Deliberate Ramming

[Jukelo]

As we're speaking hypothetically here, we would want to avoid shadow banning where possible. As an example, for a Commander that repeatedly killed clean ships that were significantly weaker than them, I'd rather see a removal of insurance cover (so when a ship is destroyed it's gone, or you have to pay the full price to get it back), docking privileges rescinded at all starports and outposts except those in anarchy jurisdictions and game applied Pilot Federation bounties rather than a shadow ban.

Hey Sandro,

As I said earlier, this sounds like a good thing to me, not a disincentive to bad behaviour at all. This is exactly the kind of things a lot of us who play criminals expected from the game to begin with: meaningful consequences. Your punishments actually sound like a way to encourage players to start amassing bad karma just for the opportunity of adding depth to an aspect of the game which has been left awfully shallow for so long :/

 

[Bunkerkind Anni]

Hello Commander Arry!

If you mean context (apologies if I am misunderstanding), then we'd probably go with some form of Pilot's Federation Rating system.

This would be like a code of conduct for members. In the dangerous universe of Elite and due to the nature of the organisation, the PF understands there will be conflict within the ranks. So this code of conduct would perhaps be like the Geneva conventions. Rules of engagement, if you will.

As you commit actions that break these codes, the PF would take an increasingly dim view of you, which would translate into them withdrawing support and even working with factions to punish you.

Hypothetically, of course.

the question is? how would any griefer care about that? beeing banned from shinrata? losing his elite rank after griefing 500 defenseless player ships?
increased insurance costs up to no rebuy?

any plans to make bounties split 50/50 between pilot and ship?

a bit offtopic: but do you have time explaining what the actual impact of major faction reputation has currently for a pilot, that makes it necesary to have a decay on it?

edite:
wow, this topic is progressing faster then i can type

 

[Sole Hunter]

I can't wait to abuse this new idea with an eagle and waste people ships forever by crashing into their lasers.

Good job Frontier.

 

[ryan_m]

Hello Commanders!

In response to combat logging versus "griefing" (which I will define here as killing a much weaker vessel with potentially a lower combat rated pilot): both are considered "undesirable" behaviour. I'm not saying that they would have to get exactly the same bad karma, just that repeatedly doing either act would see a Commander slide down the karma slope. I'm not sure that this can really be argued against, unless you are bringing a strong bias to the discussion table.

In Open, you can run into other Commanders that want to destroy your ship. We are saying that if they repeatedly pick unfair fights, we will take action against them. Why would we not take action against someone who consistently logs to avoid legitimate destruction? And I'm sure that we could envisage a system that reduced karma loss for combat logging when aggressors are also low karma Commanders, so it feels reasonable to me?

Hell Commander besieger!

As we're speaking hypothetically here, we would want to avoid shadow banning where possible. As an example, for a Commander that repeatedly killed clean ships that were significantly weaker than them, I'd rather see a removal of insurance cover (so when a ship is destroyed it's gone, or you have to pay the full price to get it back), docking privileges rescinded at all starports and outposts except those in anarchy jurisdictions and game applied Pilot Federation bounties rather than a shadow ban.

Of course, we'd always reserve the right to apply out of game measures if we felt they were justified.

Sandro, I hope you're also planning on rolling out changes to make crime actually profitable for people at the same time, because what you're proposing would sterilize your universe. You need people to do undesirable things to incentivize "do-gooders" on the other side to hunt them down. If you're going to rebalance crime and punishment, you need to take a LONG hard look at crime as a profession or you're going to end up with a game where players pass each other in shieldless T7's, say "o7", and continue on with literally no danger.

Feel free to reach out to any of us directly if you'd like some ideas. We've all been thinking long and hard about this for a while.

 

[Earth Ultimatum IV.]

Does all of this apply to PVE aswell? If yes, REST IN PEACE POWERPLAY.


Also, define "inferior ship". Is my over-engineered Viper that kills Anacondas a "inferior ship"? How do you tell which ship is inferior?

Last but not least: the punishment for killing clean players is far worse than the punishment for combat logging. What the...?

 

[Sole Hunter]

Does all of this apply to PVE aswell? If yes, REST IN PEACE POWERPLAY.


Also, define "inferior ship". Is my over-engineered Viper that kills Anacondas a "inferior ship"? How do you tell which ship is inferior?

Last but not least: the punishment for killing clean players is far worse than the punishment for combat logging. What the...?

It will apply to everything, including regular combat.

Can you imagine if I crash into your ship outside of a station with an eagle, you get flagged for killing me and LOSE your fully decked out engineered ship forever BECAUSE the station blew you up?

If this idea make it live, it will be the death of combat as we know it. NOBODY in their right mind will want to fight.

This is idea is the ABSOLUTE worst thing I'VE ever seen in 2 years of development.

 

[SmokeWeez]

So basically if I fight ANY 13th legion member I will have the lowest Karma possible, damn.

 

[besieger]

Saying it now, if this goes through. RIP your game. Nothing but who can grief who harder.

 

[Imperial Guard]

Deliberate Ramming.

This is actually very common with ships at Sea, so perfectly understandable that it might happen in Space too.
Different dynamics of course.

 

[Sandro Sammarco]

Hello Commander besieger!

Well, it would be a descent rather than an instant slam - there would be plenty of warnings and punitive measures would ramp up from much lesser effects, but if we decide that unbalanced combat encounters are bad for the overall game health then yes, something like this could be the ultimate consequence of roleplaying a remorseless murderer.

Open is a shared game space and we want to maximize enjoyment for all the Commanders that use it.

Of course, this is hypothetical. If we do decide to go down this route, we will make sure that everyone is fully informed along the way.

 

[nrage]

It will apply to everything, including regular combat.

Can you imagine if I crash into your ship outside of a station with an eagle, you get flagged for killing me and LOSE your fully decked out engineered ship forever BECAUSE the station blew you up?

No, that's not how it would work. The idea is to track individual events and apply karma shifts for each one. It will take a number of negative events, applying bad karma, before your insurance would be removed (if that even happens, it was only an example Sandy gave). So, assuming you're not a murderhobo you would not lose an Engineered ship in this case.

If this idea make it live, it will be the death of combat as we know it. NOBODY in their right mind will want to fight.

It is going to have almost zero effect on normal PvP combat.

 

[Misaniovent]

Hello Commanders!

In response to combat logging versus "griefing" (which I will define here as killing a much weaker vessel with potentially a lower combat rated pilot): both are considered "undesirable" behaviour. I'm not saying that they would have to get exactly the same bad karma, just that repeatedly doing either act would see a Commander slide down the karma slope. I'm not sure that this can really be argued against, unless you are bringing a strong bias to the discussion table.

In Open, you can run into other Commanders that want to destroy your ship. We are saying that if they repeatedly pick unfair fights, we will take action against them. Why would we not take action against someone who consistently logs to avoid legitimate destruction? And I'm sure that we could envisage a system that reduced karma loss for combat logging when aggressors are also low karma Commanders, so it feels reasonable to me?

Hell Commander besieger!

As we're speaking hypothetically here, we would want to avoid shadow banning where possible. As an example, for a Commander that repeatedly killed clean ships that were significantly weaker than them, I'd rather see a removal of insurance cover (so when a ship is destroyed it's gone, or you have to pay the full price to get it back), docking privileges rescinded at all starports and outposts except those in anarchy jurisdictions and game applied Pilot Federation bounties rather than a shadow ban.

Of course, we'd always reserve the right to apply out of game measures if we felt they were justified.

It can of course be argued against, but not without biases — which cannot be removed from any discussion. I like the core idea of increasing the penalty for crime, but I think it would be good to have clarity when discussion what the impact of bad karma might be. You mentioned the PF withdrawing support. What exactly does this mean? You mentioned "the right to apply out of game measures." In what case? Would these measures be justified based on a pilot's accumulated bad karma, or would they be applied holistically?

More specifically: could a CMDR like besieger potentially face out of game measures for attacking pilots without reason or warning? If he were attacking a specific pilot repeatedly, would that trigger these measures? What if he were combat logging repeatedly? How would the reaction vary?

I believe, and I assume you do, too, that the game should appropriately penalize crime and should be adjusted in a way that defines crime in a logical way. I disagree that combat logging should be considered a crime, though. I believe that combat logging should, in most circumstances, be considered a subversion of game mechanics, and that we should be looking at significant penalties for it that match currently stated penalties (shadowbans).

Why would we not take action against someone who consistently logs to avoid legitimate destruction?

You absolutely should, and I do not think anyone is saying otherwise.

And I'm sure that we could envisage a system that reduced karma loss for combat logging when aggressors are also low karma Commanders, so it feels reasonable to me?

I hope you do not do this. What you are suggesting is that combat logging should be situationally permissible if a CMDR is attacked by a CMDR with a history of assault.

 

[Sole Hunter]

No, that's not how it would work. The idea is to track individual events and apply karma shifts for each one. It will take a number of negative events, applying bad karma, before your insurance would be removed (if that even happens, it was only an example Sandy gave). So, assuming you're not a murderhobo you would not lose an Engineered ship in this case.


It is going to have almost zero effect on normal PvP combat.

All opinions are valid whether they are negative or positive. I could care less if mine is not constructive. Im not paid to work for them to find ideas inbetween a coffee break. If that's what you want to do because you like wasting your brain cells suit yourself.

No this idea is garbage for PVP players. It will be a griefing land of opportunities, we already know EXACTLY what to do to abuse this new mechanic.

Don't you remember the good old days of Cmdr ''Itchynipples'' and ''Cawkstrangla''. I'm sure we all want to go back these glory days, don't we ?

 

[n o o d l z]

Saying it now, if this goes through. RIP your game. Nothing but who can grief who harder.

He's asking for ideas man, instead of complaining about every idea Sandro throws out there come up with something yourself that makes more sense. I don't understand why it's so unreasonable that if you're out in the galaxy murdering innocent pilots for no reason, that your insurance company is going to consider not covering you (or jacking up your rate), and that stations are going to be less likely to allow a known murderer to dock. Makes perfect sense to me.

 

[nrage]

All opinions are valid whether they are negative or positive.

They might be valid, or rather everyone is entitled to have them. However, not every post/opinion is valuable.

I could care less if mine is not constructive, Im not being paid to work for them to find ideas inbetween a coffee break. If that's what you want to do because you like wasting your brain cells suit yourself.

Sure. So long as you're aware that you're not actually helping things.

It will be a griefing land of opportunities, we already know EXACTLY what to do to abuse this new mechanic.

Which is what exactly? Given a commander in a trade ship with neutral karma, how do you grief them with this system?

 

[Sole Hunter]

They might be valid, or rather everyone is entitled to have them. However, not every post/opinion is valuable.


Sure. So long as you're aware that you're not actually helping things.


Which is what exactly? Given a commander in a trade ship with neutral karma, how do you grief them with this system?

In your opinion it's not valuable.

 

[nrage]

I hope you do not do this. What you are suggesting is that combat logging should be situationally permissible if a CMDR is attacked by a CMDR with a history of assault.

I kind of like this. It goes BOTH WAYS too you know. You will be punished less for murdering a combat logger, for example.

 

[besieger]

Hello Commander besieger!

Well, it would be a descent rather than an instant slam - there would be plenty of warnings and punitive measures would ramp up from much lesser effects, but if we decide that unbalanced combat encounters are bad for the overall game health then yes, something like this could be the ultimate consequence of roleplaying a remorseless murderer.

Open is a shared game space and we want to maximize enjoyment for all the Commanders that use it.

Of course, this is hypothetical. If we do decide to go down this route, we will make sure that everyone is fully informed along the way.

Ok this line of comments with you just proves you do not play this game to any degree... if you had even any idea you would know removing a players ship post engineers would be crazy. you make this game so difficult to enjoy already now you intend to remove PVP due to poor design decisions made by you and your team. its a constant stream of mistakes, Multi-crew(No benefit or reason to use), Power Play, Planet Landings(devoid of content), Drip feeding the story, Unbalanced PVP, Broken system reported moths ago. I could go on... Player retention is already at an all time low due to poor social mechanics that make the game difficult to get into.

Here is some example of how to fix your C&P system for station ramming right off the bat.

Make ships using a docking computer immune to speeding rules as the play is not in control, Player not using a docking computer who speed is their own fault if they crash or hit any other ship. there simple and fixed.

Increase rebuys by all means to prevent a player from killing clean ships, but for the love of god DO NOT remove ships from players... you know we will only use this to game the system and turn it against you. as with everything you and your team poorly design and implement.


Of note though, sorry for being harsh but the truth is harsh. I love this game and don't want to see it turn into a wasteland of who can grief who harder. o7

 

[CMDR Dahak]

As someone who hates griefers (much love for pirates, though, totally different thing), I beg you: Don't remove insurance from their ships entirely. By all means make them KOS by any non-anarchy station, by all means make the rebuy larger, and by all means give them a permanent police escort in high-security systems or whatever: But remember that as much as they are toxic jerks, they still have a right to play as long as they're not exploiting. Taking away their ship, which in many cases is going to be engineered to the nines, is a guaranteed way to make them quit. Punishing the murderhobos to the point they quit is as bad as not punishing them at all. In either aspect, you run the risk of losing players.

 

[nrage]

In your opinion it's not valuable, you are not speaking for the rest of community nor the developers.

No, I'm not. Nor am I saying you should not post. But, I challenge anyone to find anything of value (WRT solving this issue) in any of your recent posts.

In any case this is the last I'll say on this, as it's off topic and borderline sniping.