Elite: Harmless - Karma System aka "be the Tamagotchi" - FRESH SALT, MINED RIGHT HERE

[Godsailsaqueen]

Don't get this?

eg: If once you reach a certain negative reputation, stations start denying docking requests... and then entire systems start denying you a permit... You're suggesting this is ignorable? And isn't a suitable/effective penalty? ie: An every increasing number of stations and systems you can't even go to?

And let's not forget all the other subtle penalties that are available - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-Reputation-quot-and-quot-Risk-Hot-Spots-quot

at the moment I'm hardly suggesting anything.
From the thread of Demarco's answers, I basically understood that it was thought as a way to put consequences on your actions, not preventing people to play. Might as well ban you, then, if every basic aspect is denied to you. But as far as we know, we can't make conclusions on the implementation. Only that it will make griefer and pirate life harder - harder than what it actually is at present, eg 0, void, nada on the authorities end.

So there's obviously a step from 0 to something, yes, that some will refuse, and others will live through it and even renew their experience maybe, that's what I implied. But better be positive and constructive about it. I don't say that's what you're implying at all, I've read you multiple times. I'm basically responding to OP's EZ player farming land.

 

[Jex =TE=]

The biggest issue is leaving it to FDev, a bunch of guys that don't play games, can't understand gamers who exploit or grief to make an effective C&P system.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

at the moment I'm hardly suggesting nothing.
From the thread of Demarco's answers, I basically understood that it was thought as a way to put consequences on your actions, not preventing people to play. Might as well ban you, then, if every basic aspect is denied to you. But as far as we know, we can't make conclusions on the implementation. Only that it will make griefer and pirate life harder - harder than what it actually is at present, eg 0, void, nada on the authorities end.

Actually it can be done right.

A sliding scale basically but would require a well thought out C&P system AND added gameplay improvement FOR criminals.

- Link negative karma/reputation to a system
- Reach a certain level of criminal record in a system and the local government takes actions
- These actions can be added in increments
- Doing missions for said ruling faction could net you positive rep to regain services that were denied to you.
-- 1. Increased cost for services in larger stations
-- 2. Blocked ship services at larger stations
-- 3. Blocked access to larger stations (pushed out to unsavory outposts)
-- 4. Increased cost for services in outposts
-- 5. Blocked ship services at outposts as well
-- 6. Blocked access to outposts
-- 7. Increased cost for services on planets
-- 7. Blocked from planetary bases
-- 8. System ruling faction makes you Persona non Grata [an action governments do today against people they do not want within their borders]

If you reach point 8 you have literally been on the level of Hannibal Lecter or some real life mass murderers and only THEN are you evicted from a system.

Now, as a criminal (which you DEFINITELY are at that point) you would of course be able to gain access to fake transponder codes and fake system permits to regain some access, until you are scanned of course.

is this bad? of course, but it's elite dangerous and doing stupid stuff has consequences and in this case would enhance and improve gameplay.

 

[jasonbarron]

Actually it can be done right.

A sliding scale basically but would require a well thought out C&P system AND added gameplay improvement FOR criminals.

- Link negative karma/reputation to a system
- Reach a certain level of criminal record in a system and the local government takes actions
- These actions can be added in increments
- Doing missions for said ruling faction could net you positive rep to regain services that were denied to you.
-- 1. Increased cost for services in larger stations
-- 2. Blocked ship services at larger stations
-- 3. Blocked access to larger stations (pushed out to unsavory outposts)
-- 4. Increased cost for services in outposts
-- 5. Blocked ship services at outposts as well
-- 6. Blocked access to outposts
-- 7. Increased cost for services on planets
-- 7. Blocked from planetary bases
-- 8. System ruling faction makes you Persona non Grata [an action governments do today against people they do not want within their borders]

If you reach point 8 you have literally been on the level of Hannibal Lecter or some real life mass murderers and only THEN are you evicted from a system.

Now, as a criminal (which you DEFINITELY are at that point) you would of course be able to gain access to fake transponder codes and fake system permits to regain some access, until you are scanned of course.

is this bad? of course, but it's elite dangerous and doing stupid stuff has consequences and in this case would enhance and improve gameplay.

If I'm reading this correctly, you're talking c&p on a systemwide basis, meaning eventually repercussions for the bad actor at a CG for example, but one that would not haunt them in other systems. I rather like this idea as it would potentially take a little pressure off of player hotspots, but not be overly punitive in the context of the overall game. An idea based on moderation, a quality this subject desperately needs.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

If I'm reading this correctly, you're talking c&p on a systemwide basis, meaning eventually repercussions for the bad actor at a CG for example, but one that would not haunt them in other systems. I rather like this idea as it would potentially take a little pressure off of player hotspots, but not be overly punitive in the context of the overall game. An idea based on moderation, a quality this subject desperately needs.

Actually, it WOULD follow across systems if i had my way.

- Independent systems would have an influence of 5LY per security rating so a High security system would have a 15LY reach and all systems within range would have the pilot as wanted
- Crimes within a major faction (Empire, Federation, Alliance) would be jurisdiction wide across the whole major faction owned space
- Ships would gain an APB so crimes are locked to SHIPS
- Outside of a system a crime is committed would require a ship scan
- Within a system the ship would have an automatic wanted flag since the ship ID does not need to be scanned, only to find out the CMDR and outstanding warrants outside of the system
- Suicidewinder would be removed
- Bounties collected would be added to rebuy costs

There would of course be ways to reduce wanted status with missions and such but being wanted is supposed to be dangerous. And one can always do crimes in other major factions and skip back to safety.

 

[jasonbarron]

Actually, it WOULD follow across systems if i had my way.

- Independent systems would have an influence of 5LY per security rating so a High security system would have a 15LY reach and all systems within range would have the pilot as wanted
- Crimes within a major faction (Empire, Federation, Alliance) would be jurisdiction wide across the whole major faction owned space
- Ships would gain an APB so crimes are locked to SHIPS
- Outside of a system a crime is committed would require a ship scan
- Within a system the ship would have an automatic wanted flag since the ship ID does not need to be scanned, only to find out the CMDR and outstanding warrants outside of the system
- Suicidewinder would be removed
- Bounties collected would be added to rebuy costs

There would of course be ways to reduce wanted status with missions and such but being wanted is supposed to be dangerous. And one can always do crimes in other major factions and skip back to safety.

Sure, this is acceptable too IMO. A c&p system that has some mild deterrents and consequences, but allows for people to play the bad guy if determined (for instance).

 

[NeilF]

at the moment I'm hardly suggesting anything.
From the thread of Demarco's answers, I basically understood that it was thought as a way to put consequences on your actions, not preventing people to play. Might as well ban you, then, if every basic aspect is denied to you. But as far as we know, we can't make conclusions on the implementation. Only that it will make griefer and pirate life harder - harder than what it actually is at present, eg 0, void, nada on the authorities end.

So there's obviously a step from 0 to something, yes, that some will refuse, and others will live through it and even renew their experience maybe, that's what I implied. But better be positive and constructive about it. I don't say that's what you're implying at all, I've read you multiple times. I'm basically responding to OP's EZ player farming land.

The premise should be...

So you decide to go on a psychotic toxic killing spree for the lolz. After a few victims, while docking you notice stations commenting on your negative reputation. Maybe some even pass comments about you getting close to losing docking rights...

You continue on your lolz killing spree though...

You start to notice stations in some high security systems start denying you docking...

You continue on your lolz killing spree though...

You start to notice more stations are slowly starting to deny you docking...

You continue on your lolz killing spree though...

You start to notice high security systems are denying you a permit to even jump to them...

You continue on your lolz killing spree though...

You start to notice more systems are denying you a permit to even jump to them...


This approach, along with a myriad of other penalties/outcomes that can be included in the mix seem "fair" and reasoned to me!?


ps: I'm coming around to the idea of the illegal destruction of NPCs causing the same outcome as the illegal destruction of CMDRs.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Sure, this is acceptable too IMO. A c&p system that has some mild deterrents and consequences, but allows for people to play the bad guy if determined (for instance).

Exactly, the system is useless if we cannot make a more clear polarization between lawful space and anarchy while also making anarchy both bloody dangerous and a potential goldmine.

And as an opposite, lawful systems very safe but very dangerous for criminals. But most importantly, making Anarchy and High Security goldmines for each other when it comes to smuggling for example.

High risk and high reward and all that.

 

[Sandmann]

If you're out hiking (in Open) and you encounter a huge, ravenous bear, if you want to survive the encounter you don't need to be able to actually outrun the bear... just your buddy.

Valid tactic.

I used to give similar advice to students when I used to teach SCUBA diving when they asked about shark attacks... "Why do you think you always dive with a buddy? You don't have to out-swim the shark, just be faster than your buddy." I'm sure it gave them just as much comfort.

 

[Godsailsaqueen]

The premise should be...

So you decide to go on a psychotic toxic killing spree for the lolz. After a few victims, while docking you notice stations commenting on your negative reputation. Maybe some even pass comments about you getting close to losing docking rights...

You continue on your lolz killing spree though...

You start to notice stations in some high security systems start denying you docking...

You continue on your lolz killing spree though...

You start to notice more stations are slowly starting to deny you docking...

You continue on your lolz killing spree though...

You start to notice high security systems are denying you a permit to even jump to them...

You continue on your lolz killing spree though...

You start to notice more systems are denying you a permit to even jump to them...


This approach, along with a myriad of other penalties/outcomes that can be included in the mix seem "fair" and reasoned to me!?


ps: I'm coming around to the idea of the illegal destruction of NPCs causing the same outcome as the illegal destruction of CMDRs.

Everything just stands on the "you continue though". It's your choice, game warned you time and time again. Play it cool for a time, let it drop, buy some fake IDs, I don't know, we don't know, it's not even a thing yet. This side has to be fun too, I agree, that does not necessarily equate to statuts quo. But why would or wouldn't it need to be as reasoned or unreasoned as a lolz killing spree. Maybe it's just the 2 irreconciliable stances facing again, the ""believable" universe" vs the "log in for fun".

And for NPCs, I'd be kinda up for that too. Sometimes I need materials from trade ships. I kill trade ships. I switch systems. End of the story. Always breaks something in my mind.

 

[Robert Maynard]

ps: I'm coming around to the idea of the illegal destruction of NPCs causing the same outcome as the illegal destruction of CMDRs.

For Crime & Consequences, certainly.

For karma, not so much - as karma would seem to be designed to deal with the inevitable conflict of play-styles between players - and, while Frontier control NPC behaviours, they cannot directly control players - hence a proposal that seems designed to discourage particular player behaviours through the introduction of consequences for engaging in them against other players.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

For Crime & Consequences, certainly.

For karma, not so much - as karma would seem to be designed to deal with the inevitable conflict of play-styles between players - and, while Frontier control NPC behaviours, they cannot directly control players - hence a proposal that seems designed to discourage particular player behaviours through the introduction of consequences for engaging in them against other players.

the karma system feels more like the pilot federations rules of conduct between members.

 

[Robert Maynard]

the karma system feels more like the pilot federations rules of conduct between members.

Exactly - there are clear distinctions between players and NPCs: all players are prefixed with CMDR, are members of the Pilots' Federation and show up as hollow on the scanner.

 

[Zambrick]

Sure, this is acceptable too IMO. A c&p system that has some mild deterrents and consequences, but allows for people to play the bad guy if determined (for instance).

I like it as well but I would add a few caveats.

All system services such as defense forces do not work and Nav Beacon scans report you to the authorities.
That would also include other major faction locations because it is assumed that the Pilots Federation is involved since its one of their pilots.
The player status is permanently set to not report crimes against them. (Until they are caught)
Loss of access to all starports, bases, outposts, in non anarchy systems.
Worse case scenario the loss of ship/ships flown while committing said crimes.

If you want to be a bad guy in this game, then the bad guy should face the same risks of losings one ship or bank balance just like people who are trying to play within the law/rules of the game.

Now if you are caught and these punishments do happen, then you do not get set back to a clean slate. You will however be a known criminal, but it would open up missions and or the ability to raise ones karma/rep back up above criminal status. That way if the person decides to jump right back into the life of crime that it wont take them 2 weeks to get into the same boat. So a kind of repeat offender sped up progression through the different consequences.

 

[jasonbarron]

the karma system feels more like the pilot federations rules of conduct between members.

Exactly - there are clear distinctions between players and NPCs: all players are prefixed with CMDR, are members of the Pilots' Federation and show up as hollow on the scanner.

The very early talks on it do seem that way, but that doesn't mean they need to shake out that way in the end result. If players are going to get hit with the ridiculous, arbitrary "karma" tracking system that follows them no matter where they go for engaging in non consensual PvP, I don't see why PvEers should not have to abide by the same rule set. It's only fair.

 

[Rakaposhi]

So that is the plan...make open play the new solo coward mode, but now with people?

....

PVP only "on demand" "Mememe i don´t wanna be herassed in my weak ship by stronger players, they must be punished...also those evil wings...and those
rammers...ohhhh those rammers! And all that abuse their time to * of somebody else in the game... we must teach them all to be GOOD PERSONS.

Wow. No need to go mining. All the salt was right there in the first post.

Are you worried that your ability to gank defenceless un-engineered ships is going to be affected?

Awwww. You poor little snowflake.

 

[jasonbarron]

I like it as well but I would add a few caveats.

All system services such as defense forces do not work and Nav Beacon scans report you to the authorities.
That would also include other major faction locations because it is assumed that the Pilots Federation is involved since its one of their pilots.
The player status is permanently set to not report crimes against them. (Until they are caught)
Loss of access to all starports, bases, outposts, in non anarchy systems.
Worse case scenario the loss of ship/ships flown while committing said crimes.

If you want to be a bad guy in this game, then the bad guy should face the same risks of losings one ship or bank balance just like people who are trying to play within the law/rules of the game.

Now if you are caught and these punishments do happen, then you do not get set back to a clean slate. You will however be a known criminal, but it would open up missions and or the ability to raise ones karma/rep back up above criminal status. That way if the person decides to jump right back into the life of crime that it wont take them 2 weeks to get into the same boat. So a kind of repeat offender sped up progression through the different consequences.

You seem to be an advocate of more or less hounding the malcontents out of the game entirely for their bad behavior, if I'm understanding your overall point; I consider this completely unacceptable. Mild consequences, increased rebuys, difficulty operating in connected High Sec systems where crimes occur, etc, are good gameplay enhancing mechanics everybody would benefit from. That's all that's needed.

 

[Robert Maynard]

The very early talks on it do seem that way, but that doesn't mean they need to shake out that way in the end result. If players are going to get hit with the ridiculous, arbitrary "karma" tracking system that follows them no matter where they go for engaging in non consensual PvP, I don't see why PvEers should not have to abide by the same rule set. It's only fair.

All players can engage in PvE without directly affecting (possibly adversely) another player.

The same cannot be said for PvP.

The karma system seems to be very specifically designed to look at a player's behavioural trends and possibly introduce consequences.

 

[Mohrgan]

The very early talks on it do seem that way, but that doesn't mean they need to shake out that way in the end result. If players are going to get hit with the ridiculous, arbitrary "karma" tracking system that follows them no matter where they go for engaging in non consensual PvP, I don't see why PvEers should not have to abide by the same rule set. It's only fair.

It's because the PF expects it's members to be civilized, especially between each other. If for no other reasons than money on re-buys. It's far from arbitrary. It shouldn't follow you into Anarchy systems. PvP'ers can save themselves by the proper setting of the 'Report Crimes' toggle.

All your concerns wrapped up nicely.

 

[SpongeJim]

You seem to be an advocate of more or less hounding the malcontents out of the game entirely for their bad behavior, if I'm understanding your overall point; I consider this completely unacceptable. Mild consequences, increased rebuys, difficulty operating in connected High Sec systems where crimes occur, etc, are good gameplay enhancing mechanics everybody would benefit from. That's all that's needed.

On the contrary, I think what he's describing here is a role, a *real* role, that someone can choose to play in the game. You want to be a criminal - then accept the consequences, play the role. You don't like them, don't do the crime. Even with that he provides an out, a way for that life of crime to be abandoned and for one to go back on the straight-and-narrow.

Edit: I will add that suggestions like this probably seem somewhat draconian since there aren't any gameplay-driven roles at all in this game now, so any change like this would perhaps seem punitive.