Sure, but there is no ambiguity in a video game. So to leave it that way on purpose is cruel and unusual.
Report crimes should also report one's own crimes...
- Thread starter Aashenfox
- Start date
Sure, but there is no ambiguity in a video game. So to leave it that way on purpose is cruel and unusual.
You are aware that Sandro has recognised this is an issue, right? The only debate is how the solution is implemented...
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...port-Crimes-On-Off-quot?p=5477374#post5477374
...I think the solution in my OP in this thread is a little more elegant, but I like Truesilver's suggestion too.
I suggest you update the OP with the link to TrueSilver's thread.
Consider summarising the various proposed solutions too, with their pros & cons compared to leaving as-is.
I don't think comparisons to RL law is all that productive. The game has no courts, no jurys, no room for personal initiative, it's just black or white crime or no crime and fairly simple Boolean logic.
Last edited:
LOL! That was something which was asked for by the same player types wanting this new change now! And Frontier made the change. And now it's being pointed out as a point to consider for the new change!
Except - those are all new things brought into the game since release?
Whereas what's being asked for here is a fundamental change in something which has been a basic tenet of the game since before it was released! i.e. Law Enforcement will arrive at the scene of a crime.
Please.
The one and only logical repsonse is that you already have that because that's what Report Crimes Against Me does!
Again, Sandro, the lead designer of the game disagrees with you...
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-On-Off-quot?p=5477501&viewfull=1#post5477501
See above. The curious prt is that if you actually read what Schmack wrote, it agrees with the OP, I really don't know what he was trying to say, but it musta come out wrong.
Last edited:
This is exactly why real life is relevant, it sets basic expectations. It sets an expectation that if you call the police, they will help you rather than kill you, just like in real life. It sets the expectation that people committing crime will be punished (as per CnP implementation, both old and new, which punishes criminals and those who attack others without warning), just liek in real life. It therefore seems reasonable, since it's implicit in the way CnP is arranged to alow players to retaliate against attackers, that there wouldn't be a game breaking switch that under one specific circumstance, makes a mockery of the game's CnP system, not like in real life. The fact is the CnP system in Elite IS like an extreme version of real life, except in this one way.
Plus, the basic expectation that in a game where spaceship combat is simulated, that combat should be encouraged, not running away, or ridiculous loopholes, which work AGAINST the premise of the game (that it's a cutthroat universe where everything has consequences, except in one particular situation, where consequences are reversed). Anyway, you know what I mean.
I will update the op with truesilvers thread.
Last edited:
Sandro also said...
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-On-Off-quot?p=5476858&viewfull=1#post5476858
Note the "We'll take it under consideration."
This was from 4th May 2017. 10 months ago.
10 months later and it hasn't appeared in the 3.0 beta. One can only assume that the matter is still under consideration.
So if Sandro is reading this thread, if he would kindly consider the counter-arguments which have been brought up in this thread, that 10 months ago weren't brought up then.
I guess you missed the post only a few after that one, where he said "ah, yes, I understand". BEcause it was obvious that he hadn't before that, funnily enough, he was saying the same thing as you.
It only took him three or four posts to get the the idea.
Last edited:
It is also very diplomatic speak for, "Genuinely, MANY thanks for your valued suggestion .. but no."
Last edited:
There's still hope for that, he sounded warm to it if you ask me, and then there's this alternative solution on this thread to consider as well now. Yay, options!
What exactly is your objection by the way? 2 completely different solutions, you don't like either? Why?
Last edited:
Basically because the suggestion (don't report Crimes I Commit just in case the Cmdr I'm sparring with tricks me by turning Report Crimes Against on mid fight) for risk free/ consequence free sparring is total edge case stuff.
Go and fight in CQC if you want risk free and disengage (go fight someone else) if you get a fine mid fight because you've been tricked. If someone tries to hoodwink you, by toggling Report Crimes while you're in a consentual fight ... then I suggest you're playing with the wrong person.
If you want protection from that, not only is it very low priority dev work because it undermines the integrity of the law and order system but I don't think Crimes I Commit Off would be the solution anyway. Very easy to abuse and/or difficult to code. How does the game know when your toggle should be over-ridden.
Last edited:
greeting,
it's like that on the beta ? it seems to me extremely easy to report the crime as being of the victim (whereas it is the opposite).
if it's like that .. it's a problem .. i hope the criminals are not going to pass this information .. a criminal does not care if he does something morally wrong (even in a game).
however, I have not found a real workaround yet.. I thought with my little head.
there is no way to detect who fires first ? whoever shoots first can not report a crime.. there must be a shot received to report (until then I thought it was like that and that the report was automatic).
Last edited:
IMHO though, they only changed it because of player pressure. I don't think it is broken, if you attack an innocent commander and discover they aren't reporting crimes because you don't gain a bounty then you can exploit that.
The smuggler is that rare case where the player may be clean but doesn't want to be scanned, yes. I used it as an example in my logical tests earlier in the thread.
Rather than offering my opinion again, I'll just state that I can see the logic in the police deciding whether to attend, not the player. But I can see a case for the other way round too. Either outcome would potentially solve the problem and offer some gameplay benefits, but so does the existing system as long as the player understands and accepts how it actually works.
I argued against it being changed, but once the decision is made just move forward from there, no point looking back & wishing.
Ambiguity though is part of life, and simulating it is part of game development, for example when smuggling you are committing a crime, just one that hasn't been detected yet, even though the game knows you did wrong, the simulated authorities don't. If we want to go down the route of having an omnipresent judiciary who always know who the aggressor was when a fight starts then they could also slap a fine on you the second you pick up some illegal salvage, or enter their system carrying prohibited goods.
There are shades of grey between games that look to be a simulation of sorts and games that look to be more fast and arcadey. I think ED has always been on the simulation end of the scale, and while there are things that ED either can't or in the name of gameplay shouldn't simulate I think giving players an option to opt out of law enforcement would be going too far down the arcade route, whereas surely if you want to PvP somewhere where nobody cares who fired first there are literally billions of anarchy systems you can do that in.
Last edited:
What are you talking about? People wanted the ability to switch crimes on during combat removed because it had the potential to be a troll tool. A perfectly logical stand point. You didn't even know about this until I pointed it out and yet you feel that your opinion should be considered above someone who actually knows the mechanics better than you? If you don't have personal experience of the mechanic being discussed or at least understand it enough to comprehend its uses then please educate yourself before continuing to work off of your own false assumptions.
And the new C&P penalties for commiting a crime isn't a new thing brought into the game since release? As I said before, you cannot evolve one part of the game while leaving its connecting piece an atavistic leftover from an older version of the game. You're really grasping at straws here Genar and desperately going around in circles in order to obfuscate and not actually disprove any of my points.
My question still stands, how will allowing a clean ship with crimes off to engage in lawful self defence when attacked negatively impact the game?
Oh, oh, can I play this game too?
Sandro also said:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-On-Off-quot?p=5476858&viewfull=1#post5476858
He likes the third option. He really, really likes the 3rd option [heart]
Last edited:
And like I mentioned earlier - presumably all that was under consideration.
For the last 10 months and counting.
p.s. there is a difference between Sandro liking the thought of something plus htinking out aloud on the forums, and ultimately deciding whether or not it's actually good for the game.
Which this isn't - for the reasons multiple folks have pointed out.