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

[Honest Crow]

Didn't read all fifty pages of this thread, so maybe this has already been suggested.

I was thinking, if I wanted to get into bounty hunting and make a difference, what would I really appreciate?

1. I'd appreciate if especially notorious people got a couple million credit bump on their bounty.
2. I'd appreciate if there was a list of these people somewhere accessible in the game.
3. I'd appreciate a "last known whereabouts" system - the last base or orbital they docked in, or last nav point they jumped through.

That last one would be really cool. It would feel like, if I wanted to hunt big game, I really had to do my homework. Maybe they don't show up in anarchy systems - that makes a lot of sense to me - so they can fly around and surprise you. If I were a bounty hunter, that would really get me into the shoes of the "hunter psyche." If I were a pirate, that would really encourage me to hate bounty hunters and want to grief the superpowers somehow.

What do you think? Too hard to implement?

 

[Zambrick]

I fully agree with this. I don't want NPCs to act like players. Players do generally not act in a believable way. They are gennerally just as predictable as NPCs once you know their agenda.

I just want NPCs to have equal rules as players. I have no problem with behavior tracking and galaxy wide reputation. I just cant see what the harm would be to give NPCs equal effect on that reputation.

When it comes to the Pilots federation, I think it's a strange strategy to force all players in to the same 'faction' and make us be friends.

I do understand the lumping all players into one group does seem a bit off, but it is indeed something that humans are subjected to on a daily basis.

(Easily related able Example, Do not read too much into it.)
Easiest example is your country and your government. For some reason over the last 30 years, the government entities in first world nations have all seemed to be in complete conflict with its citizens as a whole. Yes there is whole one bad apple ruins the bunch analogy, but it has ever increased to the point that there are more bad apples than good in the bunch.

For the most part First world nations governments in the free world are more and more in opposition of their countries citizenship. Its like saying I am a citizen of Country X but I do not agree or condone my governments actions. That is a legitimate claim and you can even take action against said government via voting and other change inducting actions.
(I dont want to go into politics or government, this was just an easy and undeniable truth of the free world at the moment.)

So lets take the Pilots Fed as a government unto itself. After reading up on their lore a while ago, they are indeed their own entity outside of all factions. They have the most Elite, successful, and dangerous pilots in the known galaxy. The only reason why the large superpowers don't do anything about it is because the vast majority of their pilots are also part of the Pilots Federation. (According to the lore.) As it stands most members of the pilots federation are law abiding according to their super powers faction. There are some on the fringes, but that is tolerated because it was bound to happen with such a large population of members.

However what any government real or fake does not want is to have its authority challenged. If the overall population of galaxy (NPCs or otherwise) think that your government is illegitimate because a small percentage of your constituency are psychotic, then you may want to reign in or control that perception. So you have to have some sort of law or charter to maintain group cohesion. The Karma system would do that for us I believe. The Do what you will aspect of being in the pilots fed will still be present, but doing what you will may have some risk or rewards associated with it. Right now other than access to Jamison station regardless to your play style, there is no reward for being in the pilots fed. There is no risk for being a killer in the pilots fed either.

I do think they need to create NPCs that do not have a rank in the Pilots Federation. There can be such things as purely innocent or citizen targets.

 

[-Denali-]

Again you are (apparently) half reading things...

I never said it was not a PvP game, I said it was not a PvP combat focused game - there is a palpable distinction between the two and as much has been said by FD in the past... IIRC FD have always stuck by the principle of PvP intended to be "rare and meaningful", that is not the kind of thing you say about a PvP combat focused game.

As has been said by several people in this thread, the karma system would primarily monitor and measure patterns of individuals' behaviours in reality. The karma system would have supporting mechanics probably primarily focused around the C&P system which would notionally be modified.

Unless you are a habitual griefer or ganker, you almost certainly have nothing to fear from the proposed karma system. I would not be misled into thinking the proposed karma system is intended to be anything like a dark-side/light-side or renegade/paragon type system.

EDIT: Probably the closest analogy to the proposed karma system is the points system on real world driving licenses.

I don't need you to explain what a Karma system is. I get it. I see no evidence to back up your claims that the players are supposed to act as one faction, or that PVP is supposed to be rare. You're just saying words. Show me a link where someone from FD says these things because I've never seen it. Otherwise please stop claiming to know their intent. You want to state such things as your own belief then fine. To do more without support is misleading. They've never made any claims as to what players are supposed to do. Player choice is what I've seen them talk about. Picking PVP focus is a player choice.

If you play in open you should risk PVP. If you don't want that, then don't play in open. That is player choice, you have that option. There is no need to push for a system where everyone has to play by the rules you like. That isn't the game I'd want to play. I want the danger. That's exciting.

I said nothing about a dark/light side. Just that I'd like to see C&P and related mechanics developed so pirating became an atmospheric style of game play. Again, depth of experience is the goal. If they're going to change C&P at all, this should be considered.

Karma should be separate and carry more severe repercussions. Players who engage in PVP aren't bad. It's different than being a griefer. Players that don't want PVP at all should just play in a non-pvp mode. Mobius, solo, other private group. I go into open because I want there to be a good chance that a player will attack me. That isn't to say I like griefing. There is a difference.

 

[DaveB]

A good C&P system can be used to reduce any kind of unwanted behavior to an acceptable level. The idea of the karma system is to hit harder against PvP crime than PvE crime.

Keep the C&P at a relaxed level to allow PvE criminals an easy life and deal with PvP criminals hard.

It doesn't feel right to me, and I have never killed a commander.

I have, but only after he opened fire on me. I don't, as a rule, initiate PvP although I've occasionally kicked it off when he had too good a bounty to pass up. Sadly all of those were also too good for me to actually claim the bounty too

The whole point of the karma system is working on patterns of behavior rather than being an integral part of in-game C&P which is tightly constrained to punishing specific individual crimes. If the C&P is ramped up too far then the punishment for a kill of a clean target will be so high as to preclude any chance of viable piracy. I know pirates are not aiming to kill their targets, just rob them, but they can't make that work, no matter how skilled they are or how many extra tools FD give them, if they can't make a realistic threat of destruction.

If the penalty for even a single murder is strong enough to discourage a string of them on its own, the victim has a fair idea that the pirate is WAY unlikely to pop 'em. If the murder penalty is low enough to allow for viable piracy, it's not going to be high enough to make the "cheap kill artists" think twice. Having karma as an additional system, supplementing and supporting C&P based on trends in behavior rather than single actions and allowing the detection and response to trends that do not necessarily intersect with the in-game C&P allows much more fine-tuning and more nuanced response.

As a trader and bounty hunter, pirates are my "natural foes" but I don't want to see any more rocks piled on their style of gameplay in the process of targeting other behavior.

I don't want to see "serious PvPers" hurt by it either, even though that's not my bag, and I don't think they will be as currently proposed.

Introducing a mechanic such as this which can be used to give both additional depth to how the game responds to player actions and a greater ability on FDs part to fine-tune those responses shouldn;t be a bad thing for anyone, no matter what their play-style.

 

[Zambrick]

I don't need you to explain what a Karma system is. I get it. I see no evidence to back up your claims that the players are supposed to act as one faction, or that PVP is supposed to be rare. You're just saying words. Show me a link where someone from FD says these things because I've never seen it. Otherwise please stop claiming to know their intent. You want to state such things as your own belief then fine. To do more without support is misleading. They've never made any claims as to what players are supposed to do. Player choice is what I've seen them talk about. Picking PVP focus is a player choice.

If you play in open you should risk PVP. If you don't want that, then don't play in open. That is player choice, you have that option. There is no need to push for a system where everyone has to play by the rules you like. That isn't the game I'd want to play. I want the danger. That's exciting.

I said nothing about a dark/light side. Just that I'd like to see C&P and related mechanics developed so pirating became an atmospheric style of game play. Again, depth of experience is the goal. If they're going to change C&P at all, this should be considered.

Karma should be separate and carry more severe repercussions. Players who engage in PVP aren't bad. It's different than being a griefer. Players that don't want PVP at all should just play in a non-pvp mode. Mobius, solo, other private group. I go into open because I want there to be a good chance that a player will attack me. That isn't to say I like griefing. There is a difference.

I do understand where you are coming from with this sentiment. I urge you to look at the PVP servers in WoW as a good example. They do server wide PVP quite well.

If you are in one of your factions cities or towns you are relatively safe. Not because you cant be killed mind you, but because you have protection because of your faction. The other player character would have to be willing and able to either fight or stealth their way into that location and kill you. In ED there is no such place. In ED there are no NPCs that can really put a fight or stop another players ship.

So you have 2 options. An all or nothing method which is very unrealistic. That method being, any infraction by one player against another will be met with the un relenting force of an NPC counter attack that cannot be avoided. It will result in the death of both sides. Or the nothing method of no meaningful consequences. That is the current method imposed in ED accept for the fact that the NPCs cant generally kill an PVP oriented ship.

The other method would be to create space in which each side can work. While being more realistic it also has some very unrealistic aspects. So if you want to kill other players in their "secure environment" then you must be willing to accept the same level of risk that your target is also willing to risk. You must be willing to risk your ship and your credit balance just as the victime does. That would be metered out in a 1 to 1 ratio. You blow up another players ship unprovoked, then you have doomed your ship or credit balance. Equal and Opposite reaction situation. Also very very unrealistic

The Karma/intention system would allow something closer to the real world. We know that there are examples of successful killers and or criminals through out human history. Still havent caught the Zodiac killer for example. The Karma system would be similar to compounding a criminal record. Over time your record gets worse or better depending on your actions. The C&P system would then take into account your past record and provide the punishment that fits the record. Slaps on the wrist all the way to ship loss. The Karma system would also allow players who do not break the law some breathing room for accidental infractions and or possible rewards for having a good Karma rating.

It would address the risk versus reward problem and the griefing versus real PVP problem. I cant see it as being bad.

 

[-Denali-]

Why should a Pirate be expected to get a free ride because of 'Educational' murders? It's still murder. If over time, as a pirate, you can't seem to get on without murder, a Notoriety system would step in, but for one murder here and there, you should be fine. Piracy is a path you can take, but there is no promise that it would be without consequences. Who do these pirates think they are? A public service?

haha. Just saw this. And yeah, some pirates do seem to think of themselves as a public service. They do make the game more interesting. If you were responding to me, I'd like to see piracy have more consequence but in a "lets make it more fun" way. I was really, really disappointed the first time I played pirate because it was so easy to avoid the P in C&P. I really wanted to have to station myself in an anarchy system to wait out the bounties, etc. Instead I just jumped once and was free to go about my business. Where's the fun in that?

Now, if someone goes on a murdering rampage and kills a flock of sidewinder noobs because they can, that deserves a karmic kick in the pants further than just role play consequences. That's my opinion at least. I don't see why they can't make that distinction.

 

[-Denali-]

I do understand where you are coming from with this sentiment. I urge you to look at the PVP servers in WoW as a good example. They do server wide PVP quite well.

If you are in one of your factions cities or towns you are relatively safe. Not because you cant be killed mind you, but because you have protection because of your faction. The other player character would have to be willing and able to either fight or stealth their way into that location and kill you. In ED there is no such place. In ED there are no NPCs that can really put a fight or stop another players ship.

So you have 2 options. An all or nothing method which is very unrealistic. That method being, any infraction by one player against another will be met with the un relenting force of an NPC counter attack that cannot be avoided. It will result in the death of both sides. Or the nothing method of no meaningful consequences. That is the current method imposed in ED accept for the fact that the NPCs cant generally kill an PVP oriented ship.

The other method would be to create space in which each side can work. While being more realistic it also has some very unrealistic aspects. So if you want to kill other players in their "secure environment" then you must be willing to accept the same level of risk that your target is also willing to risk. You must be willing to risk your ship and your credit balance just as the victime does. That would be metered out in a 1 to 1 ratio. You blow up another players ship unprovoked, then you have doomed your ship or credit balance. Equal and Opposite reaction situation. Also very very unrealistic

The Karma/intention system would allow something closer to the real world. We know that there are examples of successful killers and or criminals through out human history. Still havent caught the Zodiac killer for example. The Karma system would be similar to compounding a criminal record. Over time your record gets worse or better depending on your actions. The C&P system would then take into account your past record and provide the punishment that fits the record. Slaps on the wrist all the way to ship loss. The Karma system would also allow players who do not break the law some breathing room for accidental infractions and or possible rewards for having a good Karma rating.

It would address the risk versus reward problem and the griefing versus real PVP problem. I cant see it as being bad.

My fear with such a system is that it would make role playing as an outlaw untenable. So a pirate has to spread out their pirating to avoid bad karma? Would they have to go to bounty hunting every time they killed a player who didn't pay? It just seems like such a system would give incentive to not give in to pirates. If they kill you they'd have to stop pirating for a while and get a real job just like society wishes they would. That's no fun. I'm sure most pirates would rather have real C&P changes. Karma punishments should be harsher and reserved for players who really are just killing to be a jerk.

It's not like anything has been decided anyways. We'll see...

 

[Sandmann]

Your view is that ED is not a pvp game. That is your view. It is not suggested or supported by game mechanics which leave the choice to the player (open, private, solo).

Actually it's a pretty well established fact, not only supported by the game mechanics but in the opinions of many of the devs and of DBOBE. PvP is a PART of the game, but it's only one of MANY parts. It's a primarilly PvE game with PvP as a feature, not a main event.

 

[DefiledDragon]

Actually it's a pretty well established fact, not only supported by the game mechanics but in the opinions of many of the devs and of DBOBE. PvP is a PART of the game, but it's only one of MANY parts. It's a primarilly PvE game with PvP as a feature, not a main event.

PvP or PvE is as big a part of the game as the person playing the game decides it is. If somebody plays ED exclusively PvP, only PvE'ing to grind credits, then for them it's primarily a PvP game.

 

[-Denali-]

Actually it's a pretty well established fact, not only supported by the game mechanics but in the opinions of many of the devs and of DBOBE. PvP is a PART of the game, but it's only one of MANY parts. It's a primarilly PvE game with PvP as a feature, not a main event.

PvP or PvE is as big a part of the game as the person playing the game decides it is. If somebody plays ED exclusively PvP, only PvE'ing to grind credits, then for them it's primarily a PvP game.

Pretty much this. Everyone sees the game they want.

 

[lenna]

My fear with such a system is that it would make role playing as an outlaw untenable. So a pirate has to spread out their pirating to avoid bad karma? Would they have to go to bounty hunting every time they killed a player who didn't pay? It just seems like such a system would give incentive to not give in to pirates. If they kill you they'd have to stop pirating for a while and get a real job just like society wishes they would. That's no fun. I'm sure most pirates would rather have real C&P changes. Karma punishments should be harsher and reserved for players who really are just killing to be a jerk.

It's not like anything has been decided anyways. We'll see...

That has been dealt with in Sandro's original post about the potential system... your fears are unfounded unless you engage in excessive ganking and griefing.

As for your remarks regarding PvP and ED, FD have made their position clear on several occasions since release - the potential karma system is just further evidence of that position still being the case.

Refusing to accept that simple fact is your problem.

 

[-Denali-]

That has been dealt with in Sandro's original post about the potential system... your fears are unfounded unless you engage in excessive ganking and griefing.

As for your remarks regarding PvP and ED, FD have made their position clear on several occasions since release - the potential karma system is just further evidence of that position still being the case.

Refusing to accept that simple fact is your problem.

Okay, again with an unsubstantiated claim. I'm not sure where you're getting this from. Here's his actual first post on the subject:

Hello Commanders!

Some thoughts.

Most of the issues we are aware of with ramming are malicious attempts rather than accidents.

The docking computer is meant to confer immunity from prosecution because we know for a fact that it does not have malicious intent.

The challenge with players is that we can never know intent, which is why we have to rely on quite blunt mechanisms that do not give benefit of the doubt (i.e. no crimes for collisions under 100 m/s, always a crime for speeds above, the reason being that it's extremely difficult to cause damage to ships flying below this speed). This is why we never want to assign blame to a Commander using a docking computer when they collide with another Commander's ship; we can never know how much the other Commander might have been to blame.

In addition, we feel that verisimilitude has its limits. Just because in real life a pilot might be responsible for their craft when using autopilot does not mean we want to emulate this in the game.

Also, I'll have to re-check the docking computer: it really should only engage if throttled down *and* going very slowly.

Looking to the future, if/when we get to add a karma system (no ETA, no guarantee) it will allow us to add another layer of finesse to the thorny issue of ramming accountability. Such a system will allow us to track trends over time. An honest Commander who has the occasional mishap will trend very differently to a malicious serial rammer intent on farming salt. We will be able to use this trend tracking (hopefully) even for slow speed collisions, so malicious "grind-rammers" should start to stand out and be punished appropriately.

And a link to the thread. https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/349769-Deliberate-Ramming?p=5476362#post5476362 post #16, top of page 2.

All about ramming. nothing about pirating or killing players with weapons.


Here's what I'm talking about:

Hello Commander nrage!

Discerning naughty from undesirable would really be such a system's prime function.

so, to spitball a little, here are some potential examples:

* Attacking a wanted ship, no matter how overpowered you were compared to it, would be fine
* Attacking a clean ship when massively overpowered would get minor bad karma
* Repeatedly attacking clean ships that you massively overpowered would get you major bad karma
* Stealing cargo from a clean ship would be fine.
* Being involved in an occasional starport collision would gain you minor bad karma
* Being repeatedly involved in starport collisions over time would get you major bad karma
* Occasionally disconnecting ungracefully in danger would be fine
* Repeatedly disconnecting ungracefully in danger over time would get you major bad karma
* Attacking starports as crew would get you major bad karma

This sort of thing.

Such a system might not be perfectly right in very instance, but punitive measures would increase based on trends over time, which in the end become fairly accurate indicators of intent.

In general, we want to minimise out of game intervention. However, that does not mean that punitive measures would be toothless. We could make life *very* challenging, in ways we currently have not employed, for repeat offenders.

But please remember, as of this moment, this is just discussion, and although we have very positive vibes, there's currently no ETA or guarantee for such a system's arrival.

Same thread. page 3, post #35
What does that mean? How do you measure "overpowered"? Combat rank? can someone who's played for 2 years and is still ranked harmless trade worry free? Can you trade rares in a small "weak" ship (since they have quantity limits anyways) without fear of pirates? I do not see how these comments dissuade my concerns.

 

[Sandmann]

PvP or PvE is as big a part of the game as the person playing the game decides it is. If somebody plays ED exclusively PvP, only PvE'ing to grind credits, then for them it's primarily a PvP game.

The player's interests do not define the game's design.

 

[lenna]

Okay, again with an unsubstantiated claim. I'm not sure where you're getting this from.

Not in substantiated, Sandro's post I was referring to was several paragraphs long and possibly was not actually in the "Deliberate Ramming" thread (I don't have time to dig it out but if you read through this thread carefully you may find it).

However, here and here are two shorter and more recent posts from Sandro that re-iterates some of the main points that I have been making.
- We are all part of one faction effectively, that is the Pilot's Federation.
- The karma system is mainly targeted at griefing/ganking of players by other players rather than PvP as a whole
- The karma system may be ignored in anarchy regions
- The karma system would most likely be used to reinforce the C&P system

As for making things up about FD's stance on PvP, far from it. It has been said on many occasions, and topics in general covered by past discussions about potential changes to C&P.

It is worth noting that Sandro did not leave out potential of handling of Combat Loggers via the karma system.

 

[DefiledDragon]

The player's interests do not define the game's design.

I never said they did, but in a game where both PvE and PvP play styles are catered for then the players interests define what the game is to them.

 

[Kaltern]

And when the karma system (however it is manifest) is finally implemented, then 'the players' will still define what the game means to them - within far more clearly defined rules and guidelines. And if that means you still want to be a pirate, or a psychopathic killer, or just an idiot.. then you still can. Only now, you'll have to deal with the consequences of your actions, and THAT is the bit that's getting people's panties in a pickle. The concept of actually being punished for something which is, by definition, a crime, isn't something that you really want to accept as a game mechanic. So you, and others like you, continue to make pointless points, in order to somehow sway the vast majority of players to agree that acting like a criminal in a game with security forces, station laws and an existing (but woefully inadequate) fine system, is absolutely fine, and please let us continue killing you because that's how we play the game.

Not going to happen. You all might as well accept that your freedom of griefing others is coming to an end.

 

[-Denali-]

Not in substantiated, Sandro's post I was referring to was several paragraphs long and possibly was not actually in the "Deliberate Ramming" thread (I don't have time to dig it out but if you read through this thread carefully you may find it).

However, here and here are two shorter and more recent posts from Sandro that re-iterates some of the main points that I have been making.
- We are all part of one faction effectively, that is the Pilot's Federation.
- The karma system is mainly targeted at griefing/ganking of players by other players rather than PvP as a whole
- The karma system may be ignored in anarchy regions
- The karma system would most likely be used to reinforce the C&P system

As for making things up about FD's stance on PvP, far from it. It has been said on many occasions, and topics in general covered by past discussions about potential changes to C&P.

It is worth noting that Sandro did not leave out potential of handling of Combat Loggers via the karma system.

I've actually read the thread. Maybe we just see different things in it but I don't feel the quoted comment supports the context it was given in. He's talking about extreme griefing here, killing players because you can and for no other reason. I'm talking about punishing that but not doing it in a way that makes pirating even less rewarding than it already is (it's a horrible way to make a living) and to not make trading easier than it should be (by rewarding players who chose to fly helpless, horrible ship builds).

 

[Zambrick]

Okay, again with an unsubstantiated claim. I'm not sure where you're getting this from. Here's his actual first post on the subject:



And a link to the thread. https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/349769-Deliberate-Ramming?p=5476362#post5476362 post #16, top of page 2.

All about ramming. nothing about pirating or killing players with weapons.


Here's what I'm talking about:

Same thread. page 3, post #35
What does that mean? How do you measure "overpowered"? Combat rank? can someone who's played for 2 years and is still ranked harmless trade worry free? Can you trade rares in a small "weak" ship (since they have quantity limits anyways) without fear of pirates? I do not see how these comments dissuade my concerns.

I think Sandro is taking into account the people who dont do any kind of combat as the difference between overpowered and not. Regardless as to a persons trade rank or exploration rank the combat rank is the only one that matters when combat comes into play. The other aspect it seems he is looking into is if someone is flying around in an FDL that has 300 hours of combat engineering changes and all A rated mods blowing up trade ships with little to nothing on them.

The problem with the game as it is currently is that the only way to interact with another player in the game that is beyond text is something that is considered aggressive. Interdiction, stealing, blockading, and killing other players takes a conscious effort on the persons part. They are willfully trying to change how someone else is playing the game to fit their needs. Currently there is no real tangible penalty for doing that.

It comes down to forcing your will upon another person. While in an environment where even combat and conflict are taking place it is a known and accepted aspect of the game. The person is purposefully playing the game and are both agreeing to combat or competition. Call of Duty and the Battlefield series are just that. Its easily done in that game because the end goal and the progression are both finite and measurable. You get more XP you get more weapons, ranks, or abilities.

That is not the case in Elite Dangerous. No xp, No Ranks, and access to all the same weaponry. The only deciding factor and true currency in the game right now is time. Credits, Griding, and all of the core mechancics are measured in time. In this game when you lose something you have lost time. Someone took something away from you that you can never get back nor put a real price on it. Those who say time is not a tangible commodity are just trying to prove a point with no ammunition. We all trade our time every day for currency in the real world. Everything you do can be or is worth money if it takes time. Hence the term time is money.

So in terms of Call of Duty versus ED environment it comes down to a Similar analogy. In Call of Duty we hate hackers, we hate them with a seething passion. They have taken a game that is skill and knowledge based and threw it all out the window to get the win. Since they can always win then the whole match is a dupe. Anyone who says that they are not consciously aware or care if someone is hacking/cheating in a game and doesn't have animosity for that individual is lying.

In ED terms its the same for griefing. Everyone has access to all the same tools in the game, however not all tools are created equally. A trade ship is not a combat ship and vice versa. So when a full blown combat ship kills you in a trading ship when they did not have to, then it fuels animosity. Its basically a Developer created hack/cheat. So it puts all risk and responsibility upon the person who is getting killed and none of it on the killer. Which in turn creates animosity because they interrupted you, will not get anything for interrupting you, stole your time/money in RL, and broke game immersion. All in one fell swoop. The entire gameworld comes to a screeching halt as you consciously decide how to react or if you will even bother and leave for solo, group. Or worse yet quit the game entirely.

As long as FDEV do not become to heavy handed in the punishment and how quickly bad Karma can be accumulated, then I cant see it but being a useful tool in the long run. It can used to do many things. Perhaps you cant access certain special modifications for your ship unless your karma is low enough. Pirate only mods and weaponry. Same can be said for positive Karma.

I think every one is getting hung up on the word Karma. They could call it the fate system or destiny system. Karma sounds to damning because in western culture its used in a derogatory manner telling somebody their bad karma will get them in the end. Karma is both good and bad, but our culture really only sees it as a negative.

- - - Updated - - -

I've actually read the thread. Maybe we just see different things in it but I don't feel the quoted comment supports the context it was given in. He's talking about extreme griefing here, killing players because you can and for no other reason. I'm talking about punishing that but not doing it in a way that makes pirating even less rewarding than it already is (it's a horrible way to make a living) and to not make trading easier than it should be (by rewarding players who chose to fly helpless, horrible ship builds).

Not trying to egg you on, but what is the problem in flying horrible ship builds if that is what you like doing? Just an honest question, dont take it as a negative.

 

[-Denali-]

I think Sandro is taking into account the people who dont do any kind of combat as the difference between overpowered and not. Regardless as to a persons trade rank or exploration rank the combat rank is the only one that matters when combat comes into play. The other aspect it seems he is looking into is if someone is flying around in an FDL that has 300 hours of combat engineering changes and all A rated mods blowing up trade ships with little to nothing on them.

The problem with the game as it is currently is that the only way to interact with another player in the game that is beyond text is something that is considered aggressive. Interdiction, stealing, blockading, and killing other players takes a conscious effort on the persons part. They are willfully trying to change how someone else is playing the game to fit their needs. Currently there is no real tangible penalty for doing that.

It comes down to forcing your will upon another person. While in an environment where even combat and conflict are taking place it is a known and accepted aspect of the game. The person is purposefully playing the game and are both agreeing to combat or competition. Call of Duty and the Battlefield series are just that. Its easily done in that game because the end goal and the progression are both finite and measurable. You get more XP you get more weapons, ranks, or abilities.

That is not the case in Elite Dangerous. No xp, No Ranks, and access to all the same weaponry. The only deciding factor and true currency in the game right now is time. Credits, Griding, and all of the core mechancics are measured in time. In this game when you lose something you have lost time. Someone took something away from you that you can never get back nor put a real price on it. Those who say time is not a tangible commodity are just trying to prove a point with no ammunition. We all trade our time every day for currency in the real world. Everything you do can be or is worth money if it takes time. Hence the term time is money.

So in terms of Call of Duty versus ED environment it comes down to a Similar analogy. In Call of Duty we hate hackers, we hate them with a seething passion. They have taken a game that is skill and knowledge based and threw it all out the window to get the win. Since they can always win then the whole match is a dupe. Anyone who says that they are not consciously aware or care if someone is hacking/cheating in a game and doesn't have animosity for that individual is lying.

In ED terms its the same for griefing. Everyone has access to all the same tools in the game, however not all tools are created equally. A trade ship is not a combat ship and vice versa. So when a full blown combat ship kills you in a trading ship when they did not have to, then it fuels animosity. Its basically a Developer created hack/cheat. So it puts all risk and responsibility upon the person who is getting killed and none of it on the killer. Which in turn creates animosity because they interrupted you, will not get anything for interrupting you, stole your time/money in RL, and broke game immersion. All in one fell swoop. The entire gameworld comes to a screeching halt as you consciously decide how to react or if you will even bother and leave for solo, group. Or worse yet quit the game entirely.

As long as FDEV do not become to heavy handed in the punishment and how quickly bad Karma can be accumulated, then I cant see it but being a useful tool in the long run. It can used to do many things. Perhaps you cant access certain special modifications for your ship unless your karma is low enough. Pirate only mods and weaponry. Same can be said for positive Karma.

I think every one is getting hung up on the word Karma. They could call it the fate system or destiny system. Karma sounds to damning because in western culture its used in a derogatory manner telling somebody their bad karma will get them in the end. Karma is both good and bad, but our culture really only sees it as a negative.

- - - Updated - - -



Not trying to egg you on, but what is the problem in flying horrible ship builds if that is what you like doing? Just an honest question, dont take it as a negative.

I get why people don't like being killed. What I don't get is why they play in open if they aren't accepting the risk of that happening. Open is supposed to be more dangerous because of the unknown player element. If you take that danger away we all may as well join mobius. It's not about forcing will on anyone, it's about letting players decide if they want that risk. Right now they have that choice. What's on the table could easily take that away. I do think grief killing needs to be harshly punished. I also really think C&P in general needs to be harsher. I'm all for that. Removing context though and simply aggressively punishing all pvp killing of clean players will only remove a legitimate type of play. Pirating is a legitimate type of play. As proposed the karma system is just the opposite extreme of what we currently have.

To answer your question I used to run the rare goods loop in an unshielded type 6 myself. It was fun in that it had a lot of risk. Nothing is wrong with it but you should have to accept the responsibility of that choice, i.e. the risk involved. The proposed system would just reward players for doing it by making them safer from pvp. It doesn't make any more sense than the current system that rewards pointless murder.

 

[Gunnet]

I get why people don't like being killed. What I don't get is why they play in open if they aren't accepting the risk of that happening. Open is supposed to be more dangerous because of the unknown player element. If you take that danger away we all may as well join mobius. It's not about forcing will on anyone, it's about letting players decide if they want that risk. Right now they have that choice. What's on the table could easily take that away. I do think grief killing needs to be harshly punished. I also really think C&P in general needs to be harsher. I'm all for that. Removing context though and simply aggressively punishing all pvp killing of clean players will only remove a legitimate type of play. Pirating is a legitimate type of play. As proposed the karma system is just the opposite extreme of what we currently have.

To answer your question I used to run the rare goods loop in an unshielded type 6 myself. It was fun in that it had a lot of risk. Nothing is wrong with it but you should have to accept the responsibility of that choice, i.e. the risk involved. The proposed system would just reward players for doing it by making them safer from pvp. It doesn't make any more sense than the current system that rewards pointless murder.

People don't currently have the choice of playing in a PvE environment with a theoretically unlimited number of other players. Not to mention the fact that people who don't visit any ED forums (the overwhelming majority of players, considering the size of forum populations compared to sales numbers) wouldn't even be aware of the existence of Mobius.

Saying that people who don't accept being attacked by players should stay out of open PvP would be totally valid if there was an official open PvE mode. But as it stands, open belongs to all players and must accommodate those who don't wish to engage in PvP.