Deliberate Ramming

[shadragon]

The problem with this notion is that it does not consider PvP piracy; out of 10 interdictions, probably 8 traders will try and run (fair enough, it's up to them), so the pirate has to use force in most encounters. Obviously disabling the escaping trader is preferable to killing them, but it's not always possible given the small window of time the pirate has, so we tend to default to killing the trader for refusing to yield.

Covered already. If the trader lives, no impact. If he dies, then it's on you.

Otherwise all pirates will have to say is "Oops, I killed another one by 'accident'."

 

[n o o d l z]

We cant discus anything with Sandro, hes set in his mind what he want and its clear, look at Power Play, Sandro himself on stream has said "Its my baby", well that's one neglected baby for sure! I would love a karma system but not one with a risk of having no option to pay my rebuy. Thats not karma that's punishment and control from Fdev on how I should play, not only that but we have these comments of "Shadow banning" users for killing other players.

Exactly, which is why it's good he's not calling "crime & punishment" his baby, and is actually asking for input on it. And I think you have a ton of support on the rebuy thing, I don't think there are many people who would agree that permanently losing your ship is appropriate punishment for any in-game activity.

 

[Sole Hunter]

Yeah, I mean aside from the infinite freedom, and this cuthtroat galaxy we are meant to be in, I made the mistake of reading their website.

In your own words Frontier:

http://i.imgur.com/3cBGIRm.jpg

Funny though, its not like the game is suggesting we can shoot at others is it..

I mean is this your promotion video for ED or not? This in the station:

https://youtu.be/mx9io7bFR64

Let's be honest half of the stuff in those trailers don't even happen in the game.

 

[Halifax Gibbet]

This is good, can't see obvious flaw, must read again to find one

You want it to be even better, use the other half to re-enburse the original victims, unless they had rebuy, in which case refund them the entire rebuy.

 

[shadragon]

I find it somewhat interesting that they've sold us a game set in a cutthroat galaxy, where we are told we have infinite freedom to blaze our own trail and we see rhetoric like this from the lead developer.

Before I get on a rant.. Lets say this all goes through.. Does this mean solo and pg will be removed too? Or is the intent to just stiff people who don't play in Frontiers 'approved way'?

Sounds pretty ranty to me. If you don't see the current game mechanic weaknesses that this will fix, then you are either beyond hope or someone taking advantage of them to grief other players. I don't see a third choice.

No, Solo and PG will not be removed. This has nothing to do with game modes.

 

[n o o d l z]

the solutions been posted many times... there is even a comment literally of how a player gets ignored... thats why people respond like they do. pvp community gets ignored by default and it will just be a half solution to a problem thats as old as the game...

everyone knows who the real pvp players are, specially FD will now this by the statistics... send them a message asking for a solution. this way you get a real answer from those who know what they are talking about. stay away from the pve community with this as 90% of them dont want a solution, but a total ban...

FD has all the statistics to filter out who the real killers are, PM them instead of making a public thread knowing the pvp and pve will clash again

Where is anyone asking for total bans? If there are, they're certainly in the minority. Most people just want there to be reasonable repercussions to murdering people.

 

[shadragon]

If for instance the pirate community was to guarantee that any ship in a High or Medium Security System would never be interdicted, then you give these players a way to get around and make money in Open without the potential loss of their ship to piracy.

I repped your post for optimism, but that will never happen because there's always one weenie in the crowd who won't follow the guidelines. Then we're back to square one.

 

[The Dutch]

Where is anyone asking for total bans? If there are, they're certainly in the minority. Most people just want there to be reasonable repercussions to murdering people.

meant banning pvp... there are so meny pve only groups which proofs they dont want pvp at all

- - - Updated - - -

We finally have a dev in an active informative discussion with far reaching implications and your first knee-jerk reaction is to insult him.

At some point in the future, when you're trying to get an answer for something and no one from Frontier answers, remember this post.

think I am still waiting on a responds to my message since august 2016... been a nice guy before that, so there was no reason to ignore me... and I am not the only one on this.

 

[Cmdr. Jägermeister]

Hello Commander Sole Hunter!

Let me be as clear as I can, I think perhaps I am not articulating the concept well enough.

* Our karma system would work by tracking *trends* over time. You would never perform a single action and get dropped down to the lowest rating. It tracks intent by building up a picture over time.

* It would very likely *only* apply to interactions with other players in most cases, so it would not interfere much with the rest of the game.

* Importantly, for combat encounters, it would a) only apply to criminal attacks, b) use as detailed and as comprehensive metrics as possible for determining relative ship powers, taking into account ship hull, load out, engineered upgrades and pilot rating, and only activate when there was a large disparity.

I guess, in response, do you feel it's completely fine for powerful ships to be able to wantonly destroy new players, for example?

Hello Commanders besieger, Jukelo and others!

Regarding the possibility that such measures might act as an incentive: it's an interesting point.

In response I would suggest that if the measures did do that then with the system in place it would be more likely that we could swap in measures that in no way could be seen as good things (such as shadow bans).

There's also the argument that it's not that we necessarily want to prevent Commanders from playing how they want, more that we want appropriate consequences for such actions.

So... I miss you talking about how combat logging will reduce the karma of the Logger and increase the karma of the other cmdr.

 

[AndyJ]

So... I miss you talking about how combat logging will reduce the karma of the Logger and increase the karma of the other cmdr.

Jeez, give the guy a break. He's answering some questions off the cuff - reacting to points raised - and probably doing so long outside of office hours ... and for his effort, it turns into a murderhobo pile-on.

 

[Cmdr. Jägermeister]

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.

Wait. So you advertise the pvp part of the game and then consider shadow bans for those who actually do it? Is that even legal?

 

[Halifax Gibbet]

Covered already. If the trader lives, no impact. If he dies, then it's on you.

Otherwise all pirates will have to say is "Oops, I killed another one by 'accident'."

that may be covered but its definately not resolved, as a bounty hunter I need pirates.

Traders run or log, and accidents DO happen and frequently too.

 

[Cosmos]

Aaaaand, this is why we don't get much communication from Frontier. Sandro is literally opening the door here for discussion on whether a crime and punishment system is a good idea, and how it should be implemented. And half of the posts are people completely blowing things out of proportion instead of providing constructive feedback that will actually help make this game better. Do you guys want Sandro blindly developing this feature without any community input or do you want him to come on here and chat about it? Because it seems like you're asking for the former.

Right so its okay to threaten people in a passive aggressive manner with all sorts of veiled threats and punishments but anyone objecting is just yet another reason why the developers don't talk to the community. Yeah right..

 

[EUS]

Wow, sure are tons of qualitative items/actions that need quantifying before any of this karma can be introduced.
And that's what will make or break the C&P system, not logic, but the emotional response of the developers behind the creation of it.

 

[Elethiomel Zakalwe]

It's reasons like this that make me feel like the solution needs to be more based on in-game security response, rather than karma exclusively. If you're blockading a CG in a high-security system, there needs to be an appropriate system response to your actions, not necessarily a hit to your karma.

Exactly! I don't mind having a harsh response for criminal actions – but it should be localized to the in-game faction that my actions are hurting, not just a general obstacle to my playing the game.

 

[Goose4291]

Hello Commander Sole Hunter!

Hello Commanders besieger, Jukelo and others!

Regarding the possibility that such measures might act as an incentive: it's an interesting point.

In response I would suggest that if the measures did do that then with the system in place it would be more likely that we could swap in measures that in no way could be seen as good things (such as shadow bans).

There's also the argument that it's not that we necessarily want to prevent Commanders from playing how they want, more that we want appropriate consequences for such actions.

Ban people? For 'killing' people in a computer game? Where that playstyle is advertised? You consider that an appropriate consequence?

I'm sorry, as someone who has always advocated a crime and punishment system, and the idea of a criminal career with its pros and cons, that is to put it bluntly, mental.

 

[Bunkerkind Anni]

thy hyperbole is strong in this threat,

may the 4th be with you!

 

[Cosmos]

Let's be honest half of the stuff in those trailers don't even happen in the game.

It strikes me the only people who have and are being dishonest are Frontier.

 

[Ian Phillips]

Right so its okay to threaten people in a passive aggressive manner with all sorts of veiled threats and punishments but anyone objecting is just yet another reason why the developers don't talk to the community. Yeah right..

There is a difference between objection, and abuse.

 

[Sole Hunter]

Ban people? For 'killing' people in a computer game? Where that playstyle is advertised? You consider that an appropriate consequence?

I'm sorry, as someone who has always advocated a crime and punishment system, and the idea of a criminal career with its pros and cons, that is to put it bluntly, mental.

It's going to be a great day for customer support.

Player : Hello Frontier, I got banned. Please, why?
Frontier : You killed a player.
Player : You advertise game with PVP.
Frontier : Yes but you have to be nice to people.
Player : I will get refund with my bank.
Frontier : We will close your account.
Player : But I will have my money back