon death (paying all those insurances of the people they killed, and/or not being insured themselves by the PF), it might deter from mindless killing of new players (or at least provide some excitement/risk that would come with their wanted status).
 
Last edited:
It's not fun to have your ship destroyed where you don't feel like you had a chance of survival, but as long as it's part of the game and has an in-game justification that's just gameplay. I think what most people object to is where they are attacked for non-gameplay reasons, i.e. where there's no in-game benefit for the attacker. Then it becomes an attack on the player, not the CMDR, and personal attacks are hard to ignore.

The problem is that outside of powerplay there is no in-game justification for any kind of player interaction. There is nothing to do but shoot each other, and no particular reason to do that. The first missing element is a decent 'Pirating' mechanic, so it'll be interesting to see if planned improvements turn that into viable gameplay or not. The second is PtP trading, which I think we shouldn't hold our breath on.

Above all, PvP needs a bargaining element. At the moment the only thing an attacker can get a sort of perverse pleasure in the suffering of others. This means the best case scenario for an attacker coincides with the worst case scenario for the defender, which is a horrible state of affairs. What you need is to create a situation where a compromise is the best case scenario, which means giving the defender something to bargain with. The only bargaining tool they have is the possibility of future retribution on the attacker, so that's the part that needs to be sorted.

The key problem with the current system is that bounties are not punishments. They are rewards (albeit for someone else). The only potential drawback is that you may attract bounty hunters, and that is no drawback at all because NPCs are trivial to kill and CMDRs are both not interested in PvP for bounties and trivial to bypass anyway. None of that is ever going to change, and even that only last for a few minutes until you clear your bounties. In short, you cannot have a justice system that relies on bounties. As we are experiencing at the moment, this simply does not do the job.

One of the mistakes is treating ship destruction as death for the purposes of crime. It is clearly not a death, because we eject and are returned to a station in an escape pod automtically. We still have the same assets, the same name, the same reputation, so clearly everyone in the galaxy knows we are still the same CMDR. It makes no sense for all the various system authorities (who incidentally have no way of knowing that your ship was destroyed anyway) to suddenly wipe your record clean. Also, since the bounty money comes from nowhere and is never recouped, imagine the problem the galaxy must have with inflation. ;)

More importantly, it ruins the gameplay of being a criminal. The whole point of being a criminal is that it forces you into the underworld. You swap one life for another. If you have a reputation for being unreliable in a particular area legitimate business there don't want to do deals with you any more. If you are a threat to society the authorities there will hunt you down and make you pay. If they catch you, you'll lose all your ill-gotten gains. The more crimes you commit the more you stand to lose. Until they catch you, you have to stay on your toes. That stuff is exciting! It is exciting because it means something, it actually has an effect.

At the moment, you commit as many criminal acts as you like, and then you can get rid of any problems in 5 minutes at virtually zero cost. Where's the fun in that? There isn't any. There's no incentive to be an in-game criminal, the only alternative to normal gameplay is to be a meta-game criminal (or griefer as they're known).

All you need to do to fix this is increase fines so they are at least equal to the damage caused, have criminal records remain until the criminal rights their previous wrongs (i.e. make fines persistent until paid) and have stations perform a security check on you with their faction before allowing access to services there. The first two are trivial changes because it's just about tweaking variables that already exist. The final one would actually take a little bit of effort to introduce, but would make the game experience a whole lot more interesting.

Please let people be outlaws FD!
 
imbalance of invested time

As with all PvP threads, also this one derails into extremities nuking the hell out of PvPers (you may call them griefers but they are just playing the game and do so by the rules). And I say that as a PvEr which had his... hat handed to him on a few occassions. But all of these responses and reaction boil down to one, simple problem:

Invested Playtime vs Risk imbalance

hiciacit said:
The gameplay should ideally provide something worthwhile for everyone involved. If you want to avoid griefing, and at the same time want people to not log out of a hostile encounter, but encourage meaningful PvP against an aggressor, let there be benefits for *everyone* who has ever been killed by that aggressor *upon his death*. This could be done in part via some sort of an insurance system, e.g. getting back your insurance you had to pay for a new ship. That's alongside the bounty for the player who does the actual kill.

The attacker risk is a very small one:
  • 6400Cr bounty
while the destroyed trader/PvEr:
  • faces a multi-million Cr rebuy if he's in a decent ship
  • loses the value of cargo
  • loses haulage profits and has possible fines slapped on him for that(!)

This disproportionate punishment will convert to a significant loss of the most precious commodity a player can have: HIS PLAYTIME (because that loss has to be earned back). Given Sandro's "peculiar" view of cargo insurance as in "lack of it is part of the 'fun' ", this imbalance is the most striking with regards to murdering random people in PvP.

Now if it were like hiciacit suggested, that if you get killed "unlawfully" (clean in the system and not powerplay hostile) then some (maybe not 100%) rebuy is "covered" by the Pilots Federation, and that cost goes on the bounty of the attacker - it would help a bit, because now it would be somehow less harsh for PvErs (still no cargo insurance though, thanks Sandro for the added "fun") in opposition as what we have currently: a trader/hauler gets ganked and that's only the beginning of his problems, while the attacker gets a meager 6400Cr bounty. I also like the idea of having no suicidewinder possibility. The bounty should stay for the intended "punishment" time, unless its rightfully claimed and deducted from the attacker's credits on rebuy screen.

But now as we upped the ante for the attacker lets look at the problem the other way around. What about the attacker's profit?

A criminal should PROFIT more from criminal activities, be it attacking ships or making other kinds of mischief like smuggling or causing infavourable BGS states for a particular faction / station. Currently there is not much of an incentive for doing that, besides the thrill of a fight (which an experienced PvPer will win in seconds). You all talk about "ganker punishment" and (almost) nobody is taking both sides into account (as they are both VIABLE and FAIR gameplay). And criminals in the real world tend to lead luxurious lives with a good portion of added risk. Which leads me too:

The karma system

I think if we get a decent karma system, there will be rewards for both sides of the equation and the disproportionate consequences between the victim and the attacker will blur. Better paying and EXCLUSIVE TRADE MISSIONS for the traders if their rep/karma/success to failure ratio is stellar, and dangerous and rewarding EXCLUSIVE CRIMINAL MISSIONS for the more evil of us. Maybe missions should be divided into lawful, shady and outright criminal ones and get walled by your karma status (i.e. you won't see that lucrative biowaste hauling mission from sothis for a 1,5M / t [yum] as a die hard criminal, but you will see the similarly lucrative mission of killing 30 innocent trader ships in said sothis for a very good payout [yum]).

Borderline illegal missions (smuggling) or legal skirmishes (massacre other faction's ships in a CZ) should be available to everyone. The types of missions you take as well as your actions (i.e. selling commodities vs selling things on black market) should affect your karma status, as well as revealed criminal actions (scanned and fined for smuggling, getting a bounty, getting a ticket etc). If you can get away with that, then probably not. But that's implementation details.

PS: As a sidenote the legal status of things scooped from space or surface should also be looked into. "Finders Keepers" should be the proper way unless you actually killed the ship and that ship reported you (report crimes against me) before dying. Else there is little incentive to scoop those things except early in game as the rewards are meagre.

PS PS: inb4 powerplay and undermining - your Power Contact should have the authority to clear you from the bounty via shady diplomatic means, and that activity shouldn't count towards your evil karma (probably).
 
Last edited:
They might realise how bad it really can be in open when doing things like Community Goals.

Maybe it will make them add in a real crime and punishment system.

The Pilots Federation is exactly that, a federation, of people, that are supposed to work together.

If you murder a pilots federation member in an authority system you should be wanted in all systems, by everyone for the next 24 hours, no docking, no mining, no missions other than in anarchy systems.

If you kill someone and then continue to try kill others in authority systems the police should be almost instantaneous in appearance after interdiction, and there should be lots of them.

If you want to consensual PVP, that's cool, do it in an anarchy system. If you want to be billy the kid, that's fine too, just be prepared for the consequences. I mean after all , a pirate is a pirate and they are meant to be Wanted by everyone!

There currently is no punishment system in place that has any effect on PvP players decision on weather to engage you in an authority system or not, because the police are weak and the consequences are nil.

This mechanic might be exciting for the PvP crowd to plan and choose their points of attack, knowing they would have to retreat to their "Mexico" anarchy system afterwards to regroup and wait out the wanted timer, counting their bounty and stolen cargo.... Rather than just mindless killing.

Have some rep from me CMDR! Why are they so blind? Or maybe just turning a blind eye?
 
Glad this topic got into the main forum. It was an eye opener and everyone should watch the devs reaction to player interaction in the game they have made. Here's my recent post and feedback from the original stream thread:



Wasn't that great? And all the excuses being thrown out on them 'taking all this heat' as to somehow imply this does not happen or could not happen in open. LOL. They were in open; this is what can and does happen in open. Around the 1:00 hr mark things hit the highpoint:

"I'm dying but I'm enjoying it. It's interaction with players. This is fun..." - no you're not enjoying it! Look at the expressions; no one there is enjoying the 'player interactions' at all!
"I'm lucky I can afford to ... mumble mumble" - yeah, loading 8 billion credits helps take the edge off from losing. Play with only enough for 2 or 3 rebuys next time.
"I'm not normally in open play; I don't get this sort of thing." - shameful developing a game mode without trying and understanding the gameplay and effects.
"It's a Diamondback! <mild expletive>" - kicking your Python. Welcome to your wonderful engineering update and game imbalance.
"Next time can we make our ships (dev ships) invincible?" - why? Things seem unbalanced? Welcome to the game you made.
"Surely they should be shot to death by the station?" - no, the station doesn't always help even with the new changes.

And then a player Clipper with only 20% hull (no shields) goes on to take out a dev's much healthier FdL ship. Priceless. The other dev respawns lasting a minute or so before getting stomped once again before saying:

"I think everybody's had enough." - yeah, 45 minutes or less of PvP interaction; stressful no fun gameplay; and you already want to quit. Great PvP game, huh? Remember who built it.

Sad part is there's nothing new in this video in the context of any unknown issues or gameplay experiences. And there was nothing unfair or unique happening to them just because they were devs; players hanging out at stations or CGs griefing does and can happen - even though I wouldn't say any griefing occurred here. The whole gameplay experience was very normal with tough to win interdictions and quick deaths (thanks to overpowered engineering mods). All of the things they didn't like or commented on negatively have been reported in the forums repeatedly for a long time. They clearly haven't been listening or reading the community feedback based on the reactions shown in this video.


What we learned about open from this stream for average skilled players:

- you need to have billions of credits so you can interact with other players
- you need to be in a wing to survive any decent amount of time, period.
- prepare to burn through ~1 million credits per minute for rebuys
- prepare for countless hours of grind to buildup/restock cash reserves for minutes of 'player interaction' time
- having billions of credits and top ships still won't make the game fun


If there's any question as to why this game is so unbalanced then this video should help give the answer which is simply that the developers do not play their game. They had no first hand experience to how things are working in this mode. It's mind boggling but it's clear this was a new experience for at least these two devs.

Let's hope this 1 hour experience actually sinks in and we see some decent changes made to the game balance. Without changes open will never be anything more than it is today which is typically a ghost town. Many players do not want the experience the dev's just had. FDev: you're game isn't fun for many people. Do you understand this now?

Thank you for taking the time to write down this post! It is priceless! Rep
 
I’ll try to propose some fixes for ED. I know that there are many ideas, but it is definitely not an easy thing to solve the current imbalances.

Firstly, making the space around the stations a bit safer:

1. Increase the speed limit to 120, to make it less of a pain to obey this restriction.
2. Enforce the no fire zone as follows:
- Any player inside the no fire zone who deploys the hardpoints gets a small fine.
- Any player who fires in the no fire zone gets a big fine.
- Any player who shoots a ship or the station gets instantly vaporized. Even if it is a wanted target he previously scanned. It should be an enforced NO FIRE ZONE!


Secondly, adding consequences to those players engaged in criminal activities outside no fire zones:

1. The player who destroys another unwanted player should have a bounty on his head of exactly the price of the ship the destroyed player was in + the cost of the ships equipment + cargo. The cost of any other ships he unlawfully destroys should cumulate.
2. The bounty on his head should be persistent regardless of the ship he’s in. Every time he dies his bounty should be reduced with the amount of credits that represents the cost of the ship he was in + the cost of the ships equipment + cargo.
3. The bounty on his head should be gradually whipped while he gets destroyed until his loss amounts for the same amount of loss he caused to other players.
4. His position should be broadcast throughout the bubble and he should be the subject of a raising number of interdictions and encounters with ever increasingly difficult NPCs directly proportional with his bounty status (until he meets unescapable monsters).
5. Once the bounty on his head reaches a very high number, he should also be restricted to playing only in OPEN.
6. At this point missions should also be generated for players around the bubble, for his destruction, showing his location. The price paid to another player (the bounty hunter) for his destruction should be exactly the price of the ship the felon/ he is in at the moment of the destruction + equipment + cargo (because it will get exploited otherwise).


Wonderful gameplay options can spring from this system. I think that this system of crime/ punishment alone will drastically improve the experience in the Open. For both gankers and law abiding players. PvP-ers will have meaningful PvP, and normal players will enjoy better survivability in the open.
 
Last edited:
Ok, where is the reward part of said gameplay? Because what you propose is actually nuking said players from orbit and giving nothing in return, effectively tipping the balance to the other extreme end? Social justice ftw...

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

That said I like the forced open concept, but that should come with a HUGE honey pot on top, really.
 
Back
Top Bottom