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

[Han_Zen]

So you're in favour of the new C+P system then, as long as punishment for doing something to an npc is equal to the punishment for doing something to a player.

And all it took was a little rebalance suggestion to fix "Muh immersion"

By the way Morbad, before you move your goalposts again, I'm curious how you would implement a C+P system for this game. I know you think it needs once since you've previously admitted it. How would punishing murderous npcs/players work? You've shot down this system repeatedly for being terrible, so I'm sure you're sitting on something that would work properly.

Fixing the C&P system is simple.

- remove clearing of wanted status on death
- give police the tools to handle any type criminal.

Essentially you have to leave any sec system, if you are wanted or you have to sneak past security. If you get caught, you die.

 

[NeilF]

Fixing the C&P system is simple.

- remove clearing of wanted status on death
- give police the tools to handle any type criminal.

Essentially you have to leave any sec system, if you are wanted or you have to sneak past security. If you get caught, you die.

A few issues:-
Current wanted status/bounties - I'd suggest a broader more subtle approach is needed to rein in toxic activity (eg: toxic PvP)
Anarchy systems - Anarchy systems would remain ganking heaven. CMDR after CMDR destroyed in their exploration ships simply for the lolz, and not a single blemish on the assailant's record, and likewise not a single negative outcome... How is that condusive to the game?


IMHO there's a whole load of more "interesting" and subtle penalties that could be employed to penalise "illegal" destruction of other ships (CMDRs and NPCs!) - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-Reputation-quot-and-quot-Risk-Hot-Spots-quot

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Speaking as a "pro-griefer" in the sense that if I wanted to play in a world where nobody could shoot at me without the thought police running them out of the game I'd already be in Mobius, my reason for wanting to see all players held to the same standard regardless of whether they're shooting players or NPC's is that it would A) be only fair, and that B) much more importantly, it would lead to a more believable and enriching game environment all the way around. It's besides the point that I think the (above) average PvEer would be unable to play under this karmic burden without losing it all

Speaking as an "anti-griefer" in the sense that I believe the game would benefit from believable consequences for illegal actions in supposedly secure systems I have to agree whole heartedly with this sentiment. The PvE game is far too tame, and "reasonable consequences" are always reasonable, regardless of the status of your victim.

As long as the griefing side finally gets hit with the hefty cost that everyone else has been paying I am fine with whatever they do to PVE. I do not go out of my way to kill NPCs unless they are pirates, wanted, or on the other side of the CZ. Nothing else makes me money so why would I bother. Until they actually create real pirate missions and real corporate assassin missions that are more than point and shoot, then I might consider it.

Not to mention the karma system works both ways. If you for example do not commit crimes and whatnot the mention was made of not so much as rewards but some sort of benefit gain. Maybe lower rebuys what ever who knows.

Yeah I'm with you here... they could ramp karma up as much as they like and it wouldn't bother me personally. The game desperatley needs real professions, tools, areas etc for bad guys to be bad guys as anither part of addressing the whole ganking issue. Right now the only way to be a bad guy is to annoy other people. The karmic consequences have to be about broken system laws though, not about protecting players from other players... so it shouldn't matter if you attack a PC or NPC, what should matter is if you broke a law.

- - - Updated - - -



Yeah there's got to be a way to "back away from the precipice"... you need a carrot too, not just a stick.

Fixing the C&P system is simple.

- remove clearing of wanted status on death
- give police the tools to handle any type criminal.

Essentially you have to leave any sec system, if you are wanted or you have to sneak past security. If you get caught, you die.

Without options to clear ones name and get clean that would push everyone into anarchy sooner or later.

or did you mean to combine it with a karma system.

 

[Jex =TE=]

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.

The PF is a weight around the neck of ED. Whilst it may be good for a novel, it doesn't transfer into ED well at all. One simple move to quell PVP'ers ganking others would be to make all RADAR contacts the same - no more hollow square which does nothing for gameplay.

 

[Sylow]

...

.
The worlds smallest violin.
.

 

[Robert Maynard]

no more hollow square which does nothing for gameplay.

The hollow square lets players know that there are other players in their instance in this multi-player game.

How many multi-player games don't distinguish in any way between players and NPCs?

 

[Sandmann]

Anarchy systems - Anarchy systems would remain ganking heaven. CMDR after CMDR destroyed in their exploration ships simply for the lolz, and not a single blemish on the assailant's record, and likewise not a single negative outcome... How is that condusive to the game?

I'd argue that this is exactly the purpose of an anarchy system... probably also many of the independent ones. These SHOULD be places that "angels fear to tread". If they were safe or even had a system of law, they wouldn't BE anarchies.

 

[Jex =TE=]

As long as this applies to NPC's as well. Just so it's fair we will set the rebuy for them at the base cost.

I keep seeing all of these PvE commanders screaming that they want a realistic C&P but they don't want it to apply to NPC's. How is that realistic? It isn't.

No and anyone asking for that is basically saying they're a special carebear where the world should be made for them to win and never lose.

 

[Sandmann]

Without options to clear ones name and get clean that would push everyone into anarchy sooner or later.

or did you mean to combine it with a karma system.

As I said, you need to have a carrot too... a way to "come back". I was agreeing with Zambrick & JasonBarron's thoughts about a way to improve a poor "karmic score" being important too.

- - - Updated - - -

How many multi-player games don't distinguish in any way between players and NPCs?

We really need to stop using what other games do or don't have as a metric for this one. If an idea can't stand up on it's own, the fact that some other game has it is irrelevant.

 

[Jex =TE=]

The way I interpreted that was, if they get *caught* while *voluntary* choosing to take the *risk* of going into a non-anarchy system with full negative karma, then this could happen. To me that's again just choosing to play the role and taking the risks that come with it.

Well how are they going to destroy your ship with the god awful AI we have now? A pvp'er in a maxed out RNGineered ship is going to laugh as s/he blows security forces out of the sky (space lol). They won't mod the NPC's and they won't up their AI.

So what's the point of even talking about a C&P system when your own police force is like the Keystone Cops?

- - - Updated - - -

Bounties are a poor way to enforce C&P/karma IMHO.

Who knows you have a 5mCR bounty? The CMDR in the weaponless exploration Asp you're currently blowing up for the lolz before your bounty increases to 5.5mCR? Great!


There's more practical and subtle ways to penalise toxic behaviour that don't mean creating a pointless league table of bounties. I'd suggest if you're hell bent on habitually, illegally destroying other ships:-
- More and more stations slowly refusing you docking permission..
- More and more systems slowly refusing you permits to jump there...
- You being highlighted on any other CMDRs scanners as having a significantly poor C&P reputation...
- Having a permanent bounty no matter where you are...

...would soon rein in negative behaviour in a more logical/interesting way.

It's going to be a great way to rack up money to transfer to other players too.

 

[Sandmann]

Well how are they going to destroy your ship with the god awful AI we have now? A pvp'er in a maxed out RNGineered ship is going to laugh as s/he blows security forces out of the sky (space lol). They won't mod the NPC's and they won't up their AI.

So what's the point of even talking about a C&P system when your own police force is like the Keystone Cops?

Hear hear. Bring back the 2.0 beta 3 NPC's. They were at least fun.

 

[Robert Maynard]

We really need to stop using what other games do or don't have as a metric for this one. If an idea can't stand up on it's own, the fact that some other game has it is irrelevant.

Ok. What compelling reason is there for considering a proposal to remove the distinction between players and NPCs in this game?

 

[Robert Maynard]

They won't mod the NPC's and they won't up their AI.

Are you sure about that?

So what's the point of even talking about a C&P system when your own police force is like the Keystone Cops?

I would expect that NPCs sent specifically against a CMDR as a consequence of their actions could have their potency increased in relation to the "power" (as Sandro would put it) of their ship.

 

[Sandmann]

Ok. What compelling reason is there for considering a proposal to remove the distinction between players and NPCs in this game?

I wasn't bagging the idea (though I do support removing it). I was just commenting that because this or that game did something, doesn't mean that ED has to do the same thing.

To address your question however, there's little doubt that certain players deliberately seek out players over NPC's. Removing the easy identifier removes the obvious stimulus to attack a given ships just because it's a hollow square instead of a solid one. To throw the question back at you now, what compelling reason is there to consider a proposal to retain the distinction?

 

[Comrade Napoleon]

I'd argue that this is exactly the purpose of an anarchy system... probably also many of the independent ones. These SHOULD be places that "angels fear to tread". If they were safe or even had a system of law, they wouldn't BE anarchies.

Absolutely agree ....
But even the Anarchies there would have a dim view of anything disrupting their business, meaning killing tha is detrimental to their objective would be frowned upon. So if you are alligned in an Anarchy an choose targets in accordance with them you would be safe , otherwise you are fair game...
Going into an Anarch systme as a bounty hunter would gain everybody's hate obviously....
What I am trying to say is that even lawless space would have to have its own subset of "rulez" in order to excist and survive.
Does this make sense?

Cheers Cmdr's

 

[Robert Maynard]

I wasn't bagging the idea (though I do support removing it). I was just commenting that because this or that game did something, doesn't mean that ED has to do the same thing.

To address your question however, there's little doubt that certain players deliberately seek out players over NPC's. Removing the easy identifier removes the obvious stimulus to attack a given ships just because it's a hollow square instead of a solid one. To throw the question back at you now, what compelling reason is there to consider a proposal to retain the distinction?

Those who habitually play the game with the bandwidth monitor enabled would trivially discern that they were not alone in an instance - and that's just using an in-game function, other options are available.

I would expect that those who preferentially select other players as targets would have an easier, rather than harder, time of it as most players would not realise that they were in a shared instance.

 

[Sandmann]

But even the Anarchies there would have a dim view of anything disrupting their business, meaning killing tha is detrimental to their objective would be frowned upon.

When Sandro was talking about it on Reddit he mentioned the possibility that law might still be enforced in the immediate vicinity of stations within anarchy systems. As you imply, even an organised crime syndicate doesn't want bodies piling up on their doorstep.

- - - Updated - - -

Those who habitually play the game with the bandwidth monitor enabled would trivially discern that they were not alone in an instance - and that's just using an in-game function, other options are available.

I would expect that those who preferentially select other players as targets would have an easier, rather than harder, time of it as most players would not realise that they were in a shared instance.

Yeah I can see your point. If it's that easy to tell (never tried it myself), do we NEED the bandwidth meter? Really? I always thought it was just a leftover from the old beta versions.. same as the version watermark that we used to have.

 

[Jex =TE=]

The hollow square lets players know that there are other players in their instance in this multi-player game.

How many multi-player games don't distinguish in any way between players and NPCs?

Which could easily be done with a simple list of player names in your instance (not your system, it doesn't show players in system it's in your instance).

Also, it's one of the most stupid ways to show off who is a target. People who don't PVP can't really get how to get around PVP issues and a huge mark over your head isn't one of them.

It's not a case of who distinguishes what. Just because everyone else does it so badly doesn't make it good game mechanics. Games that don't show your name tags?

Armed Assault Series
IL2
Falcon 4.0
Lock On
No doubt the DCS series
Janes Longbow
Enemy Engaged
Evochron Legacy (I think)
Etc,

Notice how the majority of these are flight sims? Even Arma has aircraft so there's plenty of games out there that don't show a marker above your head.

 

[agh42]

You mean the ones with the multicannon-rate-firing PAs?
Who knows, maybe the "guardians" can be part of the karma system.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Which could easily be done with a simple list of player names in your instance (not your system, it doesn't show players in system it's in your instance).

Also, it's one of the most stupid ways to show off who is a target. People who don't PVP can't really get how to get around PVP issues and a huge mark over your head isn't one of them.

It's not a case of who distinguishes what. Just because everyone else does it so badly doesn't make it good game mechanics. Games that don't show your name tags?

Armed Assault Series
IL2
Falcon 4.0
Lock On
No doubt the DCS series
Janes Longbow
Enemy Engaged
Evochron Legacy (I think)
Etc,

Notice how the majority of these are flight sims? Even Arma has aircraft so there's plenty of games out there that don't show a marker above your head.

I would love if we could turn off that transponder signal.

If we are getting powerplay faction toggles why not minor faction membership toggles.