Criminal Gameplay needs to be made Viable and Meaningful

[Kethriss]

Great.

So you acknowledge that PvP isn't the only reason to play in Open.

That being the case, why would you want people who don't share your opinions of PvP to forego all the things they use Open for?
That seems like advice rooted in nothing more than spite if I'm honest.



Firstly, I disagree about PvP being a "major" part of anything.
Sure, it's something that has immediate consequences for those involved in it but that's about the limit of it.

As somebody pointed out recently, if FDev created an official PvE mode, I suspect Open would quickly become about as popular as a fart in a lift.
Which is probably why they're reluctant to do so.

Secondly you're back to "If you don't agree with what I want, you need to change".
It might make for a more thoughtful discussion if you could move beyond that, somehow.

there are two boxes in front of you.

one has apples and oranges, the other box has just oranges.

you hate apples, absolutely hate them, they make you throw up.

the sensible person would take the box of oranges, because they like the oranges and don't like apples.

the completely insensible person who just wants to feel the self gratification of being outraged will take the box of apples and oranges and call the people who put the apples in the box scumbags and psychopaths, and then get mad and go "why should I" when somebody suggests they just take the box with oranges.

the same goes for PvP in open play.

answer my question and stop playing armchair psychologist:

Why would you play in Open, a mode that allows PvP, when you hate PvP and could EASILY pick to be in a mode that doesn't allow PvP?

 

[Kethriss]

I agree that currently, criminal occupations aren't very rewarding and that it should be addressed. Piracy should be more rewarding than some other, more legal form of credit acquisition because of the increase in incurred risk.

However, this brings about another potential issue to be addressed. If criminal activity actually becomes high risk/reward, then it becomes the default endgame. Do we as a community even really want a true endgame? As for player interaction, this could end up with top players being pushed into piracy, and leaving new players more or less defenseless. I'm not saying that this is a huge problem, or that it makes me not want a beefier criminal element in the game. What I'm saying is that this is a facet of the debate that deserves attention.

This is why a counter to the criminal end game is made. Have players get rewarded for hunting down criminals with more engaging and meaningful gameplay that just bounty hunting as it stands. Going off the syndicate idea, have task forces set up to counter and undermine the syndicates that offer similar, but law abiding missions to go and stop syndicate activities. This then would result in meaningful and non-random PvP encounters.

 

[Stealthie]

there are two boxes in front of you.

one has apples and oranges, the other box has just oranges.

you hate apples, absolutely hate them, they make you throw up.

the sensible person would take the box of oranges, because they like the oranges and don't like apples.

the completely insensible person who just wants to feel the self gratification of being outraged will take the box of apples and oranges and call the people who put the apples in the box scumbags and psychopaths, and then get mad and go "why should I" when somebody suggests they just take the box with oranges.

the same goes for PvP in open play.

answer my question and stop playing armchair psychologist:

Why would you play in Open, a mode that allows PvP, when you hate PvP and could EASILY pick to be in a mode that doesn't allow PvP?

TBH, I'd say you've got that entirely the wrong way around.

It's more a case of somebody taking the box that contains apples and oranges because they like apples, only to have somebody shrieking about how they should go and find themselves a box of apples rather than taking a box that contains the oranges that they want for themselves.

Beyond that, you've already acknowledged that PvP isn't the only reason to play in Open mode so I see no reason for me to list them.

 

[Kethriss]

TBH, I'd say you've got that entirely the wrong way around.

It's more a case of somebody taking the box that contains apples and oranges because they like apples, only to have somebody shrieking about how they should go and find themselves a box of apples rather than taking a box that contains the oranges that they want for themselves.

Beyond that, you've already acknowledged that PvP isn't the only reason to play in Open mode so I see no reason for me to list them.

answer the question:

If you hate PvP, why would you play in Open when you could play in Mobius and get EVERYTHING Open offers except without the PvP?

 

[DEATHBR1NGER 37]

This is why a counter to the criminal end game is made. Have players get rewarded for hunting down criminals with more engaging and meaningful gameplay that just bounty hunting as it stands. Going off the syndicate idea, have task forces set up to counter and undermine the syndicates that offer similar, but law abiding missions to go and stop syndicate activities. This then would result in meaningful and non-random PvP encounters.

I think that while this is a good idea, it's an unlikely solution because it revolves around too many moving parts. What happens when the criminal player simply logs off? In what type of criminal scenario is there even time for someone to find a mission and intervene? Space is big. If the criminal simply stays out of high-traffic zones, they are unlikely to be noticed at all. PvP bounty hunting is a neat idea, but is it really a practical one?

 

[Stealthie]

answer the question:

If you hate PvP, why would you play in Open when you could play in Mobius and get EVERYTHING Open offers except without the PvP?

Why should somebody join a private group, with limited membership and limited opportunities to join rather than wishing to take advantage of the broadest possible experience that the game has to offer?

Boy, that's a tough one.

*EDIT*

Or, to put it another way: for the same reason PvP players are staying away from CQC in droves.

 

[Kethriss]

Why should somebody join a private group, with limited membership and limited opportunities to join rather than wishing to take advantage of the broadest possible experience that the game has to offer?

Boy, that's a tough one.

*EDIT*

Or, to put it another way: for the same reason PvP players are staying away from CQC in droves.

Stop dodging the question.

 

[Squaffle]

It's not even about logic, I just want to see how much mental gymnastics he tries to perform in the face of a very simple fact "if you hate PvP, don't play in the mode that allows PvP"


Why not try bringing something new to the party, instead of stifling the discussions in this way?

 

[babelfisch]

Babel and his hobby to derails and flame topics ... good lord you're one toxic person.

I'd say that this particular line in OP was toxic. You could however just ignore that I had issues with it, if you really believe my goals was to detail the thread (it's not, actually I apologised for doing it and tried a few times to stop commenting on it) you are doing a great job at supporting me in my alleged endeavours.

 

[babelfisch]

I have seen numerous posts on here, let alone reddit, where players have been compared to real-life terrorists, called psychopaths and on a few occasions conflated with rapists for their desire to pvp. I had a lengthy and ultimately reasonable discussion with someone via PM after one of the comments because as someone who has two friends that have been on the receiving end of that particular act, I was sufficiently incensed by it to contact him.

It absolutely 100% does happen and it's indefensible regardless of how much provocation someone feels they were under. Moderating it after the fact doesn't change the fact that it happened.

Regarding your last line I thought you just called out people for ridiculous hyperbole, so why then say 'Anyway, if your or the OPs claim is that everybody who doesn't play PvP calls everybody who does a ' when clearly nobody said that at all?

Sorry if you're feeling singled out after that but I can't just sit here, read that and not comment on it. I agree with you that any debate or discussion about this needs to be done in an intellectually honest and adult way, so let's at least set an example eh?

I think it's absolutely not normal to call someone a real life , that's unacceptable for a number of reasons. OP and the following discussions make it sound like it's happening on a daily basis. If this would be the case I would leave this forum immediately.
Anyway, the only example for something similar happening on this forum that I've seen yet turned out to be a misinterpretation. You can't even call someone a Richard. I also already admitted that this stuff happens on other platforms, however it is not limited to ED or PvP discussions but rather the toxic environment of some internet platforms.

 

[babelfisch]

If you listen closely, you can actually hear babelfisch moving the goalposts.

The claim was: People compare players to real life murderers.
The example given was something entirely different. Pointing it out is not moving goal posts but trying to find consens in my opinion.
+rep for being funny though

 

[CMDR Vozz]

My point is, basically, whether or not it'd be worth doing.

Yes, i think adding more depth to a criminal path is worth doing. Its not cause you dont like to play it that it doesnt deserve any attention.
Any career is worth expanding and when this one is done right it could even help giving them more consequences for their actions.

By way of metaphor, it's kind of like looking at gun violence in a place like Chicago and saying "Hey, you know what'd really help? We should build a heap of municipal gun clubs and shooting ranges so all those gang members and drug dealers have somewhere to go and shoot guns legally instead of shooting each other on the streets"

This is just answering in your own narrow-minded vision in this concept. We already have shooting ranges in this game called resource site, conflict zones, etc. Probably one of the most visited instances in this game by both parties.
Does it help the shooting outside the instances? No, but thats not the point of this thread...

Gang members and drug dealers don't want to shoot guns legally.
They want to shoot guns to instill fear into the local community, to do harm to their rivals and to assert their own dominance over others.

And this is what this thread is all about. The only criminal path that actually provides some fun is killing other cmdrs. Everyone kills npcs here, in a legal or illegal way, everyone has done this. The thread is about giving them more tools in this career. Not limited to player vs player but also vs npcs. And the consequences for these actions should be applied the same in both cases. Making dead matter more than just an instant rebuy button would be awesome, and add more risk doing illegal stuff in this whole universe. Having to wait for maybe an hour before you could access your destroyed ship because of salvage time and stuff could also lessen the griefing.

Same thing MIGHT apply in ED.
If the people acting in a criminal manner in-game are doing it for role-playing reasons then fair enough.
In that case, sure, they're going to embrace any additional content which supports that play style.
If, OTOH, they're just antisocial oddballs who get their jollies by irritating other players, FDev are likely to be wasting their time creating content which they won't use.

Again an assumption that should have no impact on the decision if this career deserves any attention. Like i said before, every career is worth expanding. Also the ones you dont think are worth creating content for. That is just egoistical thinking.

Only FDev have access to the sort of statistics which might reveal just how much PvP is done for BGS/PP/RP reasons and how much of it is just mindless violence but if they don't implement any features to enhance criminal gameplay it's probably safe to assume it's because they don't think it's worthwhile.

Lets think in your way:
Exploration didnt had much attention since launch, so its not worthwhile?
I dont like this way of thinking, i really dont... :x

 

[Stealthie]

And this is what this thread is all about. The only criminal path that actually provides some fun is killing other cmdrs. Everyone kills npcs here, in a legal or illegal way, everyone has done this. The thread is about giving them more tools in this career. Not limited to player vs player but also vs npcs. And the consequences for these actions should be applied the same in both cases. Making dead matter more than just an instant rebuy button would be awesome, and add more risk doing illegal stuff in this whole universe. Having to wait for maybe an hour before you could access your destroyed ship because of salvage time and stuff could also lessen the griefing.


Again an assumption that should have no impact on the decision if this career deserves any attention. Like i said before, every career is worth expanding. Also the ones you dont think are worth creating content for. That is just egoistical thinking.


Lets think in your way:
Exploration didnt had much attention since launch, so its not worthwhile?
I dont like this way of thinking, i really dont... :x

You seem to be missing the point by conflating what people are doing with why they're doing it.

To use your own analogy, FDev can (presumably) look at data for the number of players who're thousands of Ly outside the bubble and use that to establish just how popular exploration is.

Now, they could look at that data and conclude that people enjoy jumping between systems, scanning things and landing on planets and they might, as a result, think "Well, players can already do that stuff so it's all good".
Of course, that conclusion completely ignores the fact that all these people are doing that stuff thousands of Ly outside the bubble.
Once they factor that into their assessment, they'd have to consider that it's the exploring which people enjoy and then they might feel compelled to add content to that aspect of the game.

The flip-side of that, of course, is that maybe there ARE only a handful of players exploring outside the bubble and, that being the case, FDev feels that there are things they can spend their time on which will benefit a larger number of players.

Same thing applies to criminal behaviour in the game.

Let's face it, there's usually an optimal way to achieve a goal in the game.
If the optimal way to do something is a lawful way, nobody's going to indulge in doing that thing an unlawful way just for the sake of RPing - especially when achieving that thing is simply a stepping-stone to pew-pew.
Instead, with the current (lack of) C&P in place, a player can simply do the legal thing, achieve their goal in the optimal manner and then do any criminal stuff that they want.
And then they can commit Sideycide and go back to doing lawful stuff as long as thy see fit.

It'd be great if FDev could develop the game to create real, fundamental, choices for the player.
Trouble is, unless they can find a way to enforce the choices players make, without the players whining about it, and without pandering to either demographic, it's not worth doing because there'll always still be that ONE optimal way to achieve stuff and anything else will be ignored.

 

[Stealthie]

This is why a counter to the criminal end game is made. Have players get rewarded for hunting down criminals with more engaging and meaningful gameplay that just bounty hunting as it stands. Going off the syndicate idea, have task forces set up to counter and undermine the syndicates that offer similar, but law abiding missions to go and stop syndicate activities. This then would result in meaningful and non-random PvP encounters.

Can you provide examples of the sorts of things you might consider as "high risk consequences" as a result of criminal behaviour?

It's just that, it sounds like you're saying that people who want pew-pew should get all sorts of goodies as a result of their play-style and, in return, other players should be encouraged to participate in pew-pew with the people who actually want it.

Which is a bit like threatening to punish a fat kid by feeding him cheeseburgers.

 

[CMDR Vozz]

You seem to be missing the point by conflating what people are doing with why they're doing it.

To use your own analogy, FDev can (presumably) look at data for the number of players who're thousands of Ly outside the bubble and use that to establish just how popular exploration is.

You are dancing around my friend.
The forum is flooded with derails of threads, even this thread, where you support a PVE mode. That proves that a lot of players are also playing the pvp aspect, otherwise you wouldnt complain about it. Just to stay in your analogy...

Now, they could look at that data and conclude that people enjoy jumping between systems, scanning things and landing on planets and they might, as a result, think "Well, players can already do that stuff so it's all good".
Of course, that conclusion completely ignores the fact that all these people are doing that stuff thousands of Ly outside the bubble.
Once they factor that into their assessment, they'd have to consider that it's the exploring which people enjoy and then they might feel compelled to add content to that aspect of the game.

Last time i checked there are 3 categories of gameplay that you can rank.
Exploration, trading and combat.
Why should you be the one who decides what comes first and what doesnt need attention?
Everything should get expanded.

The flip-side of that, of course, is that maybe there ARE only a handful of players exploring outside the bubble and, that being the case, FDev feels that there are things they can spend their time on which will benefit a larger number of players.

Again this is an assumption you make in their name and doesnt justify or proves anything...

Same thing applies to criminal behaviour in the game.

Let's face it, there's usually an optimal way to achieve a goal in the game.
If the optimal way to do something is a lawful way, nobody's going to indulge in doing that thing an unlawful way just for the sake of RPing - especially when achieving that thing is simply a stepping-stone to pew-pew.
Instead, with the current (lack of) C&P in place, a player can simply do the legal thing, achieve their goal in the optimal manner and then do any criminal stuff that they want.
And then they can commit Sideycide and go back to doing lawful stuff as long as thy see fit.

If this thread would go the way as the OP intended and we could discuss different ways of a criminal career, it could maybe lead to a solution for these problems. OP wants more meaningfull ways to play as a criminal, that includes the consequences of them.

It'd be great if FDev could develop the game to create real, fundamental, choices for the player.
Trouble is, unless they can find a way to enforce the choices players make, without the players whining about it, and without pandering to either demographic, it's not worth doing because there'll always still be that ONE optimal way to achieve stuff and anything else will be ignored.

That one optimal way to make money in this game is something i havent touched since release. I dont want to be insta rich by exploits. I like the journey.
So its not true that other things are ignored.
However i do agree that real fundamental choices for the players in C&P would be a step in the right direction.
Thats why this thread tries to adress an optional career where these things can be discussed.

Its just sad to see that examples about the career here are ignored and the thread yet again is derailed by this endless debacle.

 

[PeLucheuh]

Why should somebody join a private group, with limited membership and limited opportunities to join rather than wishing to take advantage of the broadest possible experience that the game has to offer?

Because it allows them to choose their own rules. That is why Mobius exist, why it has nothing to do with PvE and why an Open PvE is not needed. Limited membership and limited opportunities are a tiny drawback for being able to choose your own rules. People join PG because they don't want to take advantage of the broadest possible experience that the game has to offer.

"If you hate PvP avoid Open" is a valid advice regardind the non optional multiplayer game core fonctionality of PvP.

Can you provide examples of the sorts of things you might consider as "high risk consequences" as a result of criminal behaviour?

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...t-CMDRs-Fair?p=5829892&viewfull=1#post5829892
And Anarchy system which want to spread chaos everywhere and offers reward for criminal actions (killing players):

• Killing in High sec system : almost impossible but huge credits potential if you survive but heavy punishment (huge bounty, being chased out by authority and unable to dock in the system)
• Killing in med sec system : hard to kill clean players and moderate credit potential and punishment.
• Killing in low sec system : easy to kill clean players but low reward potential and low punishment.

 

[thirstyfish]

This almost isn't worth a response given the OP's clear lack of understanding of the game's title. And I don't have the time or energy to waste to go find a video. Do your homework so that you don't spout nonsense and look foolish.

I don't necessarily object to the actual ideas here, its just that trying to compare star citizen to ED just doesn't work ED can't do the same things as Star Citizen. Not even going to mention how SC feels like a scam (oops). ED just works differently. The bounty system is based on the jurisdictions of the MINOR factions that actually control systems and not the major factions like the Fed or the Empire. You already can get a good or bad reputation with minor factions and they won't give you good missions if they hate you. Get low enough and you will be shoot on sight, no bounty needed. Or has the OP not looked at the mission board except to find the highest paying missions to stack?

 

[Kethriss]

This almost isn't worth a response given the OP's clear lack of understanding of the game's title. And I don't have the time or energy to waste to go find a video. Do your homework so that you don't spout nonsense and look foolish.

I don't necessarily object to the actual ideas here, its just that trying to compare star citizen to ED just doesn't work ED can't do the same things as Star Citizen. Not even going to mention how SC feels like a scam (oops). ED just works differently. The bounty system is based on the jurisdictions of the MINOR factions that actually control systems and not the major factions like the Fed or the Empire. You already can get a good or bad reputation with minor factions and they won't give you good missions if they hate you. Get low enough and you will be shoot on sight, no bounty needed. Or has the OP not looked at the mission board except to find the highest paying missions to stack?

Did you just flat out not read what my suggestions were? Because I can't fathom how you could make that response to the suggestion of expanding on and adding meaning and depth to criminal gameplay unless you didn't understand that's what the topic of this thread was.

 

[thirstyfish]

Did you just flat out not read what my suggestions were? Because I can't fathom how you could make that response to the suggestion of expanding on and adding meaning and depth to criminal gameplay unless you didn't understand that's what the topic of this thread was.

What, you want an itemized list? I can't/don't want to go through everything because some of what you suggest completely ignores how some core game mechanics work, and some is just redundant. Just saying that I don't object to the concept.

Fine then:
Stations - Have you been to a station controlled by an anarchy minor faction? No-fire zone doesn't seem to exist. At least I never see the thing pop up on the info part in the top right corner. Never tried firing weapons, but you can figure that one out for yourself.

You then just about describe the rep system for minor factions, congrats, FD beat you to it. Or you did a horrible job of explaining your "idea."

Missions - already there. They are called massacre missions. Maybe you missed the memo. Some are called assassinations. I often assassinate pirate lords when I want a specific bounty hunting target. There are surface ones too where you destroy infrastructure. Don't know what they are called, but they are there.

And you show an overall lack of understanind of how its the minor factions that actually operate systems and post bounties and track crimes. You can be wanted by the fuel rat mischief, but be just fine with the earth defense fleet (just throwing two I know off the top of my head). Kinda like how in skyrim, you could have a bounty in Markarth and be just fine in Riften. Jurisdiction is key, not security level necessarily.

And don't get me started on how I am not sure where one idea ends and one begins in your OP. Try a bulleted list or something and don't have one idea immediately bleed into another.

Happy now? I read your OP the first time around, but your "suggestions" are either ignorant of how ED works, or simply redundant.

 

[Cupcake]

Totally agree OP however FD has this horrible trend of pandering to those who cry loudest, nameley the "anti-griefer" or thye "I want to play a multiplayer game but by my rules" crowd. Piracy is dead in the water with comms and mechanics needing a serious overhaul and rework. It seems the ONLY activity that pays anything of any worth that remotley resembles criminal activity is hauling turds. Consicering we are sold the "play your own way" line, it would be nice to actually DO that.