Deliberate Ramming

[nrage]

imho bad karma needs to build up , and does decay only over time.

any form of positive karma buildup can, and will be exploited, effectively defeat the purpose of the system.

positive karma? if its implemented, then the player that are supposed to be penalised by the whole system,
will simply build up positive karma to the max, and then do their "fun" stuff until its down to neutral, or just keep it at a save level.

I agree. If there is a way to gain Karma then the griefer will simply "game" the system.

If karma can be lost via actions, automatically, then that's ok.

But positive karma should only be gain via other CMDRs "repping" you with it, with strict limits. (Can only rep the same CMDR once per week, can only receive so much per week, etc)
Otherwise people will just find some form of exploitation of an automated system and gain loads of positive rep to negate the loss from mass murder.

Especially since a positive action is much harder to define with game logic.

If I jump in to res, and see a new CMDR struggling, and I jump in and kill his attacker, thus saving his life, the game is very likely to not recognise that at all. But the CMDR will.
Same goes for if I just jump in to steal his kill. Game might not notice, but the CMDR will, if I keep doing it.

This is why I keep campaigning for a manual vote for both positive and negative karma.

Sorry but it seems to me that a vote system would be the worst possible solution, it would be gamed mercilessly and even become a new way to grief other commanders.

 

[Truesilver]

The thing you're not "getting" (from where I'm sitting) is that the karma system being proposed would not necessarily be very tightly bound to your commanders in-game situation (reputation etc). Rather, it's a measure of the actions that you as a player have taken. There is a reason I keep bolding and underlining the two words and this is because there is a difference between actions a commander takes and the repercussions (entirely in game and lore appropriate, the sorts of things an in-game C&P system would address) and the larger trends in behaviour that a player takes and the repercussions for those.

Understood, I think what separates us on the Cmdr / Player thing is whether the Player thing should be the starting point or (if necessary) the end point.

I think the implementation of a Player (not Cmdr) karma system is undesirable. I don't say it isn't necessary, though ... but 'if all else fails' it should be considered - and not before.

I therefore believe that Frontier should first attempt to improve the game purely via the Cmdr route, by improvements to the existing in-Galaxy bounty and reputation systems.

I think that Frontier should only consider moving to out-of-Galaxy Player (not Cmdr) avenues when they can hand-on-heart say that the Cmdr route has been thoroughly attempted first and that even with considerable improvements to it, still in their opinion has not achieved what they hoped.

Apart from anything else the 'work with what you have first' approach seems to me likely to be a more productive and efficient use of Developer resource.

Also, speaking as someone who wouldn't expect to be on the wrong end of the Player-karma system, even if implemented, I would still like to see more in-game consequences for my Cmdr's actions, even if those consequences sometimes work against me (sorry, I mean, "him"!)

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Hmm, lol, I do believe I underestimated the players somewhat. Lol

Like I said though, strict limits.
Maybe even as restricted as being only allowed to rep (either + or -) the same CMDR once.

And you need to have instanced with them, as an absolute minimum in order to give positive rep.
And for negative rep, maybe a physical exchange must occur, such as gunfire, or fatal collisions(either party).

I still have no clue what the results of a such a system would be, other than instantly be able to see someone's reputation, and act accordingly.
Or use it as a "filter" of sorts, especially for multicrew. (But Not instancing).

Again, it could be gamed. So if it were me, they'd be no effects for negative rep, except people's general reaction.

But as Sandro said way back near the beginning, it's an interesting idea, but would be separate from Karma.

I do believe we need a karma system too. Something to actively discourage random murder, while not preventing it entirely. (I don't want a carebear universe!)


Annnd I'm waffling.

 

[nrage]

Understood, I think what separates us on the Cmdr / Player thing is whether the Player thing should be the starting point or (if necessary) the end point.

I think the implementation of a Player (not Cmdr) karma system is undesirable. I don't say it isn't necessary, though ... but 'if all else fails' it should be considered - and not before.

I therefore believe that Frontier should first attempt to improve the game purely via the Cmdr route, by improvements to the existing in-Galaxy bounty and reputation systems.

I think that Frontier should only consider moving to out-of-Galaxy Player (not Cmdr) avenues when they can hand-on-heart say that the Cmdr route has been thoroughly attempted first and that even with considerable improvements to it, still in their opinion has not achieved what they hoped.

Apart from anything else the 'work with what you have first' approach seems to me likely to be a more productive and efficient use of Developer resource.

Also, speaking as someone who wouldn't expect to be on the wrong end of the Player-karma system, even if implemented, I would still like to see more in-game consequences for my Cmdr's actions, even if those consequences sometimes work against me (sorry, I mean, "him"!)

Fair enough. My issue with this position is that I don't think C&P improvements will achieve the desired results. Of course, it depends what they are.. but none of the suggestions I've read in this thread would do it, IMO.

 

[Bunkerkind Anni]

lore wise, when youre ship explodes, you are ejected and transported to your last station via a emergency micro-jump (yes, thats what they wrote into the manual)

the bounties on your head will either be added to the rebuy, or if they haven't been discovered, turn into hidden ones since you "died" for the faction that has issued them. if a police ship of such a faction scans you, or you do something bad again, they will notice that you are still alive and that old bounty will come back.

now - at any point, the pilot federation will always know what you did, and who you have attacked (if it was another commander of the pilot federation)

so "karma" will not be something abstract, but a 100% consistent part of the crime&punishment system, restricted to member of the pilot federation.

thats for the simulation -
not server side - that "Karma" can't be a single number. it must the result of a page full of parameters that are considered, as sandro has already mentioned, tracked over a time.

 

[Thetele]

Hello Commander nrage!

* Repeatedly attacking clean ships that you massively overpowered would get you major bad karma

Other in this post i agree but this. Attacking clean ships shouldn't give negative karma, only if you destroy the ship. It doesn't matter if stealing cargo from clean ship doesn't give you negative/bad karma. This would mean we couldn't force players to drop cargo. We need to be able to attack/disable/destroy drives/engines etc. without karma penalty. Only killing clean ship should give negative karma.

And just a Idea, maybe successfully pirating cargo from players (and let the target leave alive) should give small amount of positive Karma or maybe pirate rating/reputation/rank. This way it would encourage players to steal stuff but let players leave alive instead of killing them. Carrot going with the stick always work much better than just stick. If you only use stick then it won't work that well.

Also system to demand cargo via quick in game tool/quick pre made message would be nice.

Also will the karma system have some kind of decay for the karma or reset? As if it doesn't, eventually everyone will have bad karma just from the minor bad karma things they do over time.

CZ should be places were no one get Karma lose, same with places were security link is down (haz res sites and compromised beacons).

Can you add pad blocking to things that would get you minor bad karma? Its really bad design that players can block stations (for example CG outpost surface settlements) and force people to relog/change to solo to get pad.

Also defending yourself should never give you bad karma. If i am in my PVP cutter and i am wanted in system and some idiot flying cobra mk III, sidewinder etc. with "bad" build i shouldn't get bad karma for destroying him even if i am totally overpowered compared to him and i am wanted. In the eyes of the karma system you should never get bad karma for defending yourself. If you get bad karma for defending yourself this hole karma system will be just new griefing tool.

1. Fly stock sidewinder, with FSDI
2. Go to Cg system, Founders world, engineer base, or some popular farming spot/event place etc.
3. spot player who have 100 cr bounty for hitting the system security or any bounty at all.
4. Interdict him/her
5. Let him kill you
6. He will get bad karma and doing this over and over again you get him to very bad karma
7. Mine salt at the forums when they cry how broken the karma system is.

Please don't let this happen. If i can see this being the chase, there will probably be even worse exploits to make "good players" lose a lot of karma.

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

The sad thing is, no matter how, or what they introduce, someone will work out a hole in it, and it'll be the new station ramming...

Basically, before FD even begin to implement it, they need to let us poke as many holes in it as possible.
A poorly implemented karma system could potentially be worse than no karma system at all.

Once again, people are the reason people can't have nice things.

 

[Gunnet]

Also defending yourself should never give you bad karma. If i am in my PVP cutter and i am wanted in system and some idiot flying cobra mk III, sidewinder etc. with "bad" build i shouldn't get bad karma for destroying him even if i am totally overpowered compared to him and i am wanted. In the eyes of the karma system you should never get bad karma for defending yourself. If you get bad karma for defending yourself this hole karma system will be just new griefing tool.

1. Fly stock sidewinder, with FSDI
2. Go to Cg system, Founders world, engineer base, or some popular farming spot/event place etc.
3. spot player who have 100 cr bounty for hitting the system security or any bounty at all.
4. Interdict him/her
5. Let him kill you
6. He will get bad karma and doing this over and over again you get him to very bad karma
7. Mine salt at the forums when they cry how broken the karma system is.

Please don't let this happen. If i can see this being the chase, there will probably be even worse exploits to make "good players" lose a lot of karma.

I don't see the problem. If a wanted player chooses to kill a bounty hunter rather than fleeing, that's still just a murder. In fact, I actually like the idea of criminals being incentivised to realistically attempt to evade and escape from bounty hunters rather than fight them.

At the same time, it should probably be harder to accidentally pick up a small bounty and be labelled a criminal. But that's a question for the bounty system, not the karma system.

 

[Thetele]

I don't see the problem. If a wanted player chooses to kill a bounty hunter rather than fleeing, that's still just a murder. In fact, I actually like the idea of criminals being incentivised to realistically attempt to evade and escape from bounty hunters rather than fight them.

At the same time, it should probably be harder to accidentally pick up a small bounty and be labelled a criminal. But that's a question for the bounty system, not the karma system.

But isn't the point of karma system to discourage killing other players against and "forcing" pvp on them? If someone attack me and die their death is not unwilling, i am not forcing it on them, they picked it by themself. Karma isn't same thing as bounty. I should still get the bounty for killing unwanted bounty hunter/noob whatever, but i shouldn't lose karma because of it. Bounty and wanted status mostly has nothing to do with the Karma system other than attacking wanted ships would never give bad karma.

Also should it be wanted status? Because player can be clear in his current system but have 500 000 cr worth of bounties else were. So i would attack that if the player has bounty more than (for example) 10 000 cr in any system attacking him should be allowed and never give bad Karma, even if he is clean in the system you attack him.

My fear with karma system is that frontier will over look or cut corners when implementing it. They have done it pretty much through elite. And unlike other updates in elite the karma system can totally destroy the game. If it can be played to make/cause other people to get bad karma or by removing the pvp. I mostly don't trust frontier to implement good/well developed system at this point, its more likely that this will go horrible wrong and cause more problems than not doing anything.

 

[Gunnet]

But isn't the point of karma system to discourage killing other players against and "forcing" pvp on them? If someone attack me and die their death is not unwilling, i am not forcing it on them, they picked it by themself. Karma isn't same thing as bounty. I should still get the bounty for killing unwanted bounty hunter/noob whatever, but i shouldn't lose karma because of it. Bounty and wanted status mostly has nothing to do with the Karma system other than attacking wanted ships would never give bad karma.

P.S
Also should it be wanted status? Because player can be clear in his current system but have 500 000 cr worth of bounties else were. So i would attack that if the player has bounty more than 10 000 cr in any system attacking him should be allowed and never give bad Karma, even if he is clean in the system you attack him.

True. I agree that it's not ideal. But it's a lesser evil than the scenario you described.

Perhaps it could consider the wanted player's existing karma status. If you already have low karma then killing a bounty hunter would give you further hit to your karma to avoid exploits, but if your karma is clear you can resist bounty hunters who attack you first without fear of karma consequences.

 

[shadragon]

Agreed!

So letting an account sit idle resets karma? No...

Only doing good things should offset the bad. And ten good things = one bad. Make it really hard to come back with a pariah account.

 

[Nilt]

Sorry for being delayed in responding. Life happens here and there.

Hello Commander Cocalarix!

So we would not by default penalise using the combat timer.

However, we're still considering increasing this value to thirty/sixty seconds.

And well, if we thought it would be useful, we could clearly add some minor bad karma for this action.

I completely support the increased time as a factor. Just the other day, I had to log very suddenly due to a call about my wife's grandmother having another stroke. (They're a recurring thing, it's a bunch of "minor" ones, or as minor as such a thing can ever be. At 93 and some change, she's actually in pretty good health but this is just one of those things that happens sometimes so we need to be ready to go handle it and get her to the hospital as needed.) Anyhow, I happened to be in PvE combat ta the timer and still haven't logged in to see if I blew up in the meantime. Frankly, if I did, tough. I knew I was "on call" and am willing to take such chances. That's part of gaming life sometimes, as I see it.

nrage, aggression should always be an option for a pirate. If the trader chooses to run even in the face of what is considered "legit" piracy, they need to accept there will be potential repercussions

As a self-professed carebear, I actually agree completely with this. Just because I typically prefer PvE to PvP doesn't mean that I feel there ought never to be PvP. WHile I am a fan of banning non-consensual PvP in some manner, this karma system could be a part of that. I completely support the concept that it's consensual if I am flying in open, for example. A karma system would be a disincentive to piracy similar to real life actions we consider "not cool" but don't entirely ban. For example, we may frown upon walking around swearing in front of children in general, but we don't toss folks in jail for it in most places. We simply frown upon it and if someone does it repeatedly, we mentally judge them as appropriate to local custom and personal preference. I think something like the proposed system could be a very positive thing in the long run. Heck, I sometimes roleplay an in RPGs myself and accept that there ought to be in-game consequences as a result!

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.

I dunno if I would call it thew worst idea, but I agree that's rather too much.

I think a lot of people are angry because they think there's a chance they won't be able to rebuy their ship. The system should really just gradually increase rebuy, not entirely prevent them from rebuying their ship.

To add to this, can we make sure that crimes (excluding combat logging) aren't punished in anarchy systems?

Yeah, I think the idea of negative karma applying a multiplier to your insurance seems fair. Think of it as increased premiums in real life for those who engage repeatedly in unsafe driving habits. Obviously this would need to be a gradual thing but I think it's a fantastic idea as a natural consequence.

It's important, however, that we also allow for the karma to either be worked off in some manner. I don't think a slow decay would be entirely inappropriate assuming good behavior, I think that ought to be limited to avoid people just taking a break to let it go away. Regardless, there definitely needs to be a way for someone to either work off their karmic debt in some manner or to counter it somehow. I don't think buying it off ought to be OK, but doing certain missions ought to counter it. Maybe something like running medicine in outbreak systems and so forth.

EDIT: I forgot to add that as far as a player-specific flagging, I think it ought to be limited to each Commander's preference, or perhaps guild/clan/whatever based as well. A system to allow us note those who we liked as well as those who we didn't would be a very handy thing in general.

 

[Truesilver]

So we would not by default penalise using the combat timer.

However, we're still considering increasing this value to thirty/sixty seconds.

I completely support the increased time as a factor.

@Nilt, thank you for your thoughtful and constructive contribution. Better late than never!

About increasing the menu quit timer, I agree.

The current 15 second timer is simply too short and safe compared to the time taken to submit to an interdiction and high wake safely to another system. If the menu quit is engaged immediately on interdiction it is far faster than an in-game escape and certain to work, whereas the in-game escape requires a number of steps to be correctly completed plus (if in a weak build) the possibility of thruster or FSD damage and (in any case) the risk of a Yuri Grom FSD disruptor dumbfire or a drive-disrupting mine or FSD-disrupting mine or (if shieldless) a scramble spectrum laser hampering escape.

I cannot understand how it can be right for the Cmdr who attempts to escape using his ship to be placed at so significant a disadvantage compared to the Cmdr who attempts to escape using the menu quit.

 

[Halifax Gibbet]

It is obvious you have not done any engineering by those statements. Hell no. If that was announced as a game mechanic I would stop playing.

If a PVE player with a perfectly engineered exploration Anaconda gits ganked and killed, you want the PVE player to loose the 40+ hours they put into engineering to be lost?

I did a bit of engineering and could tell it was just another grind, I also didnt much like it because it gives too much of an advantage against non horizons players which I dont like, I am well aware of the grind, but given that a proportion of players can't use them at all yeah you lose your ship go regrind.

Its more lore friendly
It fairer to those without horizons
It would make folk less keen to bring engineered ships to bear at CG's

I don't see a lose here, other than you'll lose and advantage you've grown accustomed to having.

That said the grind is too much around the whole game, id rather the mods have to be re-got, be easier to get, and have engineer stations in space rather than planetside.

 

[VR StarLightPL]

Make life harder fur griefurz pls Fdev? NO!

The actions proposed tend very heavily into "gank the gankers" way, not "blaze your own trail (where your decisions MATTER)" way. It all depends - do we want a "do-gooder" galaxy or "free will" galaxy?

I will repeat ad nauseam that this is an OPPORTUNITY to gank kill two birds with one stone ;-). By adding this we would enrich the gameplay by making your decisions matter in the long run, while at the same time pushing unwanted behaviour off civilised areas.
I hope Sandro notices this post and at least reads the idea because it seems there is a few people in this thread who think similar.

TL; DR: karma as an UNBIASED "character roleplay" measure and a valid career path

To address the system meta-gaming concerns - if this system is implemented as I outlined it, the actions you take will make you shift your playstyle. Because climbing the criminal ranks would make medium/hisec systems more and more of a risk, stations refusing docking rights etc. YET, at the same time providing criminal "perks". So life of an Elite crime lord is possible! And the life of a honest to god trader and carebear too! Because they will enjoy more protection in hisec, yet will be a tasty treat in anarchy (consider both archetypes to be flagged to other players in corresponding systems - criminal in hisec will be hunted, trader in anarchy will be hunted). The idea is to construct the advantages and disadvantages in a way that they SUPPORT your chosen playstyle. There were a few nice ideas in this thread already.

It also solves the suicidewinder problem:

Another thing just occurred to me. With a "roleplay behaviour" karma tracking system in place, it wouldn't be so easy to game either the bounty system (two friends agree for racking up and collecting a bounty, hence the 1mil cap on bounties) and it would make suicidewinder completely useless - because it would get rid only of last bounty, not the overall karma status. And unless someone was aiming for a criminal career, the consequences of a bad rep would outweigh the short term cash infusion from bounty or escaping the wanted status via suicide.

I very much like the idea of allied faction being lenient to you if you are criminal, or showering you with lucrative missions if you are highly esteemed. That would at the same time put more meaning into faction rep, too. Conversely an unfriendly faction could be more eager to refuse docking rights to a criminal, or nerf the mission payouts or even nerf them entirely forcing you to bribe them to do it (or at least by doing another activity like selling explodata or trading in stations controlled by them).

Previous posts for reference, please read before replying if you didn't already:

1. Hello CMDR FDEV Beige Cowboy! Don't make the system into "please make life harder for griefurz fdev pls" - Karma system outline.

Spoiler

Hello CMDR FDEV Beige Cowboy!

As I have feared, this is turning into some "make players great again" system. As in "crime" and "punishment", "consequences" blah blah blah. While the trend measuring system in itself is neither bad, nor good in its essence, all I see discussed is punishment, ramifications, and otherwise restraining the so-called "griefers" AND NOT REWARDING VALID GAMEPLAY.

Why not make karma a career path?

Exactly. Why isn't a criminal career a viable way to "blaze your trail"? There should be PERKS for BOTH sides of the equation. Let's take a hypothetical Carebear and a Ganker and drop them into instance. What happens? Ganker kills Carebear, of course. But what happens then? Well... It may be that this particular Carebear in his carebearing ways made lots of friends (high positive karma), among them some insurance companies who give him discounts on rebuys (just an example, don't get overattached to it). So, the gank sting would be greatly reduced. Also, the loss would be manageable, because with so many friends there are discounts and good missions everywhere, faction rep with lawful factions is gained faster because Carebear is trustworthy, model citizen... Maybe cargo insurance? Who knows. Or maybe a panic button for next time which will send yuuuge reinforcements of system security to the crime scene almost as soon as first shots are fired? Imagine someone like Dalai Lama, Pope or similar attacked, or a beloved pop-star... Even bystanders would help (and be rewarded perhaps). And the downsides? Well... if a Carebear wanders out to dangerous systems (anarchy, low sec) he could even be "highlighted" as a high value target for piracy or murder (think bounties on someone's head, only issued by a rivalling faction than he is allied with perhaps) and suffer more interdictions that way...

Now that we have covered the Carebear side, lets turn to the dark side of the force - the Ganker. Why did he do it? Why did he kill the poor unarmed Carebear in paper thin ship? Well, the answer is simple. Because he COULD. Crime lords do not ask for "pvp consent" (bahahahaha, still can't say that with straight face), sorry. And this kill, being a 100th one, has granted him a criminal rank of master. In which he gained access to the black market to BUY things from (another perk example you shouldn't be overly attached to). Yes, he will be hunted. Yes he will need to choose systems carefully, and avoid hi-sec because he could even lose his ship permanently in there. But anarchy and low sec - oh boy, they are totally different matter. For example in anarchy he can call in some henchmen (the scum of the galaxy, just like him). Low sec with bribery he can make low paid sysdef force to turn a blind eye. Perhaps he even does get info about some targets [cmdrs, npcs] doing lucrative (as in to pirate) cargo runs. As in - Yuri Nakamura will be transporting valuable data from 46 Eridani to Tionisla system, intercept before he reaches Tionisla, because we know somebody who would pay millions for that data (or for it to be lost, whatever). From criminal or shady factions which he of course gains rep faster with (as opposed to lawful).

The point I am getting at is - currently we don't get rewarded for playing "in character".

Capo di tutti capi doesn't ask for "pvp consent". He just shoots people in the face, with constant threat of the law forces catching up, but he lives an exciting (albeit often short) life. A lawful entrepreneur which has stellar reputation also lives a rich life with people helping him along the way but can be a victim of the aforementioned mafioso or his goons. The circle of life, almost ;-)

Now that is what a proper karma system could be used for. Tracking the roleplay percentage and awarding perks and hindrances according to behaviour, fairly on both sides of the equation. Of course the perks and hindrances have to be different for both career choices (as in the game should not force you to either path), but that's implementation details which I leave to Sandro Sammarco to work out.

2. Current imbalance of invested playtime vs risk as a cause and outlining of the karma system (as in: don't nuke the hell out of PvPers - and I say that as a PvEr).

Spoiler

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



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).

 

[VR StarLightPL]

So letting an account sit idle resets karma? No...
Only doing good things should offset the bad. And ten good things = one bad. Make it really hard to come back with a pariah account.

Agreed on no time expiry part.

But this: "ten good things = one bad. Make it really hard to come back with a pariah account" makes completely no sense and is biased to Sagittarius A* and back. Also it would severely punish honest mistakes like lighting somebody's shield for example... No, just no

 

[Robert Maynard]

Agreed on no time expiry part.

.... which could be extended to include the preservation of karma through a CMDR reset.

 

[Vorthax]

And Xbox Live Gold game sharing.

 

[EUS]

No decay. Actions = consequences, which is the whole point of any C&P/Karma system.

 

[Obsidian Ant]

This is a great thread, thanks for all the updates Sandro!

One question I have, is that so far all (most?) the suggestions seem to focus on punishment. I'm wondering if you are considering any incentives for outlaw players?

Maybe players with a negative Karma, are allowed to dock at pirate / criminal outposts bases that are off-limits to regular players? Maybe such players can gain access to hatch breaker limits that are "better" than the ones everyone else can buy? What if players with a negative Karma get access to a "modules / ship black market"?

My point isn't to reward "criminal" players...but rather recognize it as a valid play style. The punishments you describe go a long way to bringing protection to non-criminal players, and those rules would also create a lot of safer star systems. However might not, punishment for negative Karma - without also offering incentives for "being a criminal", might essentially totally destroy any crime-based play styles?