If you start firing on a Wanted ship, it will fire on you. That becomes a Crime against me, the authorities are notified, when RC is on. It goes unreported when RC is off. If you are smuggling, or just holding something illegal, you will not want the authorities to come poking around, while you dust some over ambitious pirate type. This is a perfect time to use RC-Off. You run a risk of being caught out, as the OP did, but that's the risk you took, just as the OP did.
New Crime & Punishment Will Be Broken If You Fly with CRIMES OFF
- Thread starter Nightshady
- Start date
If you start firing on a Wanted ship, it will fire on you. That becomes a Crime against me, the authorities are notified, when RC is on. It goes unreported when RC is off. If you are smuggling, or just holding something illegal, you will not want the authorities to come poking around, while you dust some over ambitious pirate type. This is a perfect time to use RC-Off. You run a risk of being caught out, as the OP did, but that's the risk you took, just as the OP did.
I read through the fist few pages. I think that Report Crimes should be modified to just prevent a NPC response, but it shouldn't exclude system status changes. So in your case they should have still been WANTED if they broke a system law, but your ship would have not sent a request for assistance and you would be free to fight or free as you want. Report Crimes should be considered more of a NPC Help Request. I think it's worth a developer look. You situation doesn't seem like it's good for the game. It's more gaming the system.
I have a feeling your situation isn't the developer intended use. But at the same time, with the changes you can't just play the way you used to. I learned some more about the system with this thread.
Last edited:
I don't know whether anyone in the previous 53 pages recalled or mentioned it, but I do have a Suggestions thread that would solve the entire problem mentioned in the OP, which Sandro posted positively in, but which has yet to be implemented.
You can read it here, if interested:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...nctionality-of-quot-Report-Crimes-On-Off-quot
Extracts:
Truesilver:
"Please consider solving this problem by adding a third option to the right panel toggle:
1. Report crimes on
2. Report crimes off
3. Report crimes but do not summon assistance"
(This would enable PvP-ers such as myself and Cmdr Nightshady to fly with the third option engaged, meaning that if we defend ourselves against attackers, no authority ships would be summoned to assist either party and we would not incur punitive bounties.)
Sandro
"To be fair, if you fly with report crimes off then it mechanically makes sense to get lumped with a crime if you fight back against an aggressor if they are not currently wanted.
This is why I kind of like the suggestion of a third option, log crime but do not call for assistance."
(In other words, in the example Cmdr Nightshady gives, which has many times happened to me also, if he had been flying with my third option engaged, upon shooting him his attackers would have become Wanted, no authority ships would have been called to help anyone, and when he destroyed them he would not have incurred bounties.)
You can read it here, if interested:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...nctionality-of-quot-Report-Crimes-On-Off-quot
Extracts:
Truesilver:
"Please consider solving this problem by adding a third option to the right panel toggle:
1. Report crimes on
2. Report crimes off
3. Report crimes but do not summon assistance"
(This would enable PvP-ers such as myself and Cmdr Nightshady to fly with the third option engaged, meaning that if we defend ourselves against attackers, no authority ships would be summoned to assist either party and we would not incur punitive bounties.)
Sandro
"To be fair, if you fly with report crimes off then it mechanically makes sense to get lumped with a crime if you fight back against an aggressor if they are not currently wanted.
This is why I kind of like the suggestion of a third option, log crime but do not call for assistance."
(In other words, in the example Cmdr Nightshady gives, which has many times happened to me also, if he had been flying with my third option engaged, upon shooting him his attackers would have become Wanted, no authority ships would have been called to help anyone, and when he destroyed them he would not have incurred bounties.)
I would be happy with this as a solution to o, but i prefer my own suggestion (I have a thread too) that if crimes are on, they report your own crimes too. I feel it accomplishes the same goal, adds dynamic to your own illegal activities (be careful not to grass yourself up and know that no matter what you won't get police help) and is even more elegant in terms of not adding extra options /confusion and minimizing coding effort
By the way, yes, your thread was referred much earlier in the topic, when this was put forward as the answer by someone else. It drew comments that it would be immersion breaking for any serious police force to acknowledge a crime but not respond. I say small price to pay, others disagreed
Last edited:
Ah perfect! I hope Sandro was serious, it takes care of the issue.
Your assumption is that the societal matrix in the ED universe HAS to be derived from one that you like in the current world and incorporate its sacred cows. You mentioned a "constitutional right" - let's take the most significant of currently extant national constitutional frameworks, that of the USA. Currently it's two hundred years and change old. ED is set in the 3300s, over a thousand years in the future. That's 900+ years AFTER Star Trek, ok? Arguing from current reality only gets you so far, once you start claiming that ED society should bear any more resemblance to that which currently exists than ours does to the 10th century, the depths of the Dark Ages, you're going far beyond what such an argument can support.
So change your expectations. You're making a faulty assumption and expectations based on it are unlikely to be met.
Absurdity does nothing good for your argument. There is zero expectations of things being like RL, in a game. Let alone in a game setting like the one in E|D. Pixels have no natural rights. No one is expected to protect you in E|D, but yourself, especially if you tell the game you don't want protecting.
The OP misinterpreted, and misused the RC-Off function. You are trying to use our RL today to inform rules of a game. That in ludicrous. The RC switch is a QoL game thing to allow for fights between Commanders without in-game 'legal' issues. It is, and never was, intended to be a PvP flag. Learn the rules, and leave the law to reality.
Your efforts to twist my words are in vain friend. My assumption that law in elite should be analogous with reality is not arbitrary it's an obvious design goal, especially where it relates to fairness in PvP, hence all the changes to cnp. All the rest of the game is fair and analogous with real life (more or less).
I have no reason to change my expectations because any expectation that self defense from attempted murder is illegal is insane.
I put to you... Again...
Would you defend yourself from someone trying to kill you if you had forgotten your mobile phone somewhere and couldn't report it (lol, like if that would be a way to get out of it, but let's suspend disbelief to posit YOUR scenario)? You can't run away (or the attacker is faster), and you can't report it. You are about to get stabbed in the heart, but you have your own knife and see an opportunity to strike first. What do you do? Your life is at stake and your choice is do nothing and be killed or kill your attacker. What do you do (apart from spend the next few years of your life in court, cos that isn't relevant to a video game justice system)? Do you kill your attacker or let him kill you? According to you (because you forgot your mobile phone somewhere), you have no choice but to let him kill you.
If you would defend yourself, please explain what realistic mechanism you can imagine causing your actions to become illegal, or invalidate your right to protect yourself
No he didn't misuse it, he didn't use it at all and somehow that brought about the absurd scenario that he forfeits his right to defend himself from attempted murder and not only that, but incurs FULL cnp for doing so.
Last edited:
That's the point. If someone attacks you, and you decide that you'll kill them because of that, it is murder. Manslaughter is if you unintentionally killed them. Intent is the key. Player B defending and killing Player A is always murder (the defender could stop at any point before hull reaches zero).
Though this does seem to be rather irrelevant to the topic.
That's the point. If someone attacks you, and you decide that you'll kill them because of that, it is murder. Manslaughter is if you unintentionally killed them. Intent is the key. Player B defending and killing Player A is always murder (the defender could stop at any point before hull reaches zero).
Though this does seem to be rather irrelevant to the topic.
Even though it isn't 100% relevant, you've still got that wrong.
If someone attacks you with the intent of not stopping until they've killed you (as posited in the OP), then your only reasonable chance to save yourself is to kill them first. This is what the premise of justifiable homicide is all about. At the first point someone shoots at you to try to kill you, if you have a gun you are going to shoot back until one of you succeeds in stopping the other one shooting. That might be a serious wound and not killing the attacker, which makes them stop, and if you then walked up to them and put a bullet in their forehead, a coup de gras, than THAT would be murder because the person was not a danger to you. But as long as they are firing their weapon, you are 100% justified in firing your weapon in retaliation. In Elite, it is entirely reasonable to expect that the attackers were in fact tyring to murder the OP, and therefore, he is justified in trying to kill them back. Since NPC police don't stop after they shot your thrusters out and you are a sittingn duck, that would suggest that really, what YOU are saying (about propriety of response in elite) is what doesn't match very well with the current state of the game.
In any case, whichever the outcome, it is still clear to any legal system if all facts are known, that one person shot first and the other was trying to defend themselves.
Last edited:
Great post, and I completely agree with your solution. Sounds like Sandro does, too, which means it's pretty likely this will be implemented in the not so distant future.
There was a lot of effort to confuse, misdirect and obfuscate in this thread, so it's nice to see the combined forces of reason, logic and fair play win out in the end.
Mohrgan already answered, but think of it as 'avoiding Imperial entanglements', most useful when you're smuggling or carrying shady passengers and don't want to be scanned.
Turning Report Crimes off prevents attacks on you from drawing unwanted attention from the authorities.
Yay the thread is over & all we have to do is wait for the game to change.
In the mean time, use common sense & fly with RC on if you're clean eh?
Right? It's not like anyone wants your ship to report to the Authorities every time I'm carrying something illegal. Your ship would never rat you out. It knows the 'Bro-Code'.
Even if the attacker was intent on killing you, how can you then jump to the conclusion that your only reasonable defence is to kill them first? You can't, because it isn't true (it isn't reasonable in the slightest).
The thread isn't over due to the fact that it was hijacked almost directly following the OP. I doubt if the hijackers are going to let a little thing like logic (or the lead dev agreeing there is a need for some revision concerning the feature) to stop the runaway train ride they're on.
This is in the DD forum.
There are already a couple of suggestions raised by participants of this thread regarding changes to the current system, so people can post on those their support or otherwise. It probably is best to keep the random discussion away from those threads...
Over and over again, I've said that a rules change is the thing to do. My complaints have been to the whole "Broken" thing, and the insistence that a person's 'Constitutional Rights' hold sway in a video game. As an OP come out and say: "I think we need a rules change because of this." You're onto something. But to go all running around shouting about injustices is ludicrous.
It's the 'sky-is-falling' insta-outrage that cause me to comment. I have a certain amount of incredulity about the notion that the OP, being a cunning player and pirate, hadn't already known about the way the switch worked. The surprise he felt, must have been over the Consequences his approach would lead to with the new C&P stuffs. It's ok to say that. No one needs to shout 'doomsday' over an issue we've had for some time. Frankly, it's no different than the greedy traders expecting to fly all around with no shields.
No, I said it would be nice. Clean. Wanted. I don't care. They shoot first I'm going to do everything I can to kill them.
Last edited: