This isn't life though, it's a video game and the difference between cruel and unusual and fair and fun, is not subject to the same arbitrary metrics applied by a bunch of old men as it is in rl. I don't care if people think it's fair or not any more, neither of the two viable solutions changes anything of significance for those don't see an issue, yet it completely remedies the situation for people who think this particular aspect could be handled differently. I think they call that win-win in certain circles.
New Crime & Punishment Will Be Broken If You Fly with CRIMES OFF
- Thread starter Nightshady
- Start date
beein allowed to return fire on an offender should be a thing.
there are totally legit reasons why you wouldn't want to have police dropping into your instance.
one example is when you fly a type9 and defend yourself with the help of mines.
i already got a bounty because the police ships dropped into an instance where had filled my sourroundings with mines,
and unlike the attacking pirate, the police ships didn't evade them...
there are totally legit reasons why you wouldn't want to have police dropping into your instance.
one example is when you fly a type9 and defend yourself with the help of mines.
i already got a bounty because the police ships dropped into an instance where had filled my sourroundings with mines,
and unlike the attacking pirate, the police ships didn't evade them...
Then why do we have crime and punishment system at all?
Then if you don't care, you wouldn't mind quitting the conversation and leaving me to debate this with others who do, would you?
Last edited:
Precisely.
Can I ask on what grounds did CRIME-ON player attack the CRIME-OFF player when OP has established none of them were wanted?
And in such situation, why is the system treating equally-lawful payers with such significant difference in response force?
What if the other guy lies?
The why do we have crime and punishment system at all?
Then if you don't care, you wouldn't mind quitting the conversation and leaving me to debate this with others who do, would you?
Firstly, I'm on your side. I'm the one debating the most vehemently how stupid this is. I've just given up banging my head against the wall, sa you will eventually. One guy even blocked me earlier on. No staying power some of these guys.
Secondly, and more importantly, you[ve got two sides here, one saying there is a problem (me and many others) and the other side saying there is no issue. We have debated TO DEATH, both sides of this, and we aren't really getting anywhere.
Therefore, let's shift the debate to a SOLUTION (rather more important than proving who is right? No?), that BOTH sides are happy with.
Two have been presented...
1) Three crime options, off, on and on, but don't send me backup.
2) Report crimes, reports all crimes, not just those against you (so if you are clean, with crimes on, and open fire on a clean commander with crimes off, YOUR ship reports your own crime, allowing the victim to defend themselves.
If this can be achieved, it really isn't important to convince these people that we are on the moral high ground (I used the same examples as you, getting attacked in real life, and I have defended myself from this before and I have won the court case). Chill, understnad that the debate hasn't got anywhere in 30 pages, and let's work together to try to get a solution implemented.
Last edited:
Then there's a court to decide who's right or wrong.
We don't have in-game courts and police's response is based on arbitrary, manually-switched off system, that allows two lawful, unwanted players to be treated with different police lethality based on said system's activation at the time of combat, regardless of actual crimes committed and who's the combat initiator.
So what I'm saying is this system doesn't work as it should. Hope that helps getting back on track
Aashenfox - got you, I apologize, I seem to have misunderstood your post
Last edited:
Then there's a court to decide who's right or wrong.
We don't have in-game courts and police's response is based on arbitrary, manually-switched off system, that allows two lawful, unwanted players to be treated with different police lethality based on said system's activation at the time of combat, regardless of actual crimes committed and who's the combat initiator.
So what I'm saying is this system doesn't work as it should. Hope that helps getting back on track
You are right, in my opinion, but honestly, this has all been said before at least 20 times. I even said it on the previous page most recently, and somewhere back on page 10 the first time. Don't waste your breath trying to convince them, honestly, read the thread from page 10ish and you'll see what I mean.
The trick now is gtting them to accept one of the two solutions. If we can get to a point where nobody has an issue, then we can go to FD with a solid piece of evidence that this is worth doing, because both sides agree on it.
Aashenfox - got you, I apologize, I seem to have misunderstood your post
No worries mate.
Only if criminals are able to hotwire the feature to broadcast duff information.
Then there's a court to decide who's right or wrong.
We don't have in-game courts and police's response is based on arbitrary, manually-switched off system, that allows two lawful, unwanted players to be treated with different police lethality based on said system's activation at the time of combat, regardless of actual crimes committed and who's the combat initiator.
So what I'm saying is this system doesn't work as it should. Hope that helps getting back on track
Aashenfox - got you, I apologize, I seem to have misunderstood your post
So you go to court and the jury decides your fate based on the balance of probabilities. Can you see that it would be much easier to confirm your innocence if there were an automatic crime detecting gadget to back up your side of the story? There is one in ED, keep it switched on (if you are clean) or accept the consequence.
As several of us have stated throughout this thread, there is a simple solution already proposed, and a workaround. I included both in my first post to this thread.
Last edited:
Yes, there is a system in place already, so the question is: why can it be turned off by a player?
No there isn't (it does not back up your side of the story). That's still not what "report crimes against me" does. All it does is send a beacon out to say that a crime is being committed, and requests that security respond ASAP. When the security turn up, they'll attack all wanted ships (whether it was you who called them or not). I've mentioned this a couple of times, as it really is a quite important point as to how this works. There is no all-seeing, all-knowing arbiter that can tell the authorities who was the actual naughty boy...
Go back and read the thread, you will find the answer to this an more already posted.
I'd say that the question is why would you want to change a feature so that it allows far less interesting interaction?
Griefing is, after all, a part of the game.
It does if you didn't shoot first and both Cmdrs are clean.
You are right that it doesn't back up your side of the story, if you lie (or are wrong) it won't back you up, it will (or should) provide a clear & concise sequence of events.
Last edited:
No it doesn't. It does absolutely nothing except send a signal to security! Where has this idea come from that it is recording everything?
Crank, what do you think of the idea that all crimes are reported by either ship? So in the case of the OP, when the clean ships opened fire, their own crime report would have grassed them up, made them wanted and allowed the player to defend himself? I don't think anyone can have any immersion issues with that, seems very elegant and easy to implement and cures all issues I can think of.
I see what you meanSee what I mean John?
If they don't feel like repeating one sentence, I guess I can feel free to skip reading 30 pages of discussion to find what it is they're talking about
How about a beer?