Good point. It would be awesome if 4 limpets driving a net under the target hatch was a thing.
Either that, or some way to stop a ship once its drives are taken out.
Last edited:
Karma vs PvP Piracy
- Thread starter Riverside
- Start date
Good point. It would be awesome if 4 limpets driving a net under the target hatch was a thing.
Either that, or some way to stop a ship once its drives are taken out.
Some some of magnetic harpoon would be nice. Only works if the drives are taken out, maybe snaps/disconnects if the marque boosts
By clicking the big word open you also accept that not everybody is your pirate victim. If you want a mode very everyone can get pirated without consequences you better create a private group for it. Open means open, not "I get a free pirating card". If you want to pirate, work for it.No, sorry, I'm not being unreasonable here. If you click the big word "open" it is intended that you will face risk, and potentially from other players. Please be encouraged to build yourself up to escape that risk, or handle it otherwise, but you aren't entitled to a risk-free experience
LOL, it's the other way around. YOU are complaining about FDEV punishing mindless killing because you fear it will harm your consequence free pirating. You want the right to dictate every event that happens. You want every pirate attempt to be either succesful or the death of the trader. You are the carebear.
I don't really care about any of this, I want the game to be good and open to be an interesting experience. It's not if it's without consequences.
PS
Just to make it clear:
It's you who is complaining about the status quo and the way FDEV wants to fix it, not me "if you want to complain that you don't feel ED should let pirates have at you, and that you feel players should have the right to dictate every event that happens to them"
It looks like you didn't even try to understand anything
Last edited:
I totally agree not everyone would be my pirating victim...because I understand some people will take the steps to evade me. Which is why I would work for it by creating a ship and playstyle that are effective at catching running targets and getting the job done.
You know, that whole thing about loadout and technique actually mattering? That's all I am advocating - handling events in-game. There is nowhere in ED that says risk is optional, and therefore you should handle the risk in-game as opposed to having some magic "I don't want to be hurt" button. And then surely players handling it via unique loadout and technique, on both ends, leads to dynamic engagements instead of what you are about to refer to as "successful or death of the pirate"...
Right...that's totally what I said
Only I might need help being reminded what I said, because all that stuff seems to have disappeared from my posts, and I now see nothing about encouraging ganking or consequence free pirating...just arguing with the notion that players should be able to join Open without any player risk. Who knew Well roger me sideways, I thought we were supposed to be disagreeing here?
Last edited:
Please read my comments in this thread, you'll find out that I don't disagree with you.
Right...that's totally what I said
And where did I say players should be able to join Open without any risk?! If you want me to not misinterpret your posts, how about you start with it yourself? I made it very clear that I was not talking about the "in-game experience" but about the "behind the desk experience" when I said that being the victim of piracy alread IS very much optional (note, I didn't say I want it to be optional, I said it alread IS optional!).
You are just thinking that because you didn't waste your time trying to understand what I actually said.
Last edited:
Open will never become a desert because of piracy, too many traders enjoy the risk of it and respect the fact it is part of the game. The only thing that discourages players from playing in open is gank-wings; which if piracy is hindered further, the game will get more of. BTW gank-wings and pirate wings who kill because of resistance are not the same before anybody tries to imply they are.
Now, I agree that piracy should have consequences based on rep etc, but not without wholesale improvements to the playstyle to make it worthwhile.
Last edited:
The meaning of "valid" is rather critical here. I should hope that participation in an interesting system which provides much opportunity for roleplay, meaningful PvE combat and offers unique modules won't become gated by a requirement to accept being the target of anti-social behavior.
I can help here:
If you are pledged to a power, and someone else is pledged to a different power, the two of you are considered hostile. There is some level of expectation that you will clash; please see "...that system is overtly consensual player versus player".
I strongly suspect-and hope-this wouldn't apply to someone bound to a power, where the other person is not pledged at all.
If you don't want competitive play, avoid PP. Powerplay is inherently competitive, especially in Open - if you want dedicated PvE powerplay, stick to PG/Solo.
Last edited:
Sandro,
This is a huge relief to me.
I speak as one of a section of PvP-ers who only attack Clean Cmdrs within the strict context of Powerplay. We are not RPK-ers, not griefers, we have worked hard to stay on the straight path for two whole years. We do not deserve punishment and would welcome encouragement.
There are no Powerplay conscripts, only volunteers. Our targets chose their uniform, whether for reasons of principle or as mercenaries. We are playing a game feature that your goodself described as giving us 'a reason to PvP'.
I hope that you and your team will do two things concerning Powerplay PvP:
1. Draw the term 'valid Powerplay engagements' broadly
All attacks by pledger upon pledger who are not of the same superpower are valid. This is a clandestine paramilitary war, with the entire Powerplay system founded on structured murder (NPC or PC). Nobody but someone wishing to lose such a brutal war would confine such attacks to Control systems etc. And, from a Lore perspective, it is reasonable to suppose that the Powers would forbid their agents from reporting any such attacks, or use their influence to suppress such reports.
2. Recognise that, if you adopt the approach above, the karma system offers the game a unique opportunity to reinvigorate Powerplay and make pledging into the unofficial 'PvP-On' flag it was always supposed to be
Put simply, if there are karma penalties for unpledged attacks, but no penalties for pledger v pledger attacks, then it's reasonable to suppose that more of those of us who want to attack or be attacked will pledge. This could be the shot in the arm Powerplay needs and have the side benefit of drawing fire away from those who don't want it.
Carrot and stick: give violent Cmdrs penalties for attacking the unpledged but also give them freedom to attack the pledged (if they themselves pledge). Finally, then, we may start to self-regulate a bit more and see a return to the 'sides' that were fun in June 2015 but gradually withered away because it was easier just to attack anybody.
Thanks indeed,
Truesilver
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The conscious inclusion of the word "valid" in Sandro's post suggests that there are invalid engagements when both parties are pledged to Powers.
I hope that the sole reason for that qualification is that treacherous violence (both pledgers are of same power and/or superpower) will not be held immune. I hope that all other pledger v pledger attacks are completely karma immune.
This would mirror Powerplay's current 'merit' system (merits are removed for treacherous attacks but not otherwise).
Guys, CALM DOWN.
Seriously. The reason I say this is simple.
The recently announced changes are part of C&P - they are NOT part of "karma" - FD have changed the cost calculation for criminal activity to get rid of the "murder-spree on players then suicidewinder to clear bounty" mechanic. The announced changes apply to specific acts of criminality, namely destroying fellow-members of the Pilot's Federation who are otherwise clean and not acting for an opposing power.
"Karma" is something different. Specific details have not been given other than it will track trends in behavior, not individual acts.
By conflating the two as has been done throughout this thread you only confuse the issue for both.
The announced changes will have little impact on piracy.
Some of the "karma" changes that have been speculatively discussed may have a more significant impact but we can't know that or reasonably address those until we see more specifics on what trends FD will track and how the game will respond.
Harder as it would make an already-thankless task, the clarity of discussion would probably be well-served by the mods taking the attitude that "'Karma' is OT for C&P threads" and vice versa, but I'd quite understand if they were unwilling to open that particular can of worms, so we just have to be sensible and bear in mind the distinction between the two subjects ourselves.
Seriously. The reason I say this is simple.
The recently announced changes are part of C&P - they are NOT part of "karma" - FD have changed the cost calculation for criminal activity to get rid of the "murder-spree on players then suicidewinder to clear bounty" mechanic. The announced changes apply to specific acts of criminality, namely destroying fellow-members of the Pilot's Federation who are otherwise clean and not acting for an opposing power.
"Karma" is something different. Specific details have not been given other than it will track trends in behavior, not individual acts.
By conflating the two as has been done throughout this thread you only confuse the issue for both.
The announced changes will have little impact on piracy.
Some of the "karma" changes that have been speculatively discussed may have a more significant impact but we can't know that or reasonably address those until we see more specifics on what trends FD will track and how the game will respond.
Harder as it would make an already-thankless task, the clarity of discussion would probably be well-served by the mods taking the attitude that "'Karma' is OT for C&P threads" and vice versa, but I'd quite understand if they were unwilling to open that particular can of worms, so we just have to be sensible and bear in mind the distinction between the two subjects ourselves.
I think you didn't understand what I meant. I didn't say that Open will be a desert because of piracy, but by removing the optional part:
- Force everyone into open
- add a "I win button" for piracy
- make it impossible to avoid pirates
- send someone to my house, put a gun on my head and force me to play along
That kind of stuff.
As said above, I pretty much agree with your suggestions (and made some on my own) on how to improve piracy. I am just not convinced that they absolutely must happen before something like a karma system gets introduced. I think the impact of a karma system in regards to piracy is smaller than most people think. Because (which is what I tried to point out before) piracy already works on a consensual basis. Not in-game (there you are trying to force me with cargo hatch breakers, threats of ship destruction, role playing, etc.) but outside of the game (behind my desk it's me who decides I'll play with filthy pirates
).
Last edited:
Piracy is one thing, which I bow my head to and tip my hat at... but you still get covert PvPers discuising themselves as pirates.. then kaboom..
I still haven't really heard a balancing aspect of karma or C&P that evens out the scenario when a small fleet of engineered ships take out my 60m rebuy trading cutter (costing me a net loss of nearly 70m credits including cargo). What could a C&P or karma system do to satisfy me that my death (and net loss) is fairly avenged by game mechanics? Or is it just purely a loss / lose situation for me?
I still haven't really heard a balancing aspect of karma or C&P that evens out the scenario when a small fleet of engineered ships take out my 60m rebuy trading cutter (costing me a net loss of nearly 70m credits including cargo). What could a C&P or karma system do to satisfy me that my death (and net loss) is fairly avenged by game mechanics? Or is it just purely a loss / lose situation for me?
Last edited:
Even if the karma system doesn't apply in this scenario, how is it worse than it is today? Anyway, I am pretty sure that wings will be taken under consideration.
I would argue that it is next to impossible to tell the difference looking at stats. What about cmdrs that are pirates one day griefers/gankers the next. Ship destructions should all be dealt with under C&P not karma in my opinion.
Perhaps that is referencing another conversation, but I've not asked for any of those things.
Indeed true, but it's the one thing that I think unfairly unbalances my risk vs 'their' risk when it comes to shooting me in the face.
I'm not against being shot in the face so to speak, as long as I feel contented that the game itself will avenge my death in the event I am not able to (I do not do PvP pew pew).
You're right that as of this moment, it's unfair, unbalanced, and simply zero incentive to be there. There's still zero incentive with a C&P and karma system, but, at the very least my death can be avenged with some form of justice system.
Well, here's hoping anyway
I never said you did. In fact, the comment you quoted wasn't even a reply to you. It was a conversation with StiTch where I said that being the victim of piracy is pretty much optional in Elite Dangerous. Don't know why you felt the need to comment on that
PS
If you click on the little arrows in the quote box it'll take you to the original post, that should help you understand the context.
Last edited:
This is why, along with a sensible C&P (karma) mechanic to penalise habitual illegal destruction (of CMDRs and NPC, in all system types), FD should actually ochestrate PvP for those truly interested.
eg: Periodic CGs in OPEN for CMDRs to sign up to side A or B and actually fight for an outcome. Or an OPEN CG to delvier X to location Y, with a counter CG to prevent it. And it would be legal combat!
In this fashion individuals interested in PvP have obvious ways to undertake it, actually for an outcome! Those not, need not sign up to these OPEN CGs.
Last edited: