Karma vs PvP Piracy

[StiTch]

How is PvP piracy "positively encouraged by the game itself"? The game doesn't care whether the target is player or NPC, there is no additional reward for pirating a player and, while (done well) it *can* be a lot of fun for both parties, other outcomes are also available....

Oh calm your beans Rob. The chap specifically said it is rewarding in terms of fun, which seems to be something you have trouble understanding

In terms of PvP piracy, 8/10 traders run and ignore comms, then half of those will log when they can't escape.

Aye, this is very important. Firstly there cannot be piracy karma penalties until penalties are also applied to CLing. But people also have to remember that many traders will simply not even stop, and ED does not really...facilitate CMDRs disabling other ships with ease. I'm not particularly bad at it, but firstly piracy is supposed to be about fun and unique player interaction, and it'd suck to deny that to newer players that would struggle to nail subsystems...

But also to be frank if a trader is given the ultimatum and decides to make a peg for it, they should expect the escape attempt to be risky. Remember that karma is not about upholding the law; it is, in effect, a magical space force designed to push players into playing more immersively - it wouldn't be applied to, say, being caught on smuggling...but it would be applied to CMDR murder if there were no motive. If a pirate has made an honest attempt to deal with his target via reason, allowing the target to give up cargo and leave in peace, then I would say he has played as immersively as he needs to - if the trader decides to take his chances and make a peg for it to preserve a few T cargo, then the pirate should face reduced or no penalty for attempting to stop them but killing them in the process. The trader made their own choice.

Now how you make all of this work, though...I'm out of ideas. a lot of proposals rely on a piracy chat system or other declaration mechanic. I really, really hate the idea as a concept. A free-roam/sandbox game should be just that, allowing players to make demands in their own way and handle things how they choose. Unfortunately a lot of the ideas around karma rely on such a mechanic to effectively ensure each party "complies" with an ideal piracy engagement. But do this even slightly wrong or overinvolved, and you basically have the "lovely little consent and H&S piracy forms" that players have made a joke about in the past, and complete punishment for trying to do piracy in a way that isn't basically scripted.

 

[Lateralus]

I like most of the suggestions in your signature, but please keep in mind that in order to have piracy working it needs to be "consensual". While it's true that people accept the possibility of getting pirated when they join Open, you also need to accept the possibility that these players escape your piracy attempts. There is no reason the game should gurantee you a 100% win chance against someone who has every right to *not get pirated*. You want something from him, your playstyle depends on them. When you are pirating you are basically asking them a favour, "please continue to play with me, please be my content and enjoyment". The guy getting pirated gets nothing from this encounter. Apart from the thrill, but he can also have that against NPCs by flying a shieldless T6. Pirates are the kids nobody wants to play with in a sandbox, that's why you should be extraordinary nice when you threaten to use your lasers.

I don't expect to win every time, far from it - some manage to escape, so fair play to them for knowing how to a evade. The overall point of my post was to highlight how the design of this game makes it very difficult to pirate uncooperative traders and encourages you to kill them when they run (it should be possible to stop a ship that you have disabled).

A piracy demand/notification system would also be quite beneficial to the game, as I'm sure a lot of players don't understand the pirate's intentions even after a comms message. The amount of times I get asked "what do you want?" after several piracy related comms messages is bemusing.

 

[Exiton]

I have the same concerns in relation with powerplay PvP.

Enemy fortifiers typically fly unarmed cargo vessels, often their combat rank is very low. I have legitimate reasons to shoot them down. And I fully expect FD will punish me for that.

Much like right now I get "wanted" status whenever my SLF starts shooting enemy faction's player ship in my faction's control system. So much time has passed since SLF introduction, and this bug isn't fixed yet.

Or insane bounty hunters that grab me every time I go to super cruise in my powerplay faction's capital. They are clean, and they are associated with powerlay aligned system controlling faction. Basically my power is sending bounty hunters after me, because I accumulated a lot of bounties doing her bidding (undermining).

So excuse me if I don't have high expectations about this "karma" system.

 

[Noctover]

Piracy will likely evolve to snatch-n-grab with limpets over the more personal robbery method. I know both are done at the moment but my guess is it will be heavily weighted in that direction.

A pirate should only kill his target as a last resort, but it is a resort they must be willing to visit in the event the target does not cooperate....If you get a reputation for bluffing, your piracy career is over.

Because the punishments for killing will be significantly higher than they are now there will be less pirates willing to pull the trigger hence less traders willing to cooperate.

Snatch-n-grab; you watch .

 

[babelfisch]

I don't expect to win every time, far from it - some manage to escape, so fair play to them for knowing how to a evade. The overall point of my post was to highlight how the design of this game makes it very difficult to pirate uncooperative traders and encourages you to kill them when they run (it should be possible to stop a ship that you have disabled).

A piracy message system would also be quite beneficial to the game, as I'm sure a lot of players don't understand your intentions even after a comms message.

As said in my first post in this thread I absolutely agree with a declare piracy mechanic. I know that you don't want a 100% win chance, but often when the "piracy rights movement" posts on the forum it sounds like you guys are somehow entitled to force pleople to play along

You aren't

 

[NeilF]

On a side note, if a new karma mechanic does help rein in destruction as a form of griefing, I wonder if doing as much damage as possible, to the brink of destruction will become the new griefing?

 

[StiTch]

I have the same concerns in relation with powerplay PvP.

I don't think FD are collectively stupid enough for karma to be involved with CMDRs aligned to an opposing power.

As far as I am concerned, and I believe as far as they are concerned, PP supersedes the standard "etiquette of engagement" - or they wouldn't have already ruined CP to make it viable.

 

[Jukelo]

As Lateralus said, there is often no other choice but to kill an uncooperative player. As pirates that is our only leverage, and even then most of the time it is defeated by combat logging or menu logging.
Punishing us for using our tools, how's that going to help piracy and not turn even more of us into mindless gankers as rampant combat and menu logging did for the creation of SDC?

 

[Darkfyre99]

In terms of PvP piracy, 8/10 traders run and ignore comms, then half of those will log when they can't escape. If it were a good tactic I would attempt to disable their drives, but disabling a fleeing trader is pointless because they will drift at top speed when their drives are out, making collecting cargo very difficult - most also continue to ignore comms while they are drifting helplessly. FDev should give us a way to stop a ship still (tether limpets perhaps that benefit from firing ships mass?), otherwise there is no reason to let a an uncooperative trader live.

Comms definitely could use improvement across the board. Nine times out of ten, I don't even notice players communicating with me!

Nice idea about having ways to slow or stop a ship.

I see a lot of people say that pirates shouldn't kill... this is nonsense. Letting traders escape when they don't submit is the worst outcome for the pirate, as the pirate essentially becomes a begger who can be ignored with zero consequence (NPC pirates kill when ignored, so this is clearly a reasonable response).

Pirates would very much prefer that traders submit, we don't want to have to destroy T6's & Asp's all the time - but most of the time they resist and die. Perhaps this is a UI/design issue because panicking players may not read the comms panel, I don't know.

It's simple player ecology. PvP Pirates need other players to have fun. Being pirated can be a fun encounter, and would cost a trader at worst 20% of their profits if they reach their destination alive. Being ganked will cost a player trader the equivalent at least eight cargo runs before they recoup their losses, and is rarely fun for the gankee. If the ratio of proper pirates to gankers is too high, players will leave open in huge numbers, until open becomes a desert, and there is hardly anyone left to pirate at all.

Bottom line is that if you want people in open, you can either be a pirate or a ganker. You can't be both.

These issues with piracy need to be resolved before pirates get slapped with heavy karma penalties though.

Edit: See my sig for some improvement suggestions.

Open a desert. The plague of gankers driving most players into solo or private groups needs to be addressed before piracy can be improved. If any pirate has so little self control that the karma system has a negative impact on them, then clearly they were part of the problem in the first place, and I will shed no tears over their fate.

It is, after all, self inflicted.

 

[Lateralus]

As said in my first post in this thread I absolutely agree with a declare piracy mechanic. I know that you don't want a 100% win chance, but often when the "piracy rights movement" posts on the forum it sounds like you guys are somehow entitled to force pleople to play along

You aren't

I'm not doing that, traders are free to resist - rebuy is a strong possibility though. Stopping and giving up some cargo is less expensive

 

[Robert Maynard]

Oh calm your beans Rob. The chap specifically said it is rewarding in terms of fun, which seems to be something you have trouble understanding

Not at all - merely observing that fun may be absent in some of the encounters (for one party at least) and also that "fun" is entirely subjective.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I don't think FD are collectively stupid enough for karma to be involved with CMDRs aligned to an opposing power.

There was some mention of being able to disable the display of Power allegiance when not engaged in Powerplay activities and also that Powerplay NPCs would react differently to pledged players when not engaged in Powerplay activities.

 

[Noctover]

Not at all - merely observing that fun may be absent in some of the encounters (for one party at least) and also that "fun" is entirely subjective.

I just realised Rob....Your avatar looks like the love child of a Thargoid and one of those fluffy balls that stick to a surface with the googley eyes!

 

[Crazy Joe]

In terms of PvP piracy, 8/10 traders run and ignore comms, then half of those will log when they can't escape. If it were a good tactic I would attempt to disable their drives, but disabling a fleeing trader is pointless because they will drift at top speed when their drives are out, making collecting cargo very difficult - most also continue to ignore comms while they are drifting helplessly. FDev should give us a way to stop a ship still (tether limpets perhaps that benefit from firing ships mass?), otherwise there is no reason to let a an uncooperative trader live.

I see a lot of people say that pirates shouldn't kill... this is nonsense. Letting traders escape when they don't submit is the worst outcome for the pirate, as the pirate essentially becomes a begger who can be ignored with zero consequence (NPC pirates kill when ignored, so this is clearly a reasonable response).

Pirates would very much prefer that traders submit, we don't want to have to destroy T6's & Asp's all the time - but most of the time they resist and die. Perhaps this is a UI/design issue because panicking players may not read the comms panel, I don't know.

These issues with piracy need to be resolved before pirates get slapped with heavy karma penalties though.

Edit: See my sig for some improvement suggestions.

You're conflagrating two things here: 1) 8/10 traders run => Victims of piracy should run, they're either responsible for someone else's cargo or they have an investment in the cargo itself. Not running from a pirate as a default strategy is irresponsible. Pilots who make it easy for pirates to take away their cargo will soon loose their reputation and thus make less money from transport missions or will loose funds and run the risk of running out of credits. And by running they add gameplay to the Piracy gameplay, because what fun is there for either Pirate or Piratee if it isn't anything more than a involuntary cargo drop after being yanked out of supercruise. 2) Combat logging (or in this case better called anti-piracy logging), which would also be covered under the karma system. The Piratee must have options to escape the Pirate, but combat logging shouldn't be one of them. Hence the karma system also covering combat logging.

Now I agree that for Piracy to become a viable role in the game and thus add meaningful gameplay there must be more tools available for the Pirate. And the Piratee must have more tools to fight off the Pirate's tools otherwise there is no meaningful gameplay for either side after Interdiction has succeeded. More tools than there are now. So for thether limpets there must be counter measures, otherwise there is no sensible gameplay options for the Piratee.

But this whole "I must kill otherwise I become irrelevant" reasoning is beyond the pale. Killing traders does nothing for you as a pirate (no cargo is dropped, your reputation isn't impacted in any meaningful way since it doesn't come into play anyway (as players can't tell that you are a Pirate before interdiction except if you are Wanted, but that could also mean that you are a pure Player Killer, so Wanted status makes me want to run in any case whatever your intentions). This whole argument about ships drifting on at their max speed is also nonsense. Trading vessels have by definition a much slower top speed than the typical piracy ships have, so even at max speed they shouldn't outrun you anyway. Making your cargo demands while leisurely flying after them should actually make it easier, not harder since they can't get away from you anymore through maneuvering.

Destroying other players must come with a price otherwise it will become the weapon of choice of the lazy players, those who don't actually want a difficult but rewarding Piracy carreer. Those who want an easy interdiction and then expect the other player to drop their cargo without having to exert any other effort. That's not gameplay that's a "push button to win" option and I think we can both agree that would not make for very involved Piracy gameplay.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Another problem with penalising pirates (as in "more than giving them a bounty", which is entirely fair) for killing clean player ships: player bounty hunters.
- very likely to be clean while the pirate of course at least has some assault bounties
- "part of the game" that the pirates steal from the traders and the hunters kill them for it

But, a pirate who can fly their ship (with the penalties for carrying piracy gear and cargo hold) can still sometimes destroy a bounty hunter who can't fly as well.

Depending on how it goes, a "successful" pirate might have more bounty hunter kills than traders pirated, some times. (which would of course increase their bounty and attract more hunters, while perhaps scaring off traders)

Of course, the pirate has an even easier job to high/low-wake away from the hunter, than the trader has to get away from them, but that's not fun for either (indeed, rapid escape from combat being so easy is probably part of the problem)

It'll be interesting to see what exactly Frontier comes up with and how it deals with the "instant infallible robo-justice" problems that station collision rules have.

 

[CMDR_Elver]

From my understanding of how Karma will work is based on tracking states when a player kills another player.

If a Pirate player interdicts a trader player and extracts cargo from them without a kill then thsi is just the standard bounty for interdicting/ shooting lasers/ hatch breaking etc. Nothing would register on karma.

If a Pirate player interdicts a trader player, who refuses to comply to demands, engages in combat (or refuses to stop) and is then destroyed I belive that thsi would be a tracked instance that would contribute to karma.

Factors when a karma event occurs may include, Combat rating of killer and victim (massive disparity is being looked for), ship value (to compare for eagle ganker vs T9, or Corvette Pirate vs Sidey "trader" again massive disparity)

Now doing one of the above does not necessarily mark you for death, it just ticks up teh karam rating to something where possible sanctions may come into play (high security are hostile, rebuy is larger etc etc).

It is also understood that these sanctions will be gradual, so killing a T-9 with an eagle does not immediately result in 100% rebuy, no access to any Lawful systems and a shadow ban for 6 months. I would assume that anything as draconian as shadow ban would require Frontier adjudication and the other sanctions would apply gradually over time if players karma continued to degrade.

The other part that forum contributors seem to miss is that there must be a way for karma to be buffed. Lawful activities like handing in missions, bounty and combat vouchers may demonstrate that you are on the straight and narrow and should in some way mitigate bad behaviour, but not in such a way that you can kill a player then hand in 1,000,000Cr of bounty and that issue is cleared. It may be that like a criminal conviction any bad karma is always there as "previous" to help spot the players trying to game the system.

I think the challenge Fdev are facing with this is that its tracking actions that may be "honest" or accidental or planned and it has to have a way to set a target that will start punishing players that continue performing antisocial escapades, on the flip side it should also track good behavior and possible provide a positive karma rating that also enhances player rewards for complying with the law (less rebuy, bigger mission rewards, free engineer materials, automatic docking requests provided).

I am looking forward to whatever gets implemented as hopefully it will add an interesting challenge to pirate play as well as add consequneces for both anti-social and social play styles.

Sounds a bit messy putting ship destructions in the karma realm for me. Perhaps I'm being a bit pedantic but a lot of what is described above should be more crime & punishment. Pilots Fed bounty and insurance, Faction/Power reputation & bounty etc. are all C&P. Piracy falls within this realm as well, some pirates are more bloodthirsty than others, these playing styles are all valid within the context of the game. Karma would be more relevant for things like trolling, possibly griefing & ganking (but again I think these issues are more C&P related) and combat logging.

For instance a pirate will target weaker ships with cargo. A griefer might target a weaker ship with or without cargo. The pirate has a is valid game style, the griefer not so valid game style. If you can determine the difference between a pirate with 100 ship destructions and a griefer with 100 ship destructions by an algorithm, I would be interested to see that. In games consequences for ship destructions, i.e., bounties, rep loss and increased insurance are what's needed IMO. Keeping such a system simple and not too perscriptive arbitary will be the main hurdle especially for piracy related issues.

 

[StiTch]

But this whole "I must kill otherwise I become irrelevant" reasoning is beyond the pale.

I don't think that's what he's getting at per se - as I see it, he's speaking out against the notion that traders should be able to make a run for it without consequence.

If a pirate goes for the "honourable" route of piracy, and the trader makes a peg for it, that was their decision. Their financial loss would have likely been next to nothing for giving up a bit of cargo. Nay, if someone wants to run to save a few T cargo, then forceful disablement or destruction is a possibility-and as Lateralus says, if traders know then can just make a run for it and will never be destroyed, caught, or otherwise face consequence, what would be the point of piracy? It would basically become glorified begging.

There was some mention of being able to disable the display of Power allegiance when not engaged in Powerplay activities and also that Powerplay NPCs would react differently to pledged players when not engaged in Powerplay activities.

Er...I think there'd be a lot more implications for PP than for piracy if that became a thing. I haven't seen the discussion myself but it would surely invalidate the entire point of supporting a power?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Er...I think there'd be a lot more implications for PP than for piracy if that became a thing. I haven't seen the discussion myself but it would surely invalidate the entire point of supporting a power?

Possibly - what I referenced predates Sandro's most recent musings on karma (and was not in a karma related thread, from memory). It may well be that there will be karmic implications for those who attack other players solely because they are pledged to a different Power (and for no gameplay reason).

 

[babelfisch]

I'm not doing that, traders are free to resist - rebuy is a strong possibility though. Stopping and giving up some cargo is less expensive

Sorry, I am not talking about the in-game roleplay engagements but about real people sitting behind their desks. It doesn't matter if traders are free to resist, I am doing you a favour by playing with you. Be a pirate if you want, but this only works if I let you. People should remember this when discussing piracy on this forum, that's all I tried to say

 

[Robert Maynard]

I am doing you a favour by playing with you. Be a pirate if you want, but this only works if I let you. People should remember this when discussing piracy on this forum, that's all I tried to say

Indeed - while Frontier can provide the framework within which piracy exists as part of the game, the PvP subset of piracy is entirely dependent on there being players as targets - which is not mandatory.