Griefing & Piracy Solution Mega Thread

[Ziggy Stardust]

I spent a great amount of time writing it up today. It would be nice if you could be nice enough to give my thoughts a read before shooting it down with absolutely no constructive criticism what-so-ever.

I'm not done reading it, but wondering off down the thread saw this remark.

The problem with detailed plans like this is, they're fine to be discussed as a thought experiment, but you'd be really lucky for it to fit in with what's under the bonnet and the designs which are already being developed. Plus, I'm not able to keep track of all the implications in the details and how they affect others and balance, and I don't think any of us can.

Some creative solutions though. I'll now read the rest, but in order to actually give you constructive feedback I'd have to analyze the whole thing in relation to the big picture. So, thanks for taking the effort to produce the read, sorry if I can't deliver what you're looking for

 

[Deadspin]

I'm not biting.

If you have nothing constructive to add, then fine, but please leave.

My first post was constructive. That was my second and it was in reference to the acute lack of sophisticated technology that, even today in the year 2016, is leaps and bounds ahead of what our apparently advanced starships are capable of executing. It weighs less too.

Edit: Foot in mouth.

 

[CMDR Dreamstate]

I'm not done reading it, but wondering off down the thread saw this remark.

The problem with detailed plans like this is, they're fine to be discussed as a thought experiment, but you'd be really lucky for it to fit in with what's under the bonnet and the designs which are already being developed. Plus, I'm not able to keep track of all the implications in the details and how they affect others and balance, and I don't think any of us can.

Some creative solutions though. I'll now read the rest, but in order to actually give you constructive feedback I'd have to analyze the whole thing in relation to the big picture. So, thanks for taking the effort to produce the read, sorry if I can't deliver what you're looking for

No problem, thanks for the support, and look forward to your feedback o7

 

[babelfisch]

Covered in OP: Future Opportunities

Stations spawn missions at Low Security Stations that pay for robbing players carrying certain cargo. This is one way in which to make piracy feel “supported” by the game itself, and to give it a more legitimate feel to “blaze your own trail”. Such a system could be intelligent, and rely on Frontier's data centre to send players to systems that are actively busy with traders. This payout will help pirates gain small fortunes and to reward success.

I generally don't like mechanics that only work for players, everything should apply to NPCs as well. That's also why I like Kyokushin's solution more than yours.

 

[Deadspin]

If you kept reading past "Homicide", and read the entire post, you would have seen that PvP and Homicide would not punish PvP players in War Zones.

That's not good enough though. You're still restricting the entire group of PvP-preferred players to war zones and the currently limited crop of anarchy or no security systems, where there is literally nothing by the current mechanics.

So you offer them missions to grab player cargo and that's it? That's your answer to filling the void of populated space that they've given up to pursue a less than savory career? You'll drive more players from the game than you know with that kind of mechanic.

 

[CMDR Dreamstate]

My first post was constructive. That was my second and it was in reference to the acute lack of sophisticated technology that, even today in the year 2016, is leaps and bounds ahead of what our apparently advanced starships are capable of executing. It weighs less too.

Edit: Foot in mouth.

I did, and your gripe was where players would be able to PvP - I answered War Zones.

The Homicide system does allow for freedom - pilots who die to players can simply select "No" twice and no Homicide penalty is applied - this means PvP Fleets can mutually agree times and dates to slug it out and not cost each other a dime.

The system is designed to prevent griefing, but it also has the freedom to not charge someone.

EDIT: Here is what is says in the OP:

"If the result is “No” and "No", then it assumed that friendly fire could have been the cause – in which case, credits are automatically deposited back into the killer’s credit account."

 

[CptSiddy]

This is bad thread and OP should be ashamed for starting it.

 

[CMDR Dreamstate]

This is bad thread and OP should be ashamed for starting it.

Can you explain why you think it is a bad thread?

I'm only offering potential solutions.

 

[Deadspin]

I did, and your gripe was where players would be able to PvP - I answered War Zones.

The Homicide system does allow for freedom - pilots who die to players can simply select "No" twice and no Homicide penalty is applied - this means PvP Fleets can mutually agree times and dates to slug it out and not cost each other a dime.

The system is designed to prevent griefing, but it also has the freedom to not charge someone.

So what is your definition of griefing? I can assure you that it's not in line with the actual definition of griefing if that is your answer.

Finding random players to kill isn't griefing. Griefing is targeted harassment against specific players or player groups. IE, when Mobius was invaded, that was griefing. Tracking down a single player and repeatedly killing him every time he undocks, that is griefing.

Randomly flying around and killing trade vessels or seal clubbing is not actually griefing.

PvP groups don't "fleet up" and head out to do battle with other pvp groups as often as you would think because it's a royal PITA to get past the networking issues, even with wing tethering.

If you're going to propose changes to a game, especially for the betterment, you should probably do a bit of research into understanding the game better.

 

[Muzz UK]

Solution is easy just have a proper crime and punishment system.

If you want to be a bad guy thats fine in open space or unpopulated anarchy systems but Fed and Imp heavy systems with governments and military presence should be uber secure.

Bad guys get rewards and rep aimmed at criminals and ranks like petty criminal to crime lord etc.

 

[Cmdr J]

+1 for taking the time to write and format this. None of the poll options appeal to me.

I think the solution is already there in the security services, FD just need to actually script them to do these things.
It's not deep learning or anything, for the most part it's just scripting.

I'd hate to be the one to code the part concerning wing interactions.

 

[CptSiddy]

Can you explain why you think it is a bad thread?

I'm only offering potential solutions.

Your potential solutions open new can of worms for potential griefing and are, at best, applying a bandage on broken underlying core game mechanics.

Without fixing the underlying core game, all your fixes amount for nothing and take loads of work to do.

 

[CMDR Dreamstate]

So what is your definition of griefing? I can assure you that it's not in line with the actual definition of griefing if that is your answer.

Finding random players to kill isn't griefing. Griefing is targeted harassment against specific players or player groups. IE, when Mobius was invaded, that was griefing. Tracking down a single player and repeatedly killing him every time he undocks, that is griefing.

Randomly flying around and killing trade vessels or seal clubbing is not actually griefing.

PvP groups don't "fleet up" and head out to do battle with other pvp groups as often as you would think because it's a royal PITA to get past the networking issues, even with wing tethering.

If you're going to propose changes to a game, especially for the betterment, you should probably do a bit of research into understanding the game better.

This boils down to perspective, really, doesn't it.

You may not think it is griefing by flying around finding random pilots to kill is griefing, but the poor guy you just destroyed feels that way. He is playing in Open, he understands the risks to piracy - but to outright murder for no good reason? Other than the person who killed him "Can do it" so he "Is doing it". Chances are, he will never truly understand why it happened - he was probably never even communicated to.

People have argued for a better Crime and Punishment system - I have wrote 3,300+ words on a solution for it.

You have the audacity to argue that I don't read your posts, but the first thing you declared in this thread was that you "stopped at Homicide".

Good one. Nice, fair analysis of my thread.

If you don't like it, vote, move on. It is utterly fruitless to argue with me when I'm only suggesting solutions for the current problems that many people feel are an issue in this game.

 

[WindWpn]

I like it, good job on the proposal.

 

[CMDR Dreamstate]

Your potential solutions open new can of worms for potential griefing and are, at best, applying a bandage on broken underlying core game mechanics.

Without fixing the underlying core game, all your fixes amount for nothing and take loads of work to do.

Wait, what? How?

My potential solutions opens a new can of worm for potential griefing?

I... do not see... what you see.

 

[CmdrKull]

I like some of the piracy ideas, but your approach has a fair amount of player coddling. Why can a pirate not take more than half of their cargo for instance? I don't expect pirates to be nice guys with happy feelings, and if I'm carrying 40 tons and they can carry 100 I don't think they need to be limited because otherwise I might have a bad day.

Also, 112B for killing a sidewinder isn't an acceptable punishment no matter what, full stop. Yeah, the guy shouldn't be seal clubbing, but a death can happen on accident and a sidey is pretty fragile. Nav beacon hunting, sidey crosses behind the target and takes a rail gun to the canopy. Understandably upset, chooses Yes, Yes. Now our hapless bounty hunter is also in a sidewinder. What about speed-bump enforcers? Sidey flies in front of a cmdr going 101 out of the letterbox. It's already instagib which is grueling, now it's also back to 1000cr and a sidewinder?

I like encouraging pirates to keep the mark alive (as a trader, believe me I prefer it) but I think there are less draconian ways to do it. Also, the pirate tag is like a scarlet letter. I prefer pirates to be a bit anonymous in a new system. When someone (this is me, so someone usually being an NPC) gets behind me I. Super cruise, I relish that fear that takes hold :" what is going to happen, is it a pirate or another trader traveling the same way?"

I like your effort, but offering small tweaks that would help is more likely to aide the developers than full overhaul suggestions, or as I call them "back of the napkin designs". There might be gold in there, but more likely to have big glaring ommisions or not suite their design goals, right?

 

[sewerratuk]

This boils down to perspective, really, doesn't it.

You may not think it is griefing by flying around finding random pilots to kill is griefing, but the poor guy you just destroyed feels that way. He is playing in Open, he understands the risks to piracy - but to outright murder for no good reason? Other than the person who killed him "Can do it" so he "Is doing it". Chances are, he will never truly understand why it happened - he was probably never even communicated to.

People have argued for a better Crime and Punishment system - I have wrote 3,300+ words on a solution for it.

You have the audacity to argue that I don't read your posts, but the first thing you declared in this thread was that you "stopped at Homicide".

Good one. Nice, fair analysis of my thread.

If you don't like it, vote, move on. It is utterly fruitless to argue with me when I'm only suggesting solutions for the current problems that many people feel are an issue in this game.

Yes, it is about perspective.
And it would seem that this perspective is that NPC's grief me all the time. I lose count of the times I'm interdicted by them and they try to commit homicide. The same ones used to chase me across the bubble from Robigo all the time while I was redistributing labour

 

[CMDR Dreamstate]

I like some of the piracy ideas, but your approach has a fair amount of player coddling. Why can a pirate not take more than half of their cargo for instance? I don't expect pirates to be nice guys with happy feelings, and if I'm carrying 40 tons and they can carry 100 I don't think they need to be limited because otherwise I might have a bad day.

Also, 112B for killing a sidewinder isn't an acceptable punishment no matter what, full stop. Yeah, the guy shouldn't be seal clubbing, but a death can happen on accident and a sidey is pretty fragile. Nav beacon hunting, sidey crosses behind the target and takes a rail gun to the canopy. Understandably upset, chooses Yes, Yes. Now our hapless bounty hunter is also in a sidewinder. What about speed-bump enforcers? Sidey flies in front of a cmdr going 101 out of the letterbox. It's already instagib which is grueling, now it's also back to 1000cr and a sidewinder?

I like encouraging pirates to keep the mark alive (as a trader, believe me I prefer it) but I think there are less draconian ways to do it. Also, the pirate tag is like a scarlet letter. I prefer pirates to be a bit anonymous in a new system. When someone (this is me, so someone usually being an NPC) gets behind me I. Super cruise, I relish that fear that takes hold :" what is going to happen, is it a pirate or another trader traveling the same way?"

I like your effort, but offering small tweaks that would help is more likely to aide the developers than full overhaul suggestions, or as I call them "back of the napkin designs". There might be gold in there, but more likely to have big glaring ommisions or not suite their design goals, right?

Thank you! This is what I want to hear - proper constructive criticism!

The max cargo dropped idea was just a conservative add-in. Lots of cargo people carry could be for missions - if any of that goes, then I guess the haulers fail their missions! This could be changed to 100% cargo. If you have a big ship, you won't miss much.

True, the punishment is set really high - however, this can be dropped to more suitable levels - the formula I have used is solely just an example.

I think I said something about stations and ramming homicide not applying at stations, though... I'll have to have another read of it; could be I forgot to copy and paste it from the word doc into the browser.

The "Pirate" status, you are right - bit of a scarlet letter, as you put it - this could be something hidden from sight of other players - but something the game AI knows only (and you, as it is stamped on the right-hand side of the cockpit ) as means to head hunt pirates.

o7

 

[Mephane]

Example:

Harmless victim vs. Elite Anaconda = x768 to Homicide cost of ship.

Anaconda Ship Cost: 146,969,451cr

x768 = 112,872,538,368cr Homicide penalty.

Yes, you are seeing that right. Over 112 billion credits for murdering a complete newbie in Sidewinder if you are flying an Anaconda, if they are Harmless and you are Elite. A fitting punishment, as without a harsh punishment, nothing will change.

It is fair versus the type of ship versus the type of combat rank. This multiplier, alone, would entirely discourage killing other players “just for fun”, as eventually serial killers will run out of credits in order to keep committing to it.

Though well-intended, I can tell you what this leads to: suicide griefing into another player's weapon fire or flight path. We just had another thread about the suicide in NFZ exploit (yes, I consider it an exploit to get others killed by letting yourself be rammed on purpose). It's going to happen, people will end with such a 112 billion credit bounty because some intentionally flew an unshielded stock Sidewinder into their gunfire.

Now while I do agree the current crime and punishment system is woefully inadequate, I fear that there will never be a truly balanced middle ground: either the punishment is not enough to actually deter wanton ganking, or it is so high that it encourages various methods of griefing by getting someone else punished.

And if a crime&punishment system is to actually solve the PvP vs PvE divide, it must either include some form of full compensation (hardly doable because death is much more than just rebuy cost) or waive all death effects if someone is killed in PvP. In other words: die due to PvP damage, and you should just respawn at your last dock, all missions still ongoing, all cargo still intact, all bounty vouchers, combat bonds, exploration data etc. still present. Because I care relatively little about the punishment of the perpetrator; what I care about is the amount of time I have put into something that got erased because someone decided to blow me up for teh lulz*.

(*Or any other pseudo-RP "justification")

 

[AutoMechancal]

First half doesn't fix anything and just ruins the game for anyone that shoots other players for fun (no I do not mean noob killers/griefers), and the second part looks like a nerf to me but I could be wrong.

All these ideas are about money and not about the real issue. That issue is that the cops are not able to do anything to stop griefers/noob killers. Now if you make it so that a wanted player can't dock or gets chased out of the system, and have the police drop in instancely on interdictions in high security systems. Also giving the response NPCs the orginal 2.1 murder AI would help more then a hundred billion fine ever will, as I can tell you now when the 2.1 patch dropped ganking got a lot harder until the NPC nerf.