Obsidian Ant NEW VIDEO - Crime and Punishment is Flawed

[Eloy]

Once when I started the game and allied with the Empire I was WORRIED what would happen when crossing Federal space on my way to the Alliance.

You guess what happened. Nothing.
This must not be as already stated in several posts above when you have a criminal status.

Maybe this would give the griefers sth to chew on instead of, well, griefing.

 

[amigacooke]

I applaud those who explain why a feature is not working (in their opinion).

I don't applaud those who pounce on any flaw as another stick with which to beat FDevs.

 

[NeilF]

The new C&P mechanics seem to highlight three things to me... note: This mirrors my comment under the video itself, but I'm now expanding on it too.

1) Poor design of trying to deal with illegal destruction
The new mechanic is just clunky, contrived, complicated and gamey.

Consider if instead it was as simple as a reputation (what ever we call it, Notoriety, or Pilots Federation Criminal Reputation ) which increased as you illegally destroy CMDRs or NPCs. This reputation is then simply rated over a given time frame and penalties applied accordingly.

So it's entirely feasible you could illegally destroy a CMDR or NPC periodically and never even get penalised/noticed (via this mechanic), just as long as your reputation stays low enough over a given time frame.

However, if you continue your murderous activities, then you very quickly start getting more and more penalities applied:-

• More and more stations deny you access. This could following a ramping progression bases upon their security level?
• More and more systems deny you access. This could following a ramping progression bases upon their security level?
• And if you continue, and your criminal reputation gets high enough, you're even highlighted to all other CMDRs as a know psycho.
• Etc...

A pirate "working" at a CG for example, would now need to very carefully consider if destroying a CMDR is a wise thing to do. If their reputation is low, they'd probably get away without any of the above penalties being applied - hence traders still having some threat to them - but they certainly couldn't do it often without strong penalties quickly then being applied.

So your murderous behaviour is treated very organically. The odd random illegal destruction would be ignored. But if you start acting like a psycho, you'd get treated like one.

And your reputation would decay over WEEKS! Not a few hours sitting in a sidewinder outside a station while you sleep.

Note: The reputation in question is simply for the CMDR, not ships, not modules, no hot or cold anything. No going to X to do Y to do pay it off. It's just nice and simple.

2) No orchestrated PvP
We're now 3-4yrs into the game, and mechanics are now being put in to try and tighten up on unwanted PvP. ie: Ganking and mindless seal clubbing etc. This is good. However, what is clear to me is the game needs to offer easy to find rewarding PvP gameplay. Even if this is simply some OPEN only CGs.

But as things like combat scenarios haven't been invested in (eg: we stil haven't even got things like convoy escort/attack missions for example through asteroid fields, or full on orchestrate station blockades), there's little for the game to leverage and offer for PvP gameplay (or indeed Thargoids!). For example, with more interesting combat scenarios, of course Powerplay could be a goto place for PvP. ie: In OPEN a couple of key tasks pit CMDRs from one Power against another, in something a little more orchestrated than delivering papers to X (eg: One Power escorting ships through an asteroid field, with the other protecting them.).

3) Where is any sort of "positive" criminal reputation and gameplay?
So significant effort is going into penalising illegal destruction, but where (after 3-4 years) is any sort of effort to actually orchestrate and reward piracy? By this I mean general nefarious activites (not illegal destruction). Where are the missions, locations, depth to promote piracy and related gameplay?

I've quoted this before. This is an email I sent to some friends when I heard about Asteroid Bases:-

These are the hub of all the new piracy mechanics where you can build up a piracy reputation and inturn gain access to these hidden nefarious location. You can then obtain new challenging piracy based missions and access to more rewarding black markets etc.

Oh! I misread the release notes... They're just like normal stations...

I think the sarcasm in that email pretty much makes my point.




Summary
It truly worries me there's been time for Generation Ships, Guardian Bases, Thargoid Bases, Multi-Crew, and other investments in development time which IMHO offer a temporary interest/distraction, but which after a few weeks or months mostly sit there collecting dust. Meanwhile a lack of investment in improving core gameplay depth is impacting on the game over and over (ie: improved combat scenarios for PvE, PvP, CGs, Powerplay and even Thargoid invasions).

This latest issue with C&P just further concerns me about the design choices and allocation of development effort.


Anyway, I made an attempt at a C&P mechanic (along the lines of the above comments) over a year ago here - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-Reputation-quot-and-quot-Risk-Hot-Spots-quot

And a post about the lack of core gameplay investment (& its impact across the board, eg: on multicrew) a year ago here - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...s-now-coming-back-to-bite-ED-in-the-boosters!

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Couldn't agree more... Point is most people who get into trouble with the C&P are quite often edge cases presented like they are everyones experience... which is just out right stupid. SO many people who play ED seem to focus on a single aspect of the game and then never bother learning about any of the basic mechanics beyond their own tiny little section of play style.

Like getting stuck in a system because you fit a 2D FSD and cant escape.

Its like, while good thinking on optimizing your ships mass to give you an edge in combat, but thats your choice, and if that ship cant get you out of a situation that, arguably, you put yourself in, then, actually C&P is working just fine... take responsibility for your own stupidity. Whats that? 200cr fine for stray fire? Well, pay attention in battle and upgrade your brain to level 2 in perception and... shock horror, lift the your trigger when you think a shot is risky... Oh it was an accident, sure sure sure, can i hit your car with a hammer? and expect you to be happy if i say "Sorry, didnt mean it"

vindelanos So much rep for that.

Exactly the above. I thought the first point OA made about "ships with limited jump range/ships with undersized FSDs" was really off - the player decided to undersize their FSD then do something which was a criminal act. That's not the game's fault nor is it the C&P system's fault - if anything, it highlights the need to plan forward before embarking on your criminal activity.

Gone are the days where you could min-max your ship including the act of undersizing your FSD - not without consequences anyway. The real solution is to not undersize your FSD if you think you'll be needing to pay off bounties and fines. Otherwise - you reap what you have sown.

There's nothing strange about new C&P or misunderstood.

People got to 'accidental fire' with their super weapons. Now they can't blast everything at their sight just because they downloaded spreadsheet and tried to max their ship.

There are bugs. Lots of them. They are seem to be corner cases however. But people are used to careless arcade approach in ED for far too long. Now FD adding screws, people start to moan. News at 11.

But that's should be evident looking at other games. People are not very hot on any punishment for their actions in game. I mean, for their actions. NPCs are just cannon fodder right?

Totally agree. As a primarily PvE player but who has also done some PvP (and not being very good at it ) I have to say I'm perfectly happy with how C&P is shaping up. Sure, it needs tweaked here and there - maybe some kind of threshold value for friendly fire needs upped somewhat before it turns into a deadly bounty, for example.

But otherwise C&P is shaping up nicely.

Who said anything about avoiding. If you put half of a brain cell into your play session then you can either engage in the new C&P system, or not, at your choosing. Like I said, all it takes is the slightest amount of knowledge.

If it's a fine, pay it in the jurisdiction.
Anything short of clean murder, know where your nearest IF is.
Clean murder, you gain notoriety and have to wait.

It really is that simple.

P.S. If you get caught out by having an FSD that's too small for what you need it to do, then I guess you learned a lesson, huh?

Exactly. Totally agreed. +repped. Player who decides to undersize their FSD in order to min-max their ship? They should think about possible consequences of doing that beforehand - otherwise as you say - a harsh lesson is learned.

There should totally be consequences for friendly fire - and 9 times out of 10 friendly fire is avoidable. Personally I have never had an issue with the friendly fire system, but I have seen enough people have trouble with it, to know that it needs reworking. It's a hard thing to balance because most solutions are open to abuse.

I do think there should be a distinction between NPCs and Players though, and that such a distinction would fix a lot of the problems we are seeing here. One example is to have a 3 strike rule for friendly fire against NPC's (there's room to abuse that in Wings of course, which is why it should be limited to NPCs only). First two strikes are fines, third strike is a very high bounty with death warrant. The game needs consequences, but it also needs to be sensible about how it deals with that.

(That said, friendly fire is only a part of the problem with the current C&P system).

I absolutely disagree that there should be a distinction between NPC's and Players. Why should there be a distinction?

That goes against the fundamental core of the game, which is all actions performed whether it's an NPC or a player, are judged according the rules the game is written with. And that includes friendly fire - although some tweaks are certainly needed, but nothing as radical as what you are suggesting.

In short, I disagree with a lot of the points made in that video. I think C&P is shaping up nicely. Some tweaks are required, and I believe FDEV are in the process of doing so. As a primarily PvE player I am completely fine with how C&P is shaping up. I also realised early on that the new C&P system was not intended to be aimed solely at gankers and griefers - that much was obvious right from the get-go.

 

[Obsidian Ant]

Exactly the above. I thought the first point OA made about "ships with limited jump range/ships with undersized FSDs" was really off - the player decided to undersize their FSD then do something which was a criminal act. That's not the game's fault nor is it the C&P system's fault - if anything, it highlights the need to plan forward before embarking on your criminal activity.

Gone are the days where you could min-max your ship including the act of undersizing your FSD - not without consequences anyway. The real solution is to not undersize your FSD if you think you'll be needing to pay off bounties and fines. Otherwise - you reap what you have sown.

Genuine question; do you honestly believe that players getting trapped in a system with no recourse but death, was an intended design decision?

 

[2plex]

Genuine question; do you honestly believe that players getting trapped in a system with no recourse but death, was an intended design decision?

Yep, I'm pretty damn sure that was intended for this case.

 

[CMDR Carbo]

Genuine question; do you honestly believe that players getting trapped in a system with no recourse but death, was an intended design decision?

Why not? I would bet it happens way more often that a CMDR gets blown up and can't afford the rebuy, and has to go back to a Sidewinder. That is an intended game design, after all.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

Genuine question; do you honestly believe that players getting trapped in a system with no recourse but death, was an intended design decision?

Gennar had a theory that the system was designed to take care of BGS abuse as well.

Frontier implements things in reverse order. They build the code libraries first. The last part of Beyond ties all the code libraries together, leaving most of the modules as disconnected components. Classic programmer thinking.

Doesn't work so well, if the customer is looking at a pile of modules, expecting a coherent whole.

"Here's the tires and the steering wheel. We'll have the rest of the car for you by the holidays!"

 

[Obsidian Ant]

Why not? I would bet it happens way more often that a CMDR gets blown up and can't afford the rebuy, and has to go back to a Sidewinder. That is an intended game design, after all.

Getting blown up and having to go back to a Sidewinder is a gameloop. Getting stuck and having to commit suicide actually breaks the game loop.

This is totally ironic, because one of the intentions of the new C&P systems was to remove the suicidewinder exploit. It's certainly achieved that goal - but left open a case where people still have to commit suicide.

I'd be very, very surprised if this was intended design.

Instead of the player getting stuck, I would be in favour of the player having their ship impounded and given a cheap ship with capable jump range. This could work as a "surrender" or "turn-over ship" option at the local station. They then only get the ship back when they are able to clear the bounty. This way, there is still consequence (as there should be), and the game retains a gameloop that doesn't require suicide.

 

[NeilF]

maybe some kind of threshold value for friendly fire needs upped somewhat before it turns into a deadly bounty, for example.

The problem is the new mechanic is just a switch with no reason to it. It quite literally works like an ill consider game mechanic.

One evening you accidentaly friendly fire a ship with 1HP and it blows up, or, you go out and seal club half a dozen CMDRs?

The outcome is much the same, go and sit in a sidewinder outside a station while you have snooze or go out etc.

What has this achieved? Has it made your game time more fun/meaningful due to a simple accident? Has it prevented you ganking?


If the mechanic had a more organic approach to it, such that a couple of illegal destructions over a (long) given time frame were ignored, before serious (bubble wide) penalties then being ramped up, it would be more reasonable and sensible to work within - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...nt-is-Flawed?p=6576695&viewfull=1#post6576695


With the kind of mechanics I (& others) have suggested:-

• Make a simple mistake? - It'll probably be completely ignored by the mechanic in question as it is a "rare illegal destruction".
• Pirating? Well the victim knows you can destroy them and potentially not be penalised if you're rarely doing it - So there's still a viable threat there!
• Seal club or gank? - Then you'll quickly be more and more penalised with your reputation taking WEEKS to decay!

But, with FD's new mechanic? How does it judge/treat the above differently in truth?

 

[Jex =TE=]

I agree with this.

Honestly, I'm not sure how it should be implemented but I think there should be, perhaps, 3 "levels" of punishment.

1) Fines - For trivial offences. A cop ship shows up, you get told to throttle-down, get scanned and then get an inbox message allowing you to pay the fine.
2) Community Service - For high-level non-violent offences and minor violent offences. Cop ship pulls you over and tells you to report to a local station and do missions to pay your debt to society.
3) Destruction of assets - For major violent offences. You're going to get ATR ships coming after you in the jurisdiction where you committed the crime and BHers coming after you as well.

For all the above, you'd get, say, 36 hours to comply with the terms of the punishment. Failure to do so would result in the offence being elevated to the next level.

In level 1 & 2 scenarios there'd be no lethal response. There might, perhaps, be reduced station services offered at stations where the involved faction is the controlling one.
For level 1 offences, maybe it could just be that you're denied access to the commodities market and mission-boards. People don't want to do business with you until you pay your fine.

For level 2 offences it'd be the same, except that the mission-board would provide you with the missions you need to complete to pay your debt to society.

For level 3 offences, the value of the ship you were flying when you committed the crime would be used to decide how extensive the punishment would be, as well as the number of crimes you commit.
If you're flying a billion-credit Corvette when you murder somebody then the ATR will keep on coming after you until they've destroyed a proportionate amount of your assets.
If you swap to a cheap ship and it gets destroyed, they keep coming after you until the debt has been paid fully. No sideycide exploits.

I'd also suggest that committing a crime automatically reduces your rep' with a faction proportionally and that it would be possible to reduce the level of a crime by working to restore your rep' with that faction.
So, for example, if you commit a murder and you're sick of getting hassled by ATR ships and BHers then you can find a system where the appropriate faction has a presence, do missions for that faction and it'll increase your rank (perhaps at a slower rate) until your level 3 crime is reduced to level 2 or even level 1, at which point you can take the required action to pay it off.

Having your assets seized to the value of crime you had done could work quite well with a fine on top (making them seize more). People who sell drugs aren't allowed to keep their drug money, right? Then the more the criminal accrued, the more dangerous it would get for them.

FDev don't implement "I lose" scenarios' though.

 

[Roybe]

An underpowered FSD wouldn't let a player jump out of a system to start with. Now, there is a consequence to the action. Not seeing the problem.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

Please remember that the FSD might be damaged/destroyed, not the same as foolish min/maxing design decisions. Lots of places have no repair facilities.

Having to clear off two hundred credit fines, with time lost is a little silly...

 

[Roybe]

Why not? I would bet it happens way more often that a CMDR gets blown up and can't afford the rebuy, and has to go back to a Sidewinder. That is an intended game design, after all.

Probably not...it definitely sounds like an edge case. However, with new consequences, changes to game play must follow. Yes, this effectively kills the undersized FSD gameplay. Seems like a small loss for the greater good.

 

[Roybe]

Please remember that the FSD might be damaged/destroyed, not the same as foolish min/maxing design decisions. Lots of places have no repair facilities.

Having to clear off two hundred credit fines, with time lost is a little silly...

Bounties...not fines...fines are taken care of when you land.

 

[Codger]

I agree with OA. I was hoping for a simpler, more logical and understandable system, but what we got is a convoluted, complex system that can't even be simply diagrammed.

Jack Shaftoe's done the best job of it here --> https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...ide-to-Crime-amp-Punishment-(updated-for-3-0)

One look at that flowchart tells the whole story. This new system is complex. Unnecessarily so, if you ask me.

The new system adds only annoyance and 'punishment' to the game, often for very trivial situations, but adds exactly nothing to offset the pain.

It's all pain, no gain.

I can live it with, sure. I can learn the rules and avoid problems, sure.

But wow...the system is messy, ugly, and poorly thought out.

That's my opinion

 

[AbsinthSvK]

Not if you're a billionaire. It also makes for dull criminal gameplay.

and what ?, when you are billionaire, you have enough money to buy police, why not. When you earn that money from hard work, why not. When you earn that money from exploit (developers problem, they should step in and wipe that money).

AKF waiting is better solution now? i dont this so.. that is dull criminal game-play.

 

[Ralph Vargr]

Bounties...not fines...fines are taken care of when you land.

Yes, and the local cops will be happy to land you in jail, until you pay the fine. That's what happens around here.

OA started his video with an easy target for Beige Squadron, but the basic point is that the system needs a flowchart to be understood. And it goes waaay overboard for minor infractions.

This was built partially to nail AFK botters, who have an auto-combat log for most anything.

 

[Andovar]

This is the only impact the new system has had on me. All Scan missions now require a trip to IF to pay off the bounty which means a hop to a nearby system dock, pay fine, hop back to the source system to cash in the mission. It's not a massive thing, but it is a boring inconvenience that can only be avoided by not taking the mission. There's no brains or skill or clever mechanic that I can employ to avoid this.

Wouldn't it be great if I could set up a stealth ship, equip it with an SRV built for infiltration (no cargo, no weaps perhaps, but equipped with a time limited cloaking device)? Instead I either take the Python and try to chain a few of these together so I can pay off all the fines at once, or, because I occasionally get bored of always flying the Python, I just don't take them anymore...

Exactly this.
They wanted to make crime have consequences, yet much of the consequence here is just a boring inconvenience.

I'll say it again, murder and aggravated assault should carry a bounty and notoriety and the ATR chasing after you.
Everything else should be a simple fine (in some cases a hefty fine, but still just a fine).

 

[Valorin]

That's quite a statement, considering how much OA has done to promote ED and present his ED vids and thoughts in a non biased way - or at least as unbiased as ED allows, because with topics like this, it obviously broken and no amount of paint can cover the cracks.

So, would you care to give your reasoning for your comment?

Or are you happy with the most obvious "Max factor is a known fanboi of ED and thus stating "he can't be bothered anymore" is probably down to knowing that Obsidian is once again publically highlighting the obvious flaws with the game, and you're just not "down with having it rubbed in your face."

Flawed is not broken. It's that kind of black and white thinking I really don't get.