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

[Zambrick]

I'm not sure you know what a strawman is. See, at the end there where you raise the false position of me being afraid about a game mechanic, then burn it down with your counter to it? That's a strawman.

I already said the karma thing sounds fine. I don't mind if it's difficult. So long as I get to shoot cargo ships and steal your stuff.

- - - Updated - - -



What is griefing to you? What is acceptable pvp? I have literally no clue how you are distinguishing the two, which I think would be pertinent to both sides here, to set definitions

- - - Updated - - -



I want everyone to have those most freedom to play how they wish. I want y'all to be able to trade and explore to your hearts content. I also want to shoot at you and you to shoot back on occasion.

The trucker guys could hire escorts no?

Which is why you dont really have a voice in this conversation.

You have no previous experience yet you antagonize. The community has already gone over what is considered griefing in ED thousands upon thousands of times in the last 2 years.

If you are so interested in this conversation, then spend the next 6-10 hours searching through the forums on the topic of griefing and become familiar with it. Again you are extremely biased and persistent for someone who is supposedly a new player. You have done nothing abate my suspicions of this being a secondary account being used to push an agenda.

You want to prove that you are new, then speak from a position of power. Empower yourself by using the tools that have been provided. The Forum only goes back so far, but the views really have not changed.

 

[mossfoot]

Well I don't have any issue with people playing non combative roles obviously because I'd like to have a target, but I do wish we'd all be in the same Open mode so everyone would share in the experience.

You said raising the black flag makes me a griefer? Uhhh

I still don't quite understand what everyone's definition of griefing is vs pvp. I'm guessing everyone has very different definitions here.

Never said you. I said "Those arguing that they'll raise the black flag and go on a griefing spree if this happens are welcome to."

I was responding to your post at first, but quickly made it about a larger point. It's pretty clearly written that way.

There are those who have posted saying that they don't currently grief but will start if a karma system is implemented. And there are those who are going to relish in griefing more in an attempt to prove the Devs measures are futile.

You are right that griefing hasn't had a single definition (I mean, I saw someone post that they thought being scanned by someone was griefing... as if).

But largely MOST people agree on the same general framework. It boils down to behaving like a psychopath. Exploiting the game mechanics to make other people miserable.

Station ramming, for example. Suiciding yourself in a shieldless eagle at 1% health in order to have an Anaconda shot down by the station guns. Then arguing it's justified because the Anaconda was travelling at 101m/s (again, using the mechanics as a shield)

Noob swatting is another example. Taking a Corvette and hunting Harmless CMDRs in starter systems (doesn't exactly encourage them to stay in the game).


We're not talking about PvPers.

 

[Theodrid]

Don't even bother. The hard core PvE players are far more toxic than the PvP guys. You can't stop to answer questions when you are on a mission lol.

Would that be the same PVP players that on these very boards call folk carebears, cowards,cheaters and more? Would that be the same PVP players that are too delicate to be called names here while at the same time yelling as loudly as they can on Reddit and other outlets how they are going to 'trounce as many g carebears as they can tonight', how they 'g hate PVE cowards' and much worse and more besides?

Look, in my opinion there is wrong on both sides but please drop the 'oh woe is us' crap because it doesn't wash.

 

[Minonian]

Which is why you dont really have a voice in this conversation.

You have no previous experience yet you antagonize. The community has already gone over what is considered griefing in ED thousands upon thousands of times in the last 2 years.

If you are so interested in this conversation, then spend the next 6-10 hours searching through the forums on the topic of griefing and become familiar with it. Again you are extremely biased and persistent for someone who is supposedly a new player. You have done nothing abate my suspicions of this being a secondary account being used to push an agenda.

You want to prove that you are new, then speak from a position of power. Empower yourself by using the tools that have been provided. The Forum only goes back so far, but the views really have not changed.

And he also acting like someone who knows prefectly the matter in hand gone over this debate himself thousands times, he acts like a pro in the matter, he acts and talk toward everyone like he already know them.

And to be entirely honest? I only allowed him to develop his usual straw manning blame shifiting methods this far to have some sort of proof about my suspicions. And also? I counted on it he don't take me seriously and don't belíve it i will going to report him.

Serious mistake.

 

[Robert Maynard]

He's right , I am new and I can't contribute much depth of discussion to specific mechanics. But what is readily apparent is that the pve-only crowd on this thread at least are a bit dysfunctional .

Y'all act like pvp is an accident or pvpers are hacking the game to pvp. Yaknow the devs consciously added it, and you knew that before you bought the game. Same argument some of you make to others works on you

To refer to a group as dysfunctional, normal functionality must first be defined.

Of course direct PvP is part of the game - a completely optional part of the game - but a part of the game nonetheless. Indirect PvP, on the other hand, is unavoidable.

 

[lenna]

Elite sure does have the worst anti-PVP community in any mmo currently.

I would say it has the WORST PVP-advocating community IMO, primarily because most of them seem to fail to realise that ED is not primarily a PvP title and yet seem to continue to insist on trying to turn it into one (or oppose measures that would most likely largely prevent it becoming one).

 

[Deadspin]

Did I? Did I say hey Deadspin you are griefer. You are however representing them because you are defending a policy where no rules or fields of engagement are in place. You support a system where all civilians are actual feasible targets of entertainment. Does that make you a griefer by association? That is up to you to decide. I never called you a Griefer, that is your assumption.

So if you don't align yourself as a griefer then why are you opposed to this possible new system? It will only legitimize an entire profession in the game. It will only increase the risk versus reward factor that this game is lacking for an entire playstyle. You may PVP in leagues or duels or whatnot. However this has never been about PVP versus PVE. This issue is PVE and PVP Versus Griefers. Period. Anyone attempting to muddy difference between the 2 are just hiding behind a technicality because they have no other argument.

Don't align your views with theirs if you dont want to be associated with them. Again thats your fault not mine.

You're confusing me with someone else. I'm not opposed to a Karma or robust C&P system. My primary worry is that they are balanced. Remember when I said we agree on some things? This is one of them for the most part.

I monitor these threads primarily to take stabs at people who would see PvP go away through asinine rule sets that make it next to impossible to play the game in a way that ever pits you against another character if you want to keep playing it/having access to all of the features of a normal system.

 

[Zambrick]

You're confusing me with someone else. I'm not opposed to a Karma or robust C&P system. My primary worry is that they are balanced. Remember when I said we agree on some things? This is one of them for the most part.

I monitor these threads primarily to take stabs at people who would see PvP go away through asinine rule sets that make it next to impossible to play the game in a way that ever pits you against another character if you want to keep playing it/having access to all of the features of a normal system.

As do I. If there is going to PVP and we know there is, it needs to be real, measurable, and enjoyable.

However if someone wants to become a nutter and start offing newbies for the giggles, ramming at stations, and taking out ships for the lulz instead of a purpose, then they can pay for those decisions like the victims. It will cost them their credits, their time, and if it persists their ship. That is the decision everyone else has been making since day 1 of release. Those 3 items have never been a risk for griefing.

PVP has many avenues to explore. However the OP started this thread by using the a strawman argument to push the agenda that a Karma plus a C&P system would be the downfall of all player combat in the game. The OP made that claim not me. I am saying it will do nothing more than legitimize game styles and added much needed missing element to this game. A balanced playing field.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I want everyone to have those most freedom to play how they wish.

We can, sort of.

I want y'all to be able to trade and explore to your hearts content.

We can do that too.

I also want to shoot at you and you to shoot back on occasion.

Neither of those are solely your choice - they depend on the choices of others - and many don't get involved in PvP so are unlikely to volunteer to be your target nor, given the option, engage in PvP.

The trucker guys could hire escorts no?

Wing trade dividends (5% of profit on a commodity sale transaction) won't attract many escorts - and there is (thankfully) no player-to-player credit transfer.

 

[Deadspin]

Wing trade dividends (5% of profit on a commodity sale transaction) won't attract many escorts - and there is (thankfully) no player-to-player credit transfer.

[Insert quiet grumbling about scaredy-cats]

 

[Zambrick]

We can, sort of.



We can do that too.



Neither of those are solely your choice - they depend on the choices of others - and many don't get involved in PvP so are unlikely to volunteer to be your target nor, given the option, engage in PvP.



Wing trade dividends (5% of profit on a commodity sale transaction) won't attract many escorts - and there is (thankfully) no player-to-player credit transfer.

All they need to do is to allow the wing leader a choice. If they can allow the wing leader to offer more than 5%. Perhaps allow them to choose how much profit that is shared for the run.
All profit for the run is split as to the agreed percentage regardless as to its source. Be it from missions or straight up commodity trading.

This is one of the most fundamentally broken aspects of the game. We cannot hire other pilots for any purpose.

If you tie this to a mission/commodity payout, then it cannot be abused or exploited. Cap it at like 25% max for Elite rank combat and scale back accordingly to 5% for Mostly Harmless. Kind of like the multicrew. It just needs to encompass any positive increase in credit balance. That way they are not making a profit for selling stuff at a loss. No boosting a newbie by buying commodities and instantly selling them back. They can also max out the payout available by rank


Edit:

Mostly Harmless gets 5% of a maximum payout of 100,000. So if the wing leaders mission is below 100,000 k then the payout scales. However if the payout is a million credits then the Mostly Harmless Pilot would get a payout of 5,000 Maximum. However the entire 5% of the mission reward would come out of the Wing Leaders payout. That way they are not loading up with a bunch of newbies to use as meat shields on the cheap.

 

[-Denali-]

Because, in my case, that is all your comments deserve. What I consider Griefing, and what a C&P/Notoriety would do for the game, are completely different issues. I don;t want to go through a lot of word salad with you over an off-topic conversation.

Suffice it to say that only those dependent on misconduct, will be negatively affected by a Notoriety system to any degree to notice. None of the PvP crowd, that I have spent any time with, will see any changes with respect to how the galaxy reacts to them. Simply using the 'Report Crimes' toggle properly should keep PvP'ers from criminality. I really can't see anyone fearing a Notoriety system that reacts to both the positive and the negative actions a player takes.

Don;t be afraid. If you are man enough to play in open, you should be able to handle the consequences of your actions.

That's not really a fair argument. The purpose of the karma system is to punish griefers. That means someone has to define it and it's perfectly valid to ask what "griefer" means to people. It's the only way to know what we're all talking about punishing with the C&P system. While what you think griefing is and what a Karma system could do for the game aren't one in the same that statement in itself creates a false dichotomy out of what's really being discussed.

Griefing to me for instance is killing a player for no other reason than you can (clean, not pp hostile, and you aren't pirating for cargo), intentional ramming at stations and combat logging. While I'd like to see C&P treat murder more harshly for realism and fun, I don't think bad Karma should always be a result of killing. Karma should be much harsher and punish actual bad behavior. I don't think anyone should be secure from pvp in open though.

 

[mossfoot]

I
The trucker guys could hire escorts no?

Wing trade dividends (5% of profit on a commodity sale transaction) won't attract many escorts - and there is (thankfully) no player-to-player credit transfer.

Not to mention the time investment. This is why we can't have player-based police forces that are truly effective - because if you think people comment about Elite being like a second job now, imagine what it would be like if you actually tried to organise a police force. Criminals aren't full time troublemakers, but to combat them you need full time enforcement.

So basically the time investment is heavily weighted against anything player based on a defensive point of view. Offence just needs to show up whenever. Defence has to always be on guard.

So when it comes to being a trader and hiring escorts, well, that requires you having people who are available at the same time as you for the same length of time as you (or enough to trade off in shifts). And for them to be willing to fit to your scheduling. And what if they felt like changing up to exploring for a while and won't be around? And if you're hiring blind you need to check to make sure they're NOT griefers in disguise trying to get in close for some fun, so you need people you can trust, which shortens the list even further.

Meanwhile, again, the other guys just have to show up to ruin your day.

 

[Dialectic]

still no definition

 

[Unbreakable]

If a karma system stops YOU from being Dangerous, than you never actually were.

[up] completely right. I don't think people care about ganks, pirates, or anything like that so much. It is more of the people who go out to specifically ruin someone's gaming experience, aka the griefers. The people who sit in station scanning others to make them fail passenger missions who don't want to be scanned, the people ramming their ships into others at high speed outside the dock, people like that.

 

[DefiledDragon]

So we are hating PVP griefers. And because of it we are evil and right?

Let me see what this really means? We are evil because we don't like to be used as clay pigeons by some people. Know what? Shuddup!

If you're not using Solo mode or Private Groups then you're pretty much loading yourself into the trap and shouting pull.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Not to mention the time investment. This is why we can't have player-based police forces that are truly effective - because if you think people comment about Elite being like a second job now, imagine what it would be like if you actually tried to organise a police force. Criminals aren't full time troublemakers, but to combat them you need full time enforcement.

So basically the time investment is heavily weighted against anything player based on a defensive point of view. Offence just needs to show up whenever. Defence has to always be on guard.

So when it comes to being a trader and hiring escorts, well, that requires you having people who are available at the same time as you for the same length of time as you (or enough to trade off in shifts). And for them to be willing to fit to your scheduling. And what if they felt like changing up to exploring for a while and won't be around? And if you're hiring blind you need to check to make sure they're NOT griefers in disguise trying to get in close for some fun, so you need people you can trust, which shortens the list even further.

Meanwhile, again, the other guys just have to show up to ruin your day.

Indeed.

 

[mossfoot]

still no definition

Pretty sure I more or less did.

But largely MOST people agree on the same general framework. It boils down to behaving like a psychopath. Exploiting the game mechanics to make other people miserable.

Station ramming, for example. Suiciding yourself in a shieldless eagle at 1% health in order to have an Anaconda shot down by the station guns. Then arguing it's justified because the Anaconda was travelling at 101m/s (again, using the mechanics as a shield)

Noob swatting is another example. Taking a Corvette and hunting Harmless CMDRs in starter systems (doesn't exactly encourage them to stay in the game).


We're not talking about PvPers.

Or, if you need more (from Wikipedia):

A griefer is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and angers other players within the game, often using aspects of the game in unintended ways. A griefer derives pleasure primarily or exclusively from the act of annoying other users, and as such is a particular nuisance in online gaming communities, since griefers often cannot be deterred by penalties related to in-game goals.

Anyone care to add to this?

 

[-Denali-]

Pretty sure I more or less did.



Or, if you need more (from Wikipedia):

A griefer is a player in a multiplayer video game who deliberately irritates and angers other players within the game, often using aspects of the game in unintended ways. A griefer derives pleasure primarily or exclusively from the act of annoying other users, and as such is a particular nuisance in online gaming communities, since griefers often cannot be deterred by penalties related to in-game goals.

Anyone care to add to this?

Reasonably defined, but I don't think many that he's asking agree with your definition. I get the feeling many of them think that any player who attacks them is a griefer and that they should get to play in open and haul their rare goods, panite, and slaves from A to B without any real danger.

 

[mossfoot]

Reasonably defined, but I don't think many that he's asking agree with your definition. I get the feeling many of them think that any player who attacks them is a griefer and that they should get to play in open and haul their rare goods, panite, and slaves from A to B without any real danger.

Many of those who play in Solo or Mobius because they don't want to be someone else's "content" don't think regular PvP is griefing. It's just something they don't want to be part of.

I think the distinction has been made clear a number of times.