Griefers and Elite's Emerging Karma System

[Delilah]

Sadism is a very complicated subject... far more complicated than people quite realize. This is probably the wrong forum to go into full detail but I actually am a sadist outside of the game but am normally rather secretive about it (bless the t'interwebs for extra braves). My partner is fully aware of course ;-) Once you've embraced the fact that you have a sadistic side to your personality you start to realize that it's not actually that rare. Lots of people have little bits of sadism floating about in them, it's a very common human trait.

Some things to note about sadism which most people don't appreciate:

1. sadist != sociopath, the two are separate traits which occur together in some dangerous individuals but are basically independent from one another. Sociopaths are actually very rare, but many people have little sadistic traits.
2. sadists can be ethical people..
3. Very few people are either entirely benevolent or entirely sadistic... most people that have a sadistic streak are also capable of being kind or cooperative too.

I spend the vast majority of my time in game being helpful and cooperative.. sometimes I'm even almost boundlessly kind. I certainly enjoy PVP but just occasionally in the game I am willfully cruel and enjoy it. Such is the complexity of human nature.. In my real life of course I'm never cruel without people's consent (we won't discuss the exact context) but that is where games and reality can diverge due to the diminishing consequences of a virtual world

I've have observed that others on the forum dislike the linking of real life psychology with their computer game selves.. I however have long been comfortable with exactly who I am in real life.. I don't have a problem admitting that the two me's are linked ;-)

I think you are right on many accounts -- that sadism is a side of humanity's species being, that it is not the same as being a sociopath, and that there is some continuity between our real, social, and virtual selves. Brave of you to offer these insights from personal experience too.

 

[Crank Larson]

E: D hasn't got an emerging Karma system. It is only being discussed at present (as stated in the thread where it is being discussed, which rather than being on Reddit, is actually on these very forums: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/349769-Deliberate-Ramming ).

Hopefully it will stay at the discussion level, and instead sensible changes are made to the existing punishment system.

 

[Commander Biscuit]

Yea, for a game pitched as 'play your own way' and 'hunt other commanders!' that was disappointing. Especially considering that people who really hate PvP can hide in solo/PGs and not be bothered with it - ever.

The game can still be played your own way, but any online game needs to have rules against toxic behaviour that discourages others from playing, especially when the others are in a much bigger majority. It's financial suicide to cater to a small group of toxic players.

Speaking of that, solo/pgs doesn't really impact your game at all if you think about it. The players that hide in solo/pg are players that would either 1) not have bought the game in the first place, without the option to do so. Or 2) have left the game. So they wouldn't be fish in your barrel either way. Plus they wouldn't be much of a challenge for you anyway, right? no real loss then.

 

[Delilah]

Well, yes, but there should be incentives to act in a certain way.

If you're talking about a combat FPS then obviously it's a fairly straightforward premise; you shoot at the stuff shooting at you.

That isn't the ED universe though.
Sure, it's part of the ED universe but not the entire thing.
That being the case, somebody at FDev needs to sit down and decide just how violent the ED universe is intended to be and then come up with a system that will encourage people to adopt appropriate behavour OR choose to live outside mainstream society and create a viable counterculture which supports that too.

Fundamentally, we currently have a universe where a player can be attacked and killed immediately for a single stray shot in a RES but where people can willfully destroy ship after ship right outside a station in a "high security" system without significant retaliation.
That can't be right, can it?

I really appreciate the distinction you are making between a FPS and a multi-player/MMO sandbox like Elite. The change from single-player consoles to sandbox MMOs has had a substantial impact on the research, particularly in terms of the prevalence of sociopathology, and questions of ethics in virtual worlds.

Additionally that it is Frontier's time to decide how far they are willing to let griefing continue is a point well taken. Eve decided to welcome griefers from the start. That worked while it was the only game in town. But if Frontier went down that road (which I do not think it will), I'm not sure it would work for them.

 

[bigity]

For me, your point faltered when you brought up players killing player in CZs as a form of griefing. If there is any arena in the Elite Dangerous universe where player killing couldn't be more acceptable, it's within a CZ. Hell, I have videos of wing mates destroying players who stumbled into CZs with us and decided to shoot us. How could that be considered griefing in the slightest? Would you also consider CGs community events (assuming you're speaking more of events like what recently happened with Salome)? Hunting players supporting the rival faction during a CG is far from griefing as well, or imparting an RP blockade upon one or the myriad other reasons why PKs show up at large events.

I've encountered true griefing in video games, at least in comparison the tame events that happen here in Elite. Myself and many of the other players of this game have played the true griefers paradise known as EVE. I've been subject to repeated, targeted, months long harassment in that game just for my association within a specific player or corporation. Targeted by players who had an exponential advantage over me because of the way the progression system in that game is designed. Blown apart until I was broke and then hounded 24/7 by groups of coordinating players so that I couldn't leave the station to make more money via mining or seeking out NPC pirates to gather the bounties on. I've been run out of that game enough to the point where I stopped playing because there was no point in paying the monthly sub for a game I couldn't play and that was their goal the entire time.

True griefing doesn't really happen here in Elite. This community just likes to throw that word around like it's going to spur FDev into action.

You also continue to mention "research" but have failed to provide links to said research. Providing them would do wonders for supporting your argument.

Edit: I see above that, as I was writing this, you mentioned being an EVE player as well. How could you even begin to compare what happens here with actual targeted griefing?



This honestly went over my head. Nice of you to poke fun at that though, which is what I'm assuming you're doing. Show your true colors to everyone else while you're at it.

He's referencing a movie where a guy is pretending to be a mercenary/killer and gets called out by another actor with that line. It has to do with the Special Air Service in the UK.

Basically, he is insulting you as a fake/fraud.

- - - Updated - - -

I just refuse to accept that griefing, in the broad definition being used here, occurs in this game. If you are someone who is affected negatively by ship destruction at the hands of another human then there are wonderful ways to not have to deal with that.

Playing in Open is an Open invitation to either co-operation or hostilities. It is part of the game, whether you are in a sidey or an Imperial Cutter.

Now, on the matter of harassment, there may be something to talk about there. Players who hunt others only to kill the same one over and over and over...that's bullying/harassment. Though, i think many would agree that is a rare occurrence here.

Outside of those same players returning to the location of a CG or whatever in Open despite being killed once or a few times - I'd agree.

 

[markuslig]

I skimmed through it, It doesn't seem as they intend to use the karma system to identify what sort of player it is. If it is a pirate, a chaotic evil murderer, miner or a scaredy cat that stays away (just grabbing some examples)
Identify what type of player it is to decide if this player is allowed in certain factions or not like it was discussed in another thread. But only used to see if the player should be banned.
Also instead of banning players/griefers there may be a way to use them.
Well i probably missed a few thing, i'll have another look.

 

[Kaltern]

What a surprise. Someone writes about how actions done by others to deliberately ruin someone else's enjoyment for the sake of their own, with absolutely no reason that is within game mechanics, is attacked by the very same names I continue to see defending their idea of fun - which is at the absolute expense of other people.

And then, the discussion is totally disrupted by talk of what the word 'griefer' actually means. Awesome bit of distraction there.

I completely agree with the OP in so much that those people who decide that they best way to enjoy a multiplayer environment is to make the game as miserable for other people as possible. These are very likely the sort of people who, if they played those sort of games, would 'take advantage' of being able to kill people on their own team in say, CoD or Battlefield, because it's the way the game is designed.

Unfortunately, we're on the internet, which is kind of the same as Open, but with webpages. The same thing can be found pretty much everywhere, with similar actions by both sides of the ethical scale.

Regardless of what anyone might try to tell you in here, people's actions are absolutely guided by their personality. It would be a blatant lie to suggest otherwise. Oh, the usual arguments tend to come out around now - I wouldn't ram someone on the road in real life. What makes you think I would do it in game? Or, Just because I relentlessly kill people outside stations for the fun of it, doesn't mean I would sit outside a petrol station and ram people off the road as they left.

No... that's because it isn't socially acceptable, is unlawful, and you would inevitably be caught and would suffer consequences for your actions.

THAT is why these people do what they do. They want to act out their own, antisocial, immoral or otherwise unacceptable-in-public impulses, in a forum that has no real life consequence. To say they do this for any other reason is illogical and is very likely to be untrue. Justification of actions by quoting game mechanics, the game's name, and other such excuses are just that.

The odd thing, is a lot of these people somehow think that everyone who is against their specific style of gaming, must also be anti-competition. The inability to separate competition from what THEY do is also very telling. PvP, for example, is a completely valid playstyle - assuming there is a REASON for doing so. Bounty hunting, Piracy (different subject that is.), PP war, all these things are perfectly acceptable within the game's rules and spirit. Deliberately ramming someone as they are leaving a station for the sole purpose of ruining their day, is clearly an infraction of the game's rules, and yet is defended by the very same people who make the excuses I mentioned above. (that's just one of a multitude of excuses).

Oh, and as a final point, noone here has ever ask anyone to show them how not to play the game. Telling us that you do what you do in the name of education, is another lie, and justification for your gameplay style.

 

[bigity]

The game can still be played your own way, but any online game needs to have rules against toxic behaviour that discourages others from playing, especially when the others are in a much bigger majority. It's financial suicide to cater to a small group of toxic players.

Speaking of that, solo/pgs doesn't really impact your game at all if you think about it. The players that hide in solo/pg are players that would either 1) not have bought the game in the first place, without the option to do so. Or 2) have left the game. So they wouldn't be fish in your barrel either way. Plus they wouldn't be much of a challenge for you anyway, right? no real loss then.

The problem is most of what is kicking around as 'griefing' is not, nor is it toxic.

Bluntly, getting killed in Open isn't griefing. Getting killed repeatedly in Open at the same CG trying to make runs isn't being griefed. Getting randomly attacked by someone you wander across isn't being griefed. Getting killed repeatedly by other PP CMDRs while you are pledged to someone else isn't.

Having someone follow you around endlessly killing you might be griefing though (though easily avoidable).

Cleaning up a small handful of folks isn't done by hammering everyone - which is what the vast majority of these C&P threads would do.

 

[EdzUp]

there is a simple griefer test, if they chat to the target before killing them then it's pvp if they just shoot them it's griefing

 

[rrobes]

Excellent posts. I agree in:re the links between real life and on-line behavior, they exist, no surprises.

It is also true that Open is lonely and except for the obvious places, quite safe.

C&P is overdue. As part of it, FD is talking about tracking behavior, CL may become part of that tracking, so players beware.

One aspect I wish FD would consider (has been suggested) are high risk/high reward systems where anything goes. If you want in, best bring plenty of big sticks with you. This could be a relief valve for many players, the aces and the highwaymen.

Good to see that there is movement on this issue and rep to the OP for the tone of the argument.

 

[Cablefast]

What research?

Go to https://scholar.google.com and do a search for "link between videogames and antisocial behavior." I think you will agree that there has been much research on this topic. However, I do not think that there is a widely held consensus supporting the OP's opinion.

1. Targeting new players for destruction is debatably not griefing

Yes it is.

2. Interfering with CGs is not griefing, as long as no exploits are used.

I somewhat agree with you here. Actions such as a blockade in opposition of the CG's goals or piracy as a profession are not griefing. On the other hand, killing players to "mine salt" is griefing.

3. Using CZs is perfectly legitimate.

I agree with you completely.

Do you perhaps mean perhaps asymmetric PvP where a CMDR is attacking a much weaker ship? Even so that would not be griefing unless it is continually targeted against the same commander.

I agree with you again.

I am all for a new updated C&P system - it should focus on system security or other CMDRs being able to bounty hunt (via telepresence as space is big), restrict murdering CMDRs to anarchy systems and end the (IMHO) exploit of losing bounties in a suicidewinder and so on.

Another good idea.

Being a psychopath should also be a career with unlockable engineers, special modules, paintjobs etc AS LONG AS there is a way for CMDRs to hunt them more easily.

Aww, ad we were on a role. This seems like an obviously bad idea. How would the inactivation of random murder for no reason improve the ED galaxy? I'm open to hearing your response here but I don't think this question can be answered rationally.

 

[firemane]

The one thing I have an objection to is the use of the word "emerging".

This has been debated back and forth for over two years now and ED is fundamentally the same. There is no actual evidence that action of any type will be taken by Frontier. No roadmap, no dates, no promises, no commitment.

I don't really think there is any amount of C&P redesign that can be a real "game-changer" unless it includes the ability to filter out the people you don't want to play with.

As long as you are forced to play in the same universe with every random person, some of which are pretending insanity and many others who are actually insane, this stuff will happen. Nobody will be satisfied.

We're in the 21st Century. I suppose a filter by age, PvX interest, and similar parameters shouldn't be beyond our capabilities.

 

[Stealthie]

I really appreciate the distinction you are making between a FPS and a multi-player/MMO sandbox like Elite. The change from single-player consoles to sandbox MMOs has had a substantial impact on the research, particularly in terms of the prevalence of sociopathology, and questions of ethics in virtual worlds.

Additionally that it is Frontier's time to decide how far they are willing to let griefing continue is a point well taken. Eve decided to welcome griefers from the start. That worked while it was the only game in town. But if Frontier went down that road (which I do not think it will), I'm not sure it would work for them.

Here's a little thought-experiment which I think provides a useful litmus test for in-game behaviour...

If the tools were available in ED which would allow people to "grief" NPCs, do you suppose they'd be widely used?

Cos, I'm thinking that if people want to play the game a certain way, those tools would get used.
if, OTOH, those tools didn't get used, it's cos the people involved simply enjoy making life miserable for others, and protestations of "role-playing" are nothing more than excuses for lousy behaviour.

 

[Nagual]

I wrote this elsewhere:

I've never understood Elites lack of deterrent for PKers, attacking a clean player. Stations should either refuse docking or open fire on sight. PKers should have their victims rebuy added multiplied by an exponential amount per kill, plus an ever increasing legacy fine (that also increases exponentially) that has to be paid upon their own death. The ever increasing amount of money they'd pay out would eventually mean they couldn't afford a rebuy, and being heavily restricted as to what stations they can go to would force them away from certain areas, while still allowing them to act in that way if they choose to do so.

In summary form, the attacker should:

• Get the standard bounty placed on them as normal.
• Also have thier victims rebuy cosy multiplied by an exponetial factor added to theirs.
• Additionally they recieve an ever exponentially increasing legacy fine that has to be paid upon their distruction.

 

[firemane]

...protestations of "role-playing" are nothing more than excuses for lousy behaviour.

Even more terrifying... perhaps they are sincerely trying to role-play.

Hence we reach the conclusion that just because someone attempts to Role-Play doesn't mean they can actually do something worth a canister of biowaste.

Thus, rather than being a defense, the roleplay argument should lead to summary execution due to "incompetent performance".

 

[Commander Biscuit]

The problem is most of what is kicking around as 'griefing' is not, nor is it toxic.

Bluntly, getting killed in Open isn't griefing. Getting killed repeatedly in Open at the same CG trying to make runs isn't being griefed. Getting randomly attacked by someone you wander across isn't being griefed. Getting killed repeatedly by other PP CMDRs while you are pledged to someone else isn't.

Having someone follow you around endlessly killing you might be griefing though (though easily avoidable).

Cleaning up a small handful of folks isn't done by hammering everyone - which is what the vast majority of these C&P threads would do.

What's toxic is ultimately a democratic thing decided by the devs and players. It's gotten to the point where FD are seriously considering making this system, so there must be a problem in the eyes of the players and devs.

And hammering everyone is what's coming. Player killers aren't looking at the whole picture and feel like they're being singled out, but your quarry is going to be considered toxic for combat logging on you. I'm not sure if that's your definition of toxic or not, but it's FDevs, and shows they are being even-handed at least.

I agree that cleaning up a small handful of folk isn't best done with this system. Mine would be much simpler, since the toxic players are already well known to everybody. But this is the route FD are going to take, and instead of looking at it like some attempt to control the player, I view it as a gameplay opportunity to understand the new system and try and benefit from it. Grinding the karma upwards or downwards might be fun and challenging.

 

[Crank Larson]

If the tools were available in ED which would allow people to "grief" NPCs, do you suppose they'd be widely used?

But you do have the tools; your ship and your armament! That's all you need. And I'm pretty confident that NPCs get "griefed" far more than Pilots Federation members. How many NPCs have been murdered just so a commander can get some material to soup up his spaceship? It's lucky that the NPCs can't post on the forum, they've really got things to complain about...

 

[Nagual]

But you do have the tools; your ship and your armament! That's all you need. And I'm pretty confident that NPCs get "griefed" far more than Pilots Federation members. How many NPCs have been murdered just so a commander can get some material to soup up his spaceship? It's lucky that the NPCs can't post on the forum, they've really got things to complain about...

I buy my ingredients from the shop to make my soup.

 

[Monk]

Outside of those same players returning to the location of a CG or whatever in Open despite being killed once or a few times - I'd agree.

Just a thought that popped in my head...what if, after you lose your ship in a system, that system becomes permit locked for some amount of time.

 

[Dbrn47]

But you do have the tools; your ship and your armament! That's all you need. And I'm pretty confident that NPCs get "griefed" far more than Pilots Federation members. How many NPCs have been murdered just so a commander can get some material to soup up his spaceship? It's lucky that the NPCs can't post on the forum, they've really got things to complain about...

I think the idea of griefing requires that the target is sentient, has feelings.