YES. That would be perfect.
New Crime & Punishment Will Be Broken If You Fly with CRIMES OFF
- Thread starter Nightshady
- Start date
YES. That would be perfect.
Just to try this in a very direct way:
Shady is flying and is attacked without provocation, this makes the attackers the criminals in a logical sense.
However, upon returning fire, the pilot's federation bounty is placed on Shady and not the attackers/criminals.
The question isn't about who the police come to aide, but rather who receives the additional bounty.
This pretty well contradicts the ethos of Crime and Punishment changes to the game and encourages people to exploit the gameplay. Want to fight someone?
Be a troll even better and simply fly between a target and their firing angle so they now are wanted and you can freely attack them and they'll even get a Pilot's federation bounty to boot!
Shady is flying and is attacked without provocation, this makes the attackers the criminals in a logical sense.
However, upon returning fire, the pilot's federation bounty is placed on Shady and not the attackers/criminals.
The question isn't about who the police come to aide, but rather who receives the additional bounty.
This pretty well contradicts the ethos of Crime and Punishment changes to the game and encourages people to exploit the gameplay. Want to fight someone?
Be a troll even better and simply fly between a target and their firing angle so they now are wanted and you can freely attack them and they'll even get a Pilot's federation bounty to boot!
Two FDL's interdicted me and started shooting at me. Everyone was CLEAN at start. They had crimes on, I had crimes off. Here is video of situation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeT_4dxRcbk&t
Simple really... I don't want the cops tilting a fight in my favor. If you attack me, I will live or die by my own skill. I don't want the cops tainting my victory or preventing my death.
But you can't make that decision for other players, which is what you are asking to do.
Actually no I'm not. I don't want to pay the fine for killing the people who tried to murder me when I was clean. I don't really care if the cops show up to help someone attacking me (see video I posted last page) at all.
If you read the the past 36 pages, the point we are making is that it should never incur a penalty to defend yourself, regardless of whether you have CRIMES ON or CRIMES OFF.
Everybody else is pointing out that this mechanic has not changed since the beginning of the game. It is not apparent whether the point you are making is strong enough to change the mechanic...it has always been the players choice to fly with crimes on or off. What it seems to me is that the choice now comes with a very large downside...which means a lot more people will choose to be flying with it on. Those that choose otherwise have a stronger incentive to understand how the mechanic works. And choose wisely when dropping those hardpoints.
This also might show the devs intentions on how PVP is meant to work...if you want to PVP then this switch allows that. Otherwise you are meant to fly with it on...
Last edited:
Except this is not a pvp toggle, akin to how other games like WoW implements it in PVE servers.
If you attack someone flagged for PVP while you're flagged for PVE, it will immediately toggle you to PVP. You are not given
carte blanche to attack others without being penalized, let alone penalizing someone else for defending themselves.
The 'beginning of the game" argument ignores the addition of C&P pilot's federation bounties. The stated goal of which is to discourage griefing.
This actually encourages griefing anyone who doesn't fly with report crimes on. Want a fair fight? Too bad, you can both be shot/blown up and be penalized for defending yourself.
Being that the two FdL's that nabbed him were 'Clean', they probably wouldn't even have interdicted/fired on the OP if he didn't resolve out as 'Lawless'.
You're spot on!
And - frankly - if that doesn't prove this system's crap, then I don't know what does.
Or, more likely, he resolved out as the infamous Nightshady and they thought with the help of the cops they might all be able to whip him. Whoops!
@Nightshady, the obfuscation artists and agenda pushers have convoluted this thread beyond rescue. They simply do not want you as a PvPer to be accommodated in any way shape or form even though it will not affect their game in the slightest. Trying to reason with them is a pointless endeavour for they have no desire to be reasonable.
Your best bet is to post in the suggestion thread, which I see you already did. Maybe FDev will take notice and correct this oversight. All there is to do at this point is wait and see how it goes.
Your best bet is to post in the suggestion thread, which I see you already did. Maybe FDev will take notice and correct this oversight. All there is to do at this point is wait and see how it goes.
Oh, I understand precisely what you said.
I guess my question lost its meaning, or perhaps I worded it wrongly.
My original intent was to tell all those that said "you left it off, face consequences", that shooting you as a clean player in the first place should've brought immediate consequences regardless of your consented PvP flag status (which is what the damn crime reporting actually is, just in-lore named). And which somehow escaped them, for someone looking "consequences".
Other than that - you're right and frankly, don't bother fighting. Just let the 3.0 drop, grab a popcorn and wait for the "C&P is total crap" threads that will spawn en masse after the update's gone live. They'll change their tune then
Hah, see this is the thing; report crimes is for your ship only. It means they didn't get a bounty for attacking you. You can't toggle someone else's reporting; only your own. If you received a bounty, it means they had report crimes on.
Perhaps turn it back on again.
What he said ^^^^
Had you had report crimes on they would have become "wanted" when they attacked and you could have defended yourself without getting a bounty. Personally, I would leave report crimes on unless you're involved in consensual P v P.
P.S. Thread TD;DR so probably already been said.
Last edited:
I don;t think that follows. The button is clearly labeled "Report Crimes Against Me; On/Off". It doesn't say "Open for PvP without Authorities; On/Off". The trouble here is trying to twist the interpretation of the feature into what it's not. It's perfectly logical to attack a "Lawless" player, and it's perfectly logical to get a bounty for destroying a clean ship. Not accepting that by turning off the RC feature makes it legal to shoot you, and, you made that choice independently, is the illogical and confusing part.
I'm trying to figure what the split is between players who so rarely engage in PvP that they literally cannot see Nightshady's point and those who are doing their level best to obfuscate and infuriate knowing full well what this means to PvP. Dangerous Discussion has become a pitiable waste of time for anyone trying to get information or share a legitimate concern.
Last edited:
A new player would not have turned report crimes against me off. By default it is on. Many players don't even know it exists to turn it off. This is not a scenario that would ever occur to someone new to E: D.
Absolutely this.. Report Crimes was fine with the old system but is lacking with the new C&P, something of an oversight and OP raises a valid point.. personally I like the suggestion(s) of a third toggle, report but not respond. Makes much more sense with the current update.
John Galt btw.. great guy, but really 70ish pages for one speech! Nearly killed me..
Na, it's nothing like that. It's the very idea that the switch should be something it isn't, that's the trouble. The two FdL's stayed clean, because of the OP's choice to be Lawless. Consequences. But, to claim an entire game feature will be Broken, because it can't be what it isn't is crazy.
Certainly suggest and campaign for a 'PvP without Authorities' button. But to cross your arms and insist there was some miscarriage of justice untenable. I know, and I'm sure everyone else knows, what the OP wants. But his analysis of the situation is a knee jerk reaction, and wrong.