Or you can only set it in SC? Or while docked?
The problem with the new C&P improvements
- Thread starter Earth Ultimatum IV.
- Start date
Or you can only set it in SC? Or while docked?
To be fair, in an Anarchy system the PF bounty wouldn't matter, it's the cops showing up that's the inconvenience, not the money.
I would much prefer the report crimes function to be left toggleable at any time, as it currently is. I would be happy enough with a third option of 'report crime, no assistance required'.
Hmm, I can't.
I guess the solution there is to change the status of those popular systems somewhow. I am struggling to see why it is so complicated but then I probably haven't thought about it very hard.
Last edited:
While doing a "liberate X commodities" mission against a wanted target.
It gives you a LOT more time to fight them, cripple them, and liberate the goods in their cargo hold. If you leave report crimes on, then the cops turn up and mess the mission up by killing your target!
+1. I agree with this idea. Simple and elegant. It would allow a person to change the status after the fight/death but not during. I hope FD take a note of this. Perhaps this can be linked to OP ?
I don't know that at lock out would do more good than bad. There are equally as many scenarios where the lock out could be used to lure the unsuspecting. Cutting you out with offers of a duel. While you are stuck with your lock out off, you get jumped by a wing. Now, you're the turkey because of the rule you wanted...
If someone asks for a duel and then behaves like a clown, it's instant block list - problem greatly reduced.
Okay I'm WAY late to the party... but why not put a delay on the report crimes on/off, eiher a set time or on low/high wake, this way you can't just flip it back on as a trap.
And maybe an indicator to tell if the target has report crimes on or off, may just indicate on report crimes off so not to have every NPC tell you it's on...
I think this line of reasoning is a disingenuous dodge. You could say the same thing about ganking in general. If the block list is so great, then we don't need a Crime and Punishment overhaul and everything should remain the way that it is, because who cares about bounties and fines as deterrents since you can just use your block list? If on the other hand people's complaints and concerns are valid, then the existence of a block list is not sufficient reason to dismiss them. It's great that you can block people; it does not mean that Everything is Fine.
They do have a point wrt the specific case of duels, the C&P system though is not even meant to be a consideration in the duel situation but is generally meant to act as a built-in deterrent for other behaviours.
The block list only works AFTER the fact and does not discourage certain behaviours at all. A C&P punishment that hinders the attacker as much if not more than the death has hindered the victim (assuming certain conditions are met) seems an appropriate way to deal with the underlying issues with current undesirable/anti-social PvP incidents.
Despite the blocking option though, any one that tries to abuse the pending C&P changes in a duelling scenario could be reported to FD for exploiting the mechanics. However, both myself and others have put forward a simple solution to the OP's concern - limit when the "Report Crimes" flag can be changed or when it takes effect.
If you had it turned off, and want it turned on, you should be in a free and clear situation. Perhaps CMDR scans should also indicate the current report crimes flag setting and highlight when it has changed.
Last edited:
But the problem is that Anarchy systems should not be ignored by the Crime & Punishment (karma) system. It makes no sense from a game universe point of view, and makes even less sense from a game play point of view.
Ignoring anarchy systems just means the mindless toxic ganking at "exploration sites" (eg: alien sites etc etc) will carry on (or increase?). What is the point of allowing a minority to sit in a system ganking explorer after explorer for no reason? How is it benefitial to the game so that even after illegally destroying a dozen other CMDRs there's not a single negative outcome for them? Worse still, there's no blemish at all, so the next dozen CMDRs turning up have not a single indication a CMDR is a total psycho.
As I've said before, if anyone can explain how gameplay will be improved by ignoring anarchy systems from the proposed C&P (karma) system I'd love to hear it. Because to me it just sounds a poor choice.
Last edited:
It's easy enough to justify contextually. Nobody in anarchies cares enough to report crimes to the pilots federation.
Alien sites are NOT exploration sites. Explorers, with explorer builds may (or not depending on how they are discovered) be the first there (implying: the only ones, so safe from ganking), but after that the vast majority of players going there come to see/solve the mystery. These players know that, if the system in question is Anarchy, they should be equiped to deal with what you should expect from such a system.
Because killing other CMDRs is not an undesirable feature, it simply needs to be regulated. And that is exactly how leaving anarchies out of the C&P+Karma system works: some areas would heavily punish it, others should ignore it. It's called meaningful choices, aka depth. How's depth (an aspect that is sorely missing from ED) for gameplay?
Last edited:
Yes, and it's even more easily countered.
So ultimately the best aproach for gameplay should be taken? What does ignoring habitual illegal destruction in anarchy systems add to gameplay?
I've seen groups of gankers in engineered combat ships setting up home in anarchy systems ganking any/all ships they can. I've seen ships turn up there and destroyed in just a few seconds under the fire of numerous such ships.
So I have to ask again - exploration site or not - what does not holding CMDRs accountable for illegal destruction in anarchy systems add to the game?
That's a good premise, but seemingly leaving anarchy systems as the goto place for gankers will not achieve this.
There's far more productive and positive ways to orchestrate more interesting PvP IMHO, than turning a blind eye to anarchy systems...
Ultimately, there's far more logical and productive ways to bring about risk, and reward and outcome... Holding a CMDR accountable for his choice to destroy another CMDR (& NPC), no matter where, is a good first step towards this. Choice... Outcome...
I've yet to see a single reason why ignoring the habitual illegal destruction of other CMDRS (& NPCs) anywhere makes any real sense. ie: Why it improves the game outcome?
Last edited:
Read through this thread from the beginning and at it's heart is how to organise duelling (a form or "consensual PvP"). Reporting Crimes on/off has more implications for other aspects of the game not just PvP. As mentioned by a few people on the thread smuggling and pirating for example, the ability to toggle "RC" in different systems on the fly is crucial. For that reason I tend to agree with Wolf Starslayer not Earth Ultimatum IV., so would not change the crime reporting system.
Instead I think spatula has the best idea, with a "Challenge to duel" request system from the Comms panel. If a Cmdr or wing accept a "challenge to duel" then this gives a tailored game response. The duelling parties could arrange to meet at time and place and could even establish rules/ ships etc. and even put up some credits/cargo/modules/ships for the victor. The two parties will then be instanced together if they have to jump to nearby systems etc. Both parties are free to cancel the duel at any time, until the first shot is fired. If a Cmdr/wing is destroyed or jumps out in a then the duel finishes with the remaining party the victor.
Responses to duelling be systems authorities and Pilots federation
In an anarchy system, where they will not be bothered by security but maybe by random NPC.
In governed space where local government types and security levels affect the response to duelling. I.e. Some government types will have a ban on duelling, therefore both parties after a scan will be attacked fined/faction rep loss etc. Some gov types will allow duelling where security will not intervene, even, if Report crimes is on.
Pilots Federation would only really be bothered about duelling if as a result there is a ship destruction and therefore have to pay for a replacement ship. If a ship was destroyed as a result of duelling then the cmdr would have increase insurance rates e.g. 50% or 100% if the PF was totally anti duelling.
If a destroyed Cmdr had bounties against their name then the victorious Cmdr can claim them via the normal mechanism. i.e. KWS for powers and factions, not sure what is happening with PF bounties yet but I hope just a ship scan is needed for those.
Instead I think spatula has the best idea, with a "Challenge to duel" request system from the Comms panel. If a Cmdr or wing accept a "challenge to duel" then this gives a tailored game response. The duelling parties could arrange to meet at time and place and could even establish rules/ ships etc. and even put up some credits/cargo/modules/ships for the victor. The two parties will then be instanced together if they have to jump to nearby systems etc. Both parties are free to cancel the duel at any time, until the first shot is fired. If a Cmdr/wing is destroyed or jumps out in a then the duel finishes with the remaining party the victor.
Responses to duelling be systems authorities and Pilots federation
In an anarchy system, where they will not be bothered by security but maybe by random NPC.
In governed space where local government types and security levels affect the response to duelling. I.e. Some government types will have a ban on duelling, therefore both parties after a scan will be attacked fined/faction rep loss etc. Some gov types will allow duelling where security will not intervene, even, if Report crimes is on.
Pilots Federation would only really be bothered about duelling if as a result there is a ship destruction and therefore have to pay for a replacement ship. If a ship was destroyed as a result of duelling then the cmdr would have increase insurance rates e.g. 50% or 100% if the PF was totally anti duelling.
If a destroyed Cmdr had bounties against their name then the victorious Cmdr can claim them via the normal mechanism. i.e. KWS for powers and factions, not sure what is happening with PF bounties yet but I hope just a ship scan is needed for those.
Pilots Federation would not care about the government type as they insure the ships and from 2.4 issue bounties. If a cmdr destroyed another in anarchy systems, then a bounty would still be relevant punishment from the PF. Also collecting bounties from a destroyed ship, would be fair game. However, anarchy systems should be places where anything goes for a game play point of view. Pirates and cutthroats (griefers/gankers) would have equal rights in anarchy systems. Enter at your own risk.
Last edited:
Because anarchy systems should provide a safe haven for illegal professions that are part of the game, like smuggling or piracy. And although smuggling does not necessarily involve destruction of other ships, piracy does, as without the threat of destruction no one would stop a ship for pirates.
The game already provides navigation tools and a pre-jump warning to those who would prefer to stay safe and avoid anarchy systems, so I don't see what's the big deal of having no application of law in anarchy systems. I would even go further, I would give anarchy systems the highest profits, better paying missions, higher selling prices for goods and smuggling, for the ones who would brave the shark infested waters. And it would make sense, as few would want to venture there, and those who were willing would need to be better compensated for it.
Last edited:
You've made some good points, but for gameplay reasons, you can't have "crimes" where there's no "authority"
I think you're right that having anarchies as completely consequence-less should be looked at, but I totally disagree that it should be linked into in-game "crimes" - including sanctions from the PF. However, I can see the point of including anarchies in a "karma" system, provided two features are built into it. 1: That "karma" is independent of any crimes - you may get "bad karma" from a variety of things, some of which may be "crimes" and some of which may not be. While you may get "bad karma" in an anarchy, you still can't get any fines or bounties from it. 2: Having "bad karma" needs to carry advantages for the outlaw lifestyle - such as better treatment at anarchy stations etc - you may be "legally" squeaky-clean and the authorities grinding their teeth in frustration that they can't touch you, but every crook in the galaxy has heard of you and doesn't want to get on your bad side because people that do tend to disappear somewhere in deep space...