(Yet another) C&P proposal: preventative v. risk-based penalties

[StiTch]

It's everyone's favourite critter again, this time on the newly re-kindled discussion on C&P/karma.

In this post: a clarification on risk based penalties (and the assertion they are better than preventative measures) and a proposal I'd like to make on the subject.


Preventative v. risk based penalties

Preventative penalties would stop a CMDR doing something in its entirety. A risk-based penalty allows the CMDR to do something, but removes any safety nets associated with the activity, or adds additional risk and consequence.

For example: a CMDR with a low karma score is intended to be penalised against, say, carrying a type of good known to be reserved only for good guys. Preventatively you could stop the CMDR buying that good. Alternatively you can allow the CMDR to buy that good, but - unlike anyone else - the CMDR is always deemed to be carrying illegal goods when he has it, and when caught with it, faces an escalated security response.

Preventative measures are rubbish. Typically they are indicative of a system that doesn't know how to implement something more creative. In addition, they do not conform to the general ethos of Elite: that you may play your way, but that you will face rewards and consequence according to that playstyle. This is not a complaint that criminals shouldn't really face consequence from karma; conversely, the penalty should be heavy, but "you aren't allowed to do this suddenly" is not really a penalty. Please be aware this is FD's stance, who have confirmed karma will not be about preventing any playstyle.


With this in mind, a proposal:

There has already been discussion around karma ratings and station entry. To be more precise: a CMDR with a low karma rating should have docking rights rejected at a high security station. This, as we just learned, is preventative measure. So what could be done to make this better?

Relate this to risk-based gameplay. Local authorities control the station, but they don't magically know you are a criminal, in the same way they have to scan you for illegal goods. So - do not outright reject docking requests. Allow them. But if they are scanned, or fall afoul of the law by any other means, the offending CMDR should be subject to immediate security response, including station guns.

So basically think "old school smuggling gone hardcore". When playing as a CMDR that's acquired a poor karma score, they may try go to any station they choose - but doing so requires the effort of a full-on smuggling attempt, and any failure is effectively insta-death when you're close enough.

This is far more engaging and, unlike "just stop them docking", might actually provide consequence to a known criminal. Few criminals will find themselves stung because a station turned them away. They'll just realise they can't do what they wanted, and go about doing something else - possibly pointing guns at the first thing that moves. But being blown up half way through docking, with an increased rebuy cost also associated with karma...?

Go.

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Your idea is all very well and good.


But, while trying to clear an accident bounty I'd gained, I managed to casually dock my 20,000,000 rebuy Anaconda, without being noticed.

And then I actually had to chase down security in my sidewinder to get them to notice me. Lol

It actually takes a monumental failure to get scanned these days. I mean, tangle yourself up in the toast rack , or get jammed in the slot sideways type failure.



But yes, I'm all up for making illegal life difficult in higher security areas.

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead

 

[StiTch]

Your idea is all very well and good.

But, while trying to clear an accident bounty I'd gained, I managed to casually dock my 20,000,000 rebuy Anaconda, without being noticed.

And then I actually had to chase down security in my sidewinder to get them to notice me. Lol

It actually takes a monumental failure to get scanned these days. I mean, tangle yourself up in the toast rack , or get jammed in the slot sideways type failure.



But yes, I'm all up for making illegal life difficult in higher security areas.

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead

Heh, local security does need adjustment on some level, I'll give you that. I don't know if FD just pulled the panic button on making smuggling easy for some reason, but patrolling forces are generally evaded if you just travel down the middle of them. In fact evasion seems to rely on not approaching from an angle, or remembering to keep straight for a bit once out the toast rack.

This is something that ideally wants adjusting anyway though. Smuggling is dead in terms of fun and challenge now and the local cops are pretty irrelevant at present. I'd say we could really do with an adjustment around patrols - say, for instance, each station or minor faction or whatever has different generated patrol pattern(s), and the introduction of relevant silent running against NPCs etc. And then in one swift blow, smuggling gits fun again...

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Heh, local security does need adjustment on some level, I'll give you that. I don't know if FD just pulled the panic button on making smuggling easy for some reason, but patrolling forces are generally evaded if you just travel down the middle of them. In fact evasion seems to rely on not approaching from an angle, or remembering to keep straight for a bit once out the toast rack.

This is something that ideally wants adjusting anyway though. Smuggling is dead in terms of fun and challenge now and the local cops are pretty irrelevant at present. I'd say we could really do with an adjustment around patrols - say, for instance, each station or minor faction or whatever has different generated patrol pattern(s), and the introduction of relevant silent running against NPCs etc. And then in one swift blow, smuggling gits fun again...

Something does need to be done. I used to love smuggling from Robigo. It was mostly the broken AI that made it fun though (insta-dictions and all that!), but docking used to be a lot more challenging than it is now. Especially since we can now line up with the slot from supercruise, then all you need to do is casually fly in. No boost, or silent running necessary. Lol

Procedural patrol routes is an excellent idea, I recommend you throw just that idea in to the suggestions box.

+Rep for that alone.

CMDR Cosmic Spacehead

 

[Mohrgan]

I believe the Station/Outpost 'scans' you as you enter it's vicinity. Stations will send a text or voice comm to recognize your influence with them. Surly, if they come to know your affiliation with the station's controlling faction, they know who you are, and they know your criminal status. How else would they offer a 'Welcome' message?

 

[Pyrobee]

Heh, local security does need adjustment on some level, I'll give you that. I don't know if FD just pulled the panic button on making smuggling easy for some reason, but patrolling forces are generally evaded if you just travel down the middle of them. In fact evasion seems to rely on not approaching from an angle, or remembering to keep straight for a bit once out the toast rack.

This is something that ideally wants adjusting anyway though. Smuggling is dead in terms of fun and challenge now and the local cops are pretty irrelevant at present. I'd say we could really do with an adjustment around patrols - say, for instance, each station or minor faction or whatever has different generated patrol pattern(s), and the introduction of relevant silent running against NPCs etc. And then in one swift blow, smuggling gits fun again...

I miss the robigo runs, all those missions stacked, being chased towards the bubble by security, instafail interdictions, no engineered thrusters and all it took was a single scan to loose the lot.

 

[Riverside]

In principle I agree with your concept of biased rather than preventative penalties.

A few thoughts:

If you have just gained that bounty for your nefarious robbing skills, I agree no one should know without a scan. I face a similar issue with scavenging. The 'tasty cargo' NPC shouldn't know I have it yet.

But once I've docked somewhere and took longer than say a minute to splash & dash then I'd expect the secret to be out, and your local docking rights to be revoked/cargo impounded or a massive fine to release the docking clamps (if already docked) which would be an extremely effective deterrent. I could see the local police outside the station all turning red & you'd have to fight your way out, I think station guns would be overkill for a pirate but appropriate for an extreme bad karma score/PF bounty.

Get a bit of a reputation & you're escaping the death star in A New Hope (awesome), but take it too far & it's bye bye meta ship, hello freewinder.

Risky enough?

 

[StiTch]

In principle I agree with your concept of biased rather than preventative penalties.

Something tells me from the employment of sacrasm that you do not in fact agree?

But playing ball...risky enough? Absolutely not.

To start, locking play behind a pay wall - which is what you'd do by magic impounding once in there - is no better than preventing the CMDR take part in content.

This is compounded by the whole cash problem. You cannot set a price on such a release that makes sense. A mill credits? Nothing to many. Ten million credits? Still space dust to many. A hundred million credits? What, ask a lowly noob combat logger to spit out a hundred mill credits?

But then of course, it doesn't actually fix the issue. The typical example of the ganker which most people seem to be desperate to punish via C&P would be least affected by this. They are typically likely to carry unending wads of cash, not give a crap if they happen to get caught inside a station and spending two minutes releasing themselves, and care least about NPC wings trying to murder them. So in effect, business as usual, and karma just became a small fine while going about their strangely accepted murd'rous ways.

So if you want to blow up someone's meta ship*, step back from the personal vitriol; the more content you try to deny gankors, the more content they need from other CMDRs.

*Oh, and don't get any images of karma magically destroying every gankor's meta ship. A hefty insurance increase would be an ace idea...but apart from anything else, in most cases a ganking victim can be blown away by a fart, I suspect it would again be business as usual but with less than meta ships.

 

[Riverside]

Something tells me from the employment of sacrasm that you do not in fact agree?

But playing ball...risky enough? Absolutely not.

To start, locking play behind a pay wall - which is what you'd do by magic impounding once in there - is no better than preventing the CMDR take part in content.

This is compounded by the whole cash problem. You cannot set a price on such a release that makes sense. A mill credits? Nothing to many. Ten million credits? Still space dust to many. A hundred million credits? What, ask a lowly noob combat logger to spit out a hundred mill credits?

But then of course, it doesn't actually fix the issue. The typical example of the ganker which most people seem to be desperate to punish via C&P would be least affected by this. They are typically likely to carry unending wads of cash, not give a crap if they happen to get caught inside a station and spending two minutes releasing themselves, and care least about NPC wings trying to murder them. So in effect, business as usual, and karma just became a small fine while going about their strangely accepted murd'rous ways.

So if you want to blow up someone's meta ship*, step back from the personal vitriol; the more content you try to deny gankors, the more content they need from other CMDRs.

*Oh, and don't get any images of karma magically destroying every gankor's meta ship. A hefty insurance increase would be an ace idea...but apart from anything else, in most cases a ganking victim can be blown away by a fart, I suspect it would again be business as usual but with less than meta ships.

Sarcasm can be hard to detect in written form, I assure you my post was not sarcastic, I thought you raised a good point about penalties.

In a nutshell I think any rebuy type penalty might be ignored because the troll is unlikely to face the rebuy screen. But having their meta ship 'impounded' & putting them back into a freewinder (as if they had been 'killed' and lacked the funds to rebuy their ship) would be an extreme deterrent for extremely bad karma, in a way that just destroying the ship would not.

 

[StiTch]

Sarcasm can be hard to detect in written form, I assure you my post was not sarcastic, I though you raised a good point about penalties.

"I agree with your concept of biased rather than preventative penalties"? Come on, I'll give it to you it was funny sarcasm, but sarcasm it was

In a nutshell I think any rebuy type penalty might be ignored because the troll is unlikely to face the rebuy screen.

May I ask, have you ever picked a fight with station guns?

That aside I just don't see FD implementing a mechanic based on how long you wait at station. Events should happen before or during docking, but once you set down, a very random "oh btw suddenly you're now impounded, that'll be a million credits plox" would be a terrible idea. As per the mentality of risk shown in OP, the consequence should be avoidable, even if it gets worse for trying to avoid it.

Perhaps increased rebuy isn't enough - there can be another karma-based penalty that works along rebuy or whatever to add more punishment to death.

But how you are punished specifically on death is not this discussion. This discussion is that the consequence should be about death, not stopping people ever reaching that death by cutting out sections of the game. Allow the peoples to dock, so that they may be melted should they not have git gudded at docking

 

[Riverside]

"I agree with your concept of biased rather than preventative penalties"? Come on, I'll give it to you it was funny sarcasm, but sarcasm it was




May I ask, have you ever picked a fight with station guns?

That aside I just don't see FD implementing a mechanic based on how long you wait at station. Events should happen before or during docking, but once you set down, a very random "oh btw suddenly you're now impounded, that'll be a million credits plox" would be a terrible idea. As per the mentality of risk shown in OP, the consequence should be avoidable, even if it gets worse for trying to avoid it.

Perhaps increased rebuy isn't enough - there can be another karma-based penalty that works along rebuy or whatever to add more punishment to death.

But how you are punished specifically on death is not this discussion. This discussion is that the consequence should be about death, not stopping people ever reaching that death by cutting out sections of the game. Allow the peoples to dock, so that they may be melted should they not have git gudded at docking

I've just had a re-read of your OP & I don't see where the confusion lies StiTch. You make a good point & I added a punishment proposal that could improve gameplay at a low level but still act as a deterrent at a higher level.

I appreciate that we draw our particular lines in different places but it would be boring if we all agreed I'm not against your idea at all, I think you made a good point

 

[c00ky1970]

Your proposal seems skewed to me.

Assuming a player with low karma is blocked from docking at a station with a security status (Low/High), that prevents CMDR from using that location as a respawn point or resupply point. But as you imply it doesn't stop them from continuing with whatever actions that got them to that low karma (lets say its speed limit griefing).

Remember karma is not a sudden change in rating this player may have successfully rammed 10 or 20 CMDRs to get to such a low karma level (ie. the actions they perform are unsocial and repeated enough to demonstrate intent and not ineptitude) .

Why would you want to give such a low karma player an option to bypass the consequences of their actions, it defeats the point of punishment?

I would also consider that the impact of being blocked from landing would be that like outposts with a trespass warning and fine, a similar activity would occur if the pilot was within the no fire zone of teh location. This gives them an immediate warning and in game NPC response if they continue to lurk about.

Regardless of their skill and invulnerability it shows that player that the station does not want them there.

Remember that to get to this point a player would have to repeatedly do things that are considered unwanted, it is not a 1 ship ram and you are banned from all space stations mechanic.

I think thought should be placed on how you can improve your karma and whatever mechanism is in place it isn't open to gaming the method. Ie. If I ram a ship then all I need to do is 1,000,000 Cr of donation missions and I have cleared my bad karmic debt is not a good idea (bad players are bored and generally have a lot of ingame credits so donations are nothing to them). Maybe successfully completing 250 missions without a subsequent player kill debuffs your bad karma (this being a lot of game time doing 'nice' things, what those nice things are can change).

Or maybe there are 2 karmic values - absolute and modified (absolute is the sum of all your bad karma to date, and modified is current karma based on any debuffs you have achieved), if you trip over into a bad karmic episode the penalty applied becomes based on your grand total, but the effort to remove those restrictions is based on the ongoing modifier based on good /bad actions.

 

[Stealthie]

Fundamentally, I think it should be ships that raise alarm-bells rather than CMDRs.

In real-world terms, if you do bad things in, say, a Cutter, there should be some kind of "all points bulletin" out on that ship.
If it's spotted by sys-sec, reinforcements should arrive, if it tries to enter a station it might be denied access or fired upon.
Also, to close a potential loophole, shipyards would be aware of it's status and refuse to buy it.

It seems a bit contrived that a player can buy a shiny new ship, go about some legal business but, somehow, every cop in the galaxy automatically knows the pilot is the same guy who did bad things in a different ship.

 

[Stigbob]

I'm OK with the idea of stations refusing docking or attacking on sight anyone they consider undesirable, just make it work in both directions.

I shouldn't be able to dock at a pirate port unless I go on a bad karma rampage first, and a pirate shouldn't be able to dock at a trade hub.

 

[StiTch]

Why would you want to give such a low karma player an option to bypass the consequences of their actions, it defeats the point of punishment?

A question that shows little attempt at insight, but I'll bite.

Chiefly, please remember that while many players believe they are getting "gankor extermination" that is likely to be the least prominent facet of the actual punishment meted out. I am vehemently against CLing, and I can assure you now the number of people that will fall foul of the karma system for CLing - against player or NPC - will be far in excess of those done for ganking, and to boot, will have typically have much lower survival chances against the consequences.

To add to this, if we followed the C&P paths most PvE players dream up, it almost inescapably follows down a route that sounds something like "stop them docking at high sec and then low sec systems, and if they die, they lose their ship permanently". But to a player that spends their whole life killing and inhabiting anarchy systems...so what? I've spent months without dying before.

But secondly, please be reminded murder is not an illegitimate playstyle. Undesired by many yes, but legitimate - or FD would have Open and Solo, and murder would be punishable by ban or similar. Removing content from someone is, in effect, part banning them; for blazing their own way, you have actually locked them out of content they paid for. This would be like a CMDR being insta-ganked every time he enters a system that has anything to do with aliens. But unlike systematic auto-ganking, players have a choice of avoiding risk, via game mode choice, loadout and escape technique - even if those chances don't feel good until you try, or even are genuinely poor in a given situation.

As a legit playstyle I simply put forward the consequence should be risk-based, not locking them out of content. And I say that knowing it will include combat loggers - who I would love to permanently ban - but are being included within Karma for the simple reason that FD don't want to potentially over-penalise someone picked up mistakenly as CLing (unfortunately this is inconsistent, as it IS against FD rules, and SHOULD result in a ban).

Don't make their lives easy, no. Anyone reading this as "don't punish murderers" has ignored my OP and read what they wanted to read. I am simply saying that - as part of a balanced karma system - people should not be blocked from accessing content, but should have their lives made far more risky, and with greater consequences for failure...consequences and failure no murderer would ever see while camping in anarchy systems and still blowing up passers-by

 

[StiTch]

Fundamentally, I think it should be ships that raise alarm-bells rather than CMDRs.

In real-world terms, if you do bad things in, say, a Cutter, there should be some kind of "all points bulletin" out on that ship.
If it's spotted by sys-sec, reinforcements should arrive, if it tries to enter a station it might be denied access or fired upon.
Also, to close a potential loophole, shipyards would be aware of it's status and refuse to buy it.

It seems a bit contrived that a player can buy a shiny new ship, go about some legal business but, somehow, every cop in the galaxy automatically knows the pilot is the same guy who did bad things in a different ship.

Yeah, that worked for GTA..."oh look, our suspect's car is suddenly yellow; must be a different chap. Keep looking folks".

...I kid, as much as that gives me ze chuckles.

In all seriousness, not a bad idea at all. I would say perhaps not applicable as supplementary to this thread but only because such an idea would be bigger than this; ship based awareness, or karma penalties, would be fundamentally big enough to require its own suggestion and discussion elsewhere.

It couldn't be 100% ship-based to prevent someone jumping in a new ship to erase karma penalties but perhaps a "well we've associated this ship with this offending CMDR, it's scan on sight and KoS in all our jurisdiction" could be a very interesting facet.

I'm OK with the idea of stations refusing docking or attacking on sight anyone they consider undesirable, just make it work in both directions.

I shouldn't be able to dock at a pirate port unless I go on a bad karma rampage first, and a pirate shouldn't be able to dock at a trade hub.

Doesn't that require pirate ports first?

To be fair this is partially what I mean when I say "make me feel like a criminal" - it'd be cool to think the shady have to deal somewhere that shady business is appreciated. Alas, I think we are some time away from this level of role engagement.

 

[Theodrid]

I'm not sure your proposal regarding docking - at least with current implementation - is going far enough Stitch, as you say in your post above regarding 'we need pirate bases first' so we need smuggling, or criminals trying to smuggle themselves into stations, to actually be difficult/reworked first too. Personally, I don't consider having docking rights revoked as 'locking game content' or too Draconian, to me it is entirely plausible and, in a nice change, adds some realism to the galaxy. Now, don't get me wrong, I do believe criminals absolutely HAVE to have the ability to work off bad karma and said consequences in a timely manner, (though still punishing enough), and in as engaging a way as possible, possibly through missions, bribery and more via Anarchy systems.

There is no 'skill' or difficulty in smuggling whatsoever as it stands, sitting 7km from a station, lining up with the slot and hitting silent running, boost, boost, boost doesn't bring anything to smuggling and sure as hell isn't bringing any rewarding, difficult or engaging gameplay to a criminal commander.

 

[Riverside]

Doesn't that require pirate ports first?

There are pirate port assets in the game (outposts with the skull hologram) that could be put to the use you describe. They are subject to BGS manipulation though. Most systems seem to have a pirate faction that could be used to create a safe haven for pirates as you describe.

 

[NeilF]

It's everyone's favourite critter again, this time on the newly re-kindled discussion on C&P/karma.

In this post: a clarification on risk based penalties (and the assertion they are better than preventative measures) and a proposal I'd like to make on the subject.


Preventative v. risk based penalties

Preventative penalties would stop a CMDR doing something in its entirety. A risk-based penalty allows the CMDR to do something, but removes any safety nets associated with the activity, or adds additional risk and consequence.

For example: a CMDR with a low karma score is intended to be penalised against, say, carrying a type of good known to be reserved only for good guys. Preventatively you could stop the CMDR buying that good. Alternatively you can allow the CMDR to buy that good, but - unlike anyone else - the CMDR is always deemed to be carrying illegal goods when he has it, and when caught with it, faces an escalated security response.

Preventative measures are rubbish. Typically they are indicative of a system that doesn't know how to implement something more creative. In addition, they do not conform to the general ethos of Elite: that you may play your way, but that you will face rewards and consequence according to that playstyle. This is not a complaint that criminals shouldn't really face consequence from karma; conversely, the penalty should be heavy, but "you aren't allowed to do this suddenly" is not really a penalty. Please be aware this is FD's stance, who have confirmed karma will not be about preventing any playstyle.


With this in mind, a proposal:

There has already been discussion around karma ratings and station entry. To be more precise: a CMDR with a low karma rating should have docking rights rejected at a high security station. This, as we just learned, is preventative measure. So what could be done to make this better?

Relate this to risk-based gameplay. Local authorities control the station, but they don't magically know you are a criminal, in the same way they have to scan you for illegal goods. So - do not outright reject docking requests. Allow them. But if they are scanned, or fall afoul of the law by any other means, the offending CMDR should be subject to immediate security response, including station guns.

So basically think "old school smuggling gone hardcore". When playing as a CMDR that's acquired a poor karma score, they may try go to any station they choose - but doing so requires the effort of a full-on smuggling attempt, and any failure is effectively insta-death when you're close enough.

This is far more engaging and, unlike "just stop them docking", might actually provide consequence to a known criminal. Few criminals will find themselves stung because a station turned them away. They'll just realise they can't do what they wanted, and go about doing something else - possibly pointing guns at the first thing that moves. But being blown up half way through docking, with an increased rebuy cost also associated with karma...?

Go.

A primary reason for the C&P karma mechanic is to rein in unwanted illegal destruction surely? As such the penalties - what ever they are - need to be effective... Preventative if you will.

As regards the "ED ethos of play your way," we are of course talking here of players being able to at least fly around the galaxy their way, without groups of psychopaths being able to fly around destroying what ever they want, when ever they want, for all too often no in game reason, without a single negative side effect much of the time... (Griefers/Gankers)




So in your example of more and more stations slowly denying you docking access as your reputation gets worse and worse, this to me seem simple, logical and effective. IMHO stations should even be giving you warnings as you approach level whereby stations would start denying you access. If you then choose to carry on with psychotic hehaviour it only then seems sensible that stations start carrying out the threat.

The moment you arrive around the station and ask for docking, they'll instantly know your reputation and thus deny you if they deem it bad enough.


Note: Let's not confuse any of this with piracy, smuggling and other such gameplay. That IMHO is nothing to do with this C&P (karma) mechanic.

 

[Stealthie]

In all seriousness, not a bad idea at all. I would say perhaps not applicable as supplementary to this thread but only because such an idea would be bigger than this; ship based awareness, or karma penalties, would be fundamentally big enough to require its own suggestion and discussion elsewhere.

It couldn't be 100% ship-based to prevent someone jumping in a new ship to erase karma penalties but perhaps a "well we've associated this ship with this offending CMDR, it's scan on sight and KoS in all our jurisdiction" could be a very interesting facet.

yeah, I really just mentioned it in regard to the idea of stations responding to stuff.

If a ship has been involved in bad things, it's pretty reasonable to expect a station, or sys-sec, to spot that ship easily and do whatever the C&P system dictates.
If, OTOH, the player is in a different ship then maybe you could get away with creeping around, perhaps until you're scanned, regardless of any karma?

*EDIT*

Point being, if you're a player who has bad karma as a result of previous actions and you ARE "creeping around" in a "clean" ship then it's probably because you don't want to attract attention so you're going to play nice.
That being the case, the karma system is doing it's job, even if not in the intended way.
Alternatively, if the player is just flying a "clean" ship prior to embarking on more mayhem, as soon as they DO, that ship goes on the "naughty list" as well and it will become, effectively, a waste of credits for the player.