Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 48

Thread: [Potential Solution]PvE Vs PvP in Open Play: Pilots Federation Rep & Restricted Matchmaking

  1. #1

    [Potential Solution]PvE Vs PvP in Open Play: Pilots Federation Rep & Restricted Matchmaking

    Potential Solution for PvE Vs PvP in Open Play: Pilots Federation Rep & Restricted Matchmaking

    The Problem

    Ok I think most of us understand the issue now.. PvE players wish to play in open mode because;
    • They are perhaps fed-up with playing alone
    • The Mobius groups are limited in their capacity to offer a true 'open experience' as all members have to be granted access and private groups have a hard-coded player-limit
    • They are reliant on players administering Mobius or other groups in their own time
    • They don't like feeling 'forced' into solo or groups

    But their main concern participating in open play is that they do not wish to play in the same game mode as player-killers or so called 'griefers' (this is an overly-misused term but hey-ho).

    There has been much talk from the PvE community of ideas such as a 'Open PvE' mode or 'PvE-only flags', with the intention to stop the more aggressive players attacking them, but at the same time allowing them to interact with like-minded players.

    Why are 'PvE Open' mode or 'PvE flags' NOT desirable solutions?

    Despite the popularity of these ideas, there are of course issues with them (probably why FDev have not implemented them);
    • There is no lore reason why any ship should not be able to damage or destroy another ship
    • Dividing up the playerbase into yet another mode could potentially fragment the community more than it already is
    • 'Griefing' would not necessarily stop because players can't be damaged, it would just change in nature
    • Legitimate PvP gameplay pathways could suffer with these solutions (Powerplay, Bounty Hunting, Piracy, Protection Wings, Faction Combat, Community Goal Diversity)
    • Knock-on effect from introducing these solutions would effectively draw most non-combat players into Open PvE, causing what is now 'Open' to become 'Open PvP', which is undesirable to a lot of players (including myself)
    • Players would have yet another method of circumventing player-opposition in Community Goals & Powerplay
    • The notion that the Elite: Dangerous world is a 'Cut-throat galaxy' would likely be diminished
    • Splitting 'Open play' mode up or making certain players off-limits to attack would be an admission of failure from FDev that they couldn't get open working the way they wanted it to


    For these reasons, I believe a smarter solution to the problem must be sought, here is my proposal;

    Step One: Introduce a 'Pilots Federation Reputation' system


    This feature would assign reputation labels to players based on how they interact with other members of the Pilots Federation (i.e players only).

    Reputation Tiers

    This points-based system would have the following tiers (Not visible in Anarchy systems):
    • Legendary (+1000) (Top-end limited to +1500)
    • Honorable (+500)
    • Upstanding (+250)
    • Reliable (+100)
    • Neutral (Default)
    • Unpredictable (-100)
    • Dishonorable (-250)
    • Treacherous (-500)
    • Murderous (-1000) (Bottom-end limited to -1500)


    The tier your commander would occupy would be determined by how you interact with other commanders. Everyone's starting tier would be 'Neutral' and would rise or fall depending on recent player interactions. Over time, this rep would reset to 'Neutral' so players must keep their standards high to maintain a good standing. The reset of rep to neutral would take some time, probably somewhere around 25 points a week.

    At time of implementation, all players would start from 'Neutral' with a clean slate (not including fines & bounties).

    Reputation Gain

    Being given an 'Endorsement' by players who themselves have a high-reputation would boost player rep. These could only be given to the same commander once to avoid exploiters boosting their friends up continuously.
    Players with negative rep could not give endorsements at all.
    Here are the proposed endorsement values;
    • From 'Neutral' Commander : +5
    • From 'Reliable' Commander : +10
    • From 'Upstanding' Commander : +25
    • From 'Honorable' Commander : +50
    • From 'Legendary' Commander : +75

    * Max rep awarded would be capped at +10 for all levels if friends (to stop artificial boosting)
    * Endorsements could only be confirmed while docked, to counter potential 'rep extortion' (threatening players to award them rep)

    Reputation Loss

    Rep-loss penalties would be given for acts deemed dishonorable by the Pilots Federation, these include:
    • Killing clean commander ships without cause in secure systems (i.e not wanted, no Powerplay rivalry or not an enemy in a Combat Zone) : See Murder Scenarios
    • Speeding 'incidents' around stations with other commanders (player moving fastest gets the rep-loss penalty) : -50 rep
    • Using the 15 second 'graceful exit' menu system to log-out during combat (with players only) : -75 rep
    • Killing members of your own Powerplay faction (unless self-defence) : -100 rep
    • After repeated complaints of task-kill-style combat logging on a certain player, FDev could manually set the player in question's rep to 'Treacherous': Rep-loss at FDevs discretion

    The first two points on this list would not apply to 'Anarchy' or otherwise 'Lawless' systems, as they need to remain dangerous places.
    There would be caveats to make sure that rep-loss is not applied unfairly. For example, if you are wanted, and get interdicted by a clean commander and managed to kill them; you would not receive any rep-loss because you were not the aggressor.
    No rep-loss would be applied for Powerplay related kills regardless of ranks or local security rating (though it still would for logging or killing your own faction).
    Also if the victim has 'report crimes against me' set to 'off', no-rep loss is applied to the aggressor (except for menu-logging).

    Murder Scenarios

    We would need a system to measure murder-severity, so it would be a good idea to have degrees of murder (include rep loss if against other CMDR):
    • 4th degree = self-defence (when wanted vs clean opponent) or sanctioned kill (Powerplay) : 10,000 credit bounty & no rep-loss
    • 3rd degree = murder of equal or higher level clean pilot : 25,000 credit bounty & low rep-loss (-50 rep if not Powerplay, Wanted or Conflict Zone)
    • 2nd degree = murder of clean lower-level pilot (all ranks less or equal to 'Mostly xx') : 50,000 credit bounty & med rep-loss (-100 rep if not Powerplay, Wanted or Conflict Zone)
    • 1st degree = murder of clean lower-level pilot + ship value under 100k credits : 75,000 credit bounty & high rep-loss (-200 rep if not Powerplay, Wanted or Conflict Zone)


    So we do not return to the days of bounty-farming, FDev would need to standardise the conversion of unpaid fines to bounty value to say 20,000 credits. This will stop illegal-cargo fines being used to bounty-farm, and thereby allow higher bounties for murder.

    Low Reputation Consequences

    There would be consequences for having a low Pilots Federation rep, these could be:
    • Refuse docking permission for 'Murderous' or 'Treacherous' commanders at High-security ports
    • Refuse docking permission for 'Murderous' commanders at Medium-security ports
    • Refuse to issue a 'clean' status to 'Murderous' commanders in High-security systems
    • Issue kill-on-sight orders to NPC security against 'Murderous' commanders in High-security systems
    • Some faction-types would refuse to work with negative-rep commanders, regardless of ranks, making some missions unavailable.



    Step Two: Give players a 'Restricted Matchmaking' switch in the options menu


    So, now we have a system that can measure how honorably players interact with each-other, we can offer commanders an option in the game menu that restricts which players are match-made with them in open-play (in certain systems).

    The Switch

    This would be a simple two-way switch that could either be set to;
    • No Restrictions (Normal)
    • Restricted Mode


    Who would it filter-out and where?

    How this would work is; players who switch to 'Restricted Mode' would not be placed in the same instance as players with:
    • Rep-levels of 'Treacherous' or 'Murderous' in High-security systems
    • Rep-level of 'Murderous' in Medium-security systems

    There would be a few exclusions to this system:
    • Low security systems would continue to have full player matchmaking, with commander rep-level displayed to all players in the instance (after basic scan)
    • Lawless & Anarchy systems would have full player matchmaking, with commander rep-level displayed as 'Unknown'
    • If a player with a negative rep of 'Dishonorable' or lower switches to 'Restricted Mode', it has no effect and they will still be match-made with low-rep players - this is an excellent way to discourage combat logging.
    • If a player with Restricted mode set to 'On' is wanted in the local area or system, they are placed in the normal instance with everybody
    • Rival Powerplay commanders are always instanced together in power 'Control' systems regardless of rep level or 'Restricted mode' setting


    The potential benefits

    The effect this could possibly have would be:
    • Feeling a bit safer, non-combat or PvE players may return to open.
    • Low-rep players would gravitate towards 'Low-security', 'Lawless' and 'Anarchy' systems, where there would be no-matchmaking restrictions.
    • Forum-rage may subside quite a bit (it won't go away entirely)
    • Pirates would have a motivation to not kill their targets. By keeping their rep high, they would benefit from having access to more targets (No matchmaking restrictions)
    • Combat logging would be discouraged naturally, as the end result for the logger would be that 'Restricted Mode' no longer works for them and they are unable to avoid player-killers



    Step Three: Make running the risk of Low Security / Lawless Systems worth going to for non-combat players


    Dangerous systems have to have an incentive to visit

    With a system like I have outlined above, there would need to be a reason for traders, miners & explorers to go to the riskier systems.
    What should happen is that profit margins for all activities in these systems should be increased. This would include trade profit margins (including rare commodities), bounty vouchers, exploration data and mission rewards.
    Something like this could work well:
    • High Security : Profits have 0% bonus modifier applied
    • Medium Security : Profits have 10% bonus modifier applied
    • Low Security : Profits have 25% bonus modifier applied
    • Lawless/Anarchy : Profits have 50% bonus modifier applied


    Net result is, non-combat players can stay safe and trade in the secure systems relatively hassle-free -or- they can try their luck trading in risky systems for a nice bonus to their profits. This way if they get killed or robbed, the blame can be put squarely on them for venturing to low or no security systems unprotected.


    With a system like this in place, PvE-leaning players would have a barrier of protection against player killers (as long as they stay in secure systems). This way they could have the benefits of Open play social interaction, with a much-reduced risk from player killing. At the same time, criminal players would have more of a reason to keep their rep at a certain level, otherwise their targets will dry up. This may encourage more positive forms of outlaw play (such as piracy).

    All of this could potentially be achieved without extra modes being tacked-on to the game.

  2. #2
    +1
    I like this idea.

    I would add a way to see where a "murderous" player was last seen, in secure space only. So bounty hunters can decide to hunt them (with appropiate rewards). That would be great PvP and gameplay, and those few real actual noob abuser griefers will have to think twice who they kill, because really dangerous and prepared bounty hunters could come in retaliation.

  3. #3
    i dont quite like the step 2.... but i'm ok with that.... +1 again... you have great ideas always!!
    Greedy Raider Channel , Piracy , PvP , Tutorials, Tests , Stupid stuff and more!
    "These days any man who can sew a black flag and get ten fools to follow him can take a prize.
    They can take it because of the fear that I and men like me have instilled in their prey.
    But they can't do what I can do. They're not built for it. And sooner or later, they'll be exposed." Capt'n Flint

  4. #4
    I like it too.

    Don't get your hopes up tho, doubt FDEV will put paid man hours on ripping up their game's current mechanic.

  5. #5
    An all round excellent idea

  6. #6
    And why would people who play 'player killers' (as you named them) stick to these rules?

    Surely the whole aspect of griefing is to go against what others want to have their own fun? So sticking to 'allowed areas' or a restricted 'Matchmaking' would have little or no appeal.

    If this idea did appeal to them, there would be large private groups (akin to Mobius) that would just be for player killers.

  7. #7
    No, this ruins my immersion of an open universe

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post (Source)
    Potential Solution for PvE Vs PvP in Open Play: Pilots Federation Rep & Restricted Matchmaking

    The Problem

    Ok I think most of us understand the issue now.. PvE players wish to play in open mode because;
    • They are perhaps fed-up with playing alone
    • The Mobius groups are limited in their capacity to offer a true 'open experience' as all members have to be granted access and private groups have a hard-coded player-limit
    • They are reliant on players administering Mobius or other groups in their own time
    • They don't like feeling 'forced' into solo or groups

    But their main concern participating in open play is that they do not wish to play in the same game mode as player-killers or so called 'griefers' (this is an overly-misused term but hey-ho).

    There has been much talk from the PvE community of ideas such as a 'Open PvE' mode or 'PvE-only flags', with the intention to stop the more aggressive players attacking them, but at the same time allowing them to interact with like-minded players.

    Why are 'PvE Open' mode or 'PvE flags' not desirable solutions?

    Despite the popularity of these ideas, there are of course issues with them (probably why FDev have not implemented them);
    • There is no lore reason why any ship should not be able to damage or destroy another ship
    • Dividing up the playerbase into yet another mode could potentially fragment the community more than it already is
    • 'Griefing' would not necessarily stop because players can't be damaged, it would just change in nature
    • Legitimate PvP gameplay pathways could suffer with these solutions (Powerplay, Bounty Hunting, Piracy, Protection Wings, Faction Combat, Community Goal Diversity)
    • Knock-on effect from introducing these solutions would effectively draw most non-combat players into Open PvE, causing what is now 'Open' to become 'Open PvP', which is undesirable to a lot of players (including myself)
    • Players would have yet another method of circumventing player-opposition in Community Goals & Powerplay
    • The notion that the Elite: Dangerous world is a 'Cut-throat galaxy' would likely be diminished
    • Splitting 'Open play' mode up or making certain players off-limits to attack would be an admission of failure from FDev that they couldn't get open working the way they wanted it to


    For these reasons, I believe a smarter solution to the problem must be sought, here is my proposal;

    Step One: Introduce a 'Pilots Federation Reputation' system


    This feature would assign reputation labels to players based on how they interact with other members of the Pilots Federation (i.e players only).

    Reputation Tiers

    This points-based system would have the following tiers (Not visible in Anarchy systems):
    • Legendary (+1000) (Top-end limited to +1500)
    • Honorable (+500)
    • Upstanding (+100)
    • Reliable (+50)
    • Neutral (Default)
    • Unpredictable (-50)
    • Dishonorable (-100)
    • Treacherous (-250)
    • Murderous (-500) (Bottom-end limited to -3000)


    The tier your commander would occupy would be determined by how you interact with other commanders. Everyone's starting tier would be 'Neutral' and would rise or fall depending on recent player interactions. Over time, this rep would reset to 'Neutral' so players must keep their standards high to maintain a good standing. The reset of rep to neutral would take some time, probably somewhere around 25 points a week.

    At time of implementation, all players would start from 'Neutral' with a clean slate (not including fines & bounties).

    Reputation Gain

    Being given an 'Endorsement' by players who themselves have a high-reputation would boost player rep. These could only be given to the same commander once to avoid exploiters boosting their friends up continuously.
    Players with negative rep could not give endorsements at all.
    Here are the proposed endorsement values;
    • From 'Reliable' Commander : +10
    • From 'Upstanding' Commander : +25
    • From 'Honorable' Commander : +50
    • From 'Legendary' Commander : +75

    * Max rep awarded would be capped at +10 for all levels if friends (to stop artificial boosting)
    * Endorsements could only be confirmed while docked, to counter potential 'rep extortion' (threatening players to award them rep)

    Reputation Loss

    Rep-loss penalties would be given for acts deemed dishonorable by the Pilots Federation, these include:
    • Killing clean commander ships without cause in secure systems (i.e not wanted, no Powerplay rivalry or not an enemy in a Combat Zone) : See Murder Scenarios
    • Speeding 'incidents' around stations with other commanders (player moving fastest gets the rep-loss penalty) : -50 rep
    • Using the 15 second 'graceful exit' menu system to log-out during combat (with players only) : -75 rep
    • Killing members of your own Powerplay faction (unless self-defence) : -100 rep
    • After repeated complaints of task-kill-style combat logging on a certain player, FDev could manually set the player in question's rep to 'Treacherous': Rep-loss at FDevs discretion

    The first two points on this list would not apply to 'Anarchy' or otherwise 'Lawless' systems, as they need to remain dangerous places.
    There would be caveats to make sure that rep-loss is not applied unfairly. For example, if you are wanted, and get interdicted by a clean commander and managed to kill them; you would not receive any rep-loss because you were not the aggressor.
    No rep-loss would be applied for Powerplay related kills regardless of ranks or local security rating (though it still would for logging or killing your own faction).
    Also if the victim has 'report crimes against me' set to 'off', no-rep loss is applied to the aggressor (except for menu-logging).

    Murder Scenarios

    We would need a system to measure murder-severity, so it would be a good idea to have degrees of murder (include rep loss if against other CMDR):
    • 4th degree = self-defence (when wanted vs clean opponent) or sanctioned kill (Powerplay) : 10,000 credit bounty & no rep-loss
    • 3rd degree = murder of equal or higher level clean pilot or Powerplay Agents : 25,000 credit bounty & low rep-loss (-25 rep if not Powerplay, Wanted or Combat Zone)
    • 2nd degree = murder of clean lower-level pilot (all ranks less or equal to 'Mostly xx') : 50,000 credit bounty & med rep-loss (-50 rep if not Powerplay, Wanted or Combat Zone)
    • 1st degree = murder of clean lower-level pilot + ship value under 100k credits : 75,000 credit bounty & med rep-loss (-75 rep if not Powerplay, Wanted or Combat Zone)


    So we do not return to the days of bounty-farming, FDev would need to standardise the conversion of unpaid fines to bounty value to say 20,000 credits. This will stop illegal-cargo fines being used to bounty-farm, and thereby allow higher bounties for murder.

    Low Reputation Consequences

    There would be consequences for having a low Pilots Federation rep, these could be:
    • Refuse docking permission for 'Murderous' or 'Treacherous' commanders at High-security ports
    • Refuse docking permission for 'Murderous' commanders at Medium-security ports
    • Refuse to issue a 'clean' status to 'Murderous' commanders in High-security systems
    • Issue kill-on-sight orders to NPC security against 'Murderous' commanders in High-security systems
    • Some faction-types would refuse to work with low-rep commanders, regardless of ranks, making some missions unavailable.



    Step Two: Give players a 'Restricted Matchmaking' switch in the options menu


    So, now we have a system that can measure how honorably players interact with each-other, we can offer commanders an option in the game menu that restricts which players are match-made with them in open-play (in certain systems).

    The Switch

    This would be a simple two-way switch that could either be set to;
    • No Restrictions (Normal)
    • Restricted Mode


    Who would it filter-out and where?

    How this would work is; players who switch to 'Restricted Mode' would not be placed in the same instance as players with:
    • Rep-levels of 'Treacherous' or 'Murderous' in High-security systems
    • Rep-level of 'Murderous' in Medium-security systems

    There would be a few exclusions to this system:
    • Low security systems would continue to have full player matchmaking, with commander rep-level displayed to all players in the instance (after basic scan)
    • Lawless & Anarchy systems would have full player matchmaking, with commander rep-level displayed as 'Unknown'
    • If a player with a negative rep of 'Dishonorable' or lower switches to 'Restricted Mode', it has no effect and they will still be match-made with low-rep players - this is an excellent way to discourage combat logging.
    • If a player with Restricted mode set to 'On' is wanted in the local area or system, they are placed in the normal instance with everybody
    • Rival Powerplay commanders are always instanced together in power 'Control' systems regardless of rep level or 'Restricted mode' setting


    The potential benefits

    The effect this could possibly have would be:
    • Feeling a bit safer, non-combat or PvE players may return to open.
    • Low-rep players would gravitate towards 'Low-security', 'Lawless' and 'Anarchy' systems, where there would be no-matchmaking restrictions.
    • Forum-rage may subside quite a bit (it won't go away entirely)
    • Pirates would have a motivation to not kill their targets. By keeping their rep high, they would benefit from having access to more targets (No matchmaking restrictions)
    • Combat logging would be discouraged naturally, as the end result for the logger would be that 'Restricted Mode' no longer works for them and they are unable to avoid player-killers



    Step Three: Make running the risk of Low Security / Lawless Systems worth going to for non-combat players


    Dangerous systems have to have an incentive to visit

    With a system like I have outlined above, there would need to be a reason for traders, miners & explorers to go to the riskier systems.
    What should happen is that profit margins for all activities in these systems should be increased. This would include trade profit margins (including rare commodities), bounty vouchers, exploration data and mission rewards.
    Something like this could work well:
    • High Security : Profits have 0% bonus modifier applied
    • Medium Security : Profits have 10% bonus modifier applied
    • Low Security : Profits have 20% bonus modifier applied
    • Lawless/Anarchy : Profits have 30% bonus modifier applied


    Net result is, non-combat players can stay safe and trade in the secure systems relatively hassle-free -or- they can try their luck trading in risky systems for a nice bonus to their profits. This way if they get killed or robbed, the blame can be put squarely on them for venturing to low or no security systems unprotected.


    With a system like this in place, PvE-leaning players would have a barrier of protection against player killers (as long as they stay in secure systems). This way they could have the benefits of Open play social interaction, with a much-reduced risk from player killing. At the same time, criminal players would have more of a reason to keep their rep at a certain level, otherwise their targets will dry up. This may encourage more positive forms of outlaw play (such as piracy). All of this could potentially be achieved without adding extra modes being tacked-on to the game.
    There's been a significant amount of posts suggesting this in one form or another with a reputation system, but others as well as myself. so yeah, hopefully they will hear it, as almost all suggestions are near identical.
    CMDR Xon Draken


  9. #9
    i like the idea on the rep, its similar to the hero/bandit system used in day Z it would be easy to see what a player is like, without needed a cargo scanner so you can see how trustworthy they are

  10. #10
    Interesting ideas, the only thing where i disagree is the bounty part.

    your idea would make the current exploit even worse than it is now. the exploit that allows the murderer to switch to a sidewinder and get shot by a friend, who then receives all of that bounty as a bonus for cleaning the murderers crimes.
    so instead of that i would again want to see a percentual based system, based on the murdered commanders ship and cargo value. also i would change a few other things

    • 4th degree = self-defence (when wanted vs clean opponent) or sanctioned kill (Powerplay) : 10,000 credit bounty & no rep-loss
      4th degree = Contract-Kill (With a Contract from the Mission Board, Combat Zone or in Powerplay):
      10% credit bounty
      no rep-loss
      (the contractor should pay the remaining 10% bounty once you complete his contract)
    • 3rd degree = murder of equal or higher level clean pilot or Powerplay Agents : 25,000 credit bounty & low rep-loss (-25 rep if not Powerplay, Wanted or Combat Zone)
      3rd degree = murder of clean pilots that are wanted in another system OR have a bad reputation:
      50% credit bounty ± a value based on his reputation
      -25 rep ± a value based on his reputation
      (a punishment for killing a murderer outside the system where he is wanted or killing someone who is known as a bad guy)
    • 2nd degree = murder of clean lower-level pilot (all ranks less or equal to 'Mostly xx') : 50,000 credit bounty & med rep-loss (-50 rep if not Powerplay, Wanted or Combat Zone)
      2nd degree = murder of clean pilot outside of Powerplay, Combat Zones or Lawless systems:
      100% credit bounty ± a value based on his reputation
      -50 rep ± a value based on his reputation
    • 1st degree = murder of clean lower-level pilot + ship value under 100k credits : 75,000 credit bounty & med rep-loss (-75 rep if not Powerplay, Wanted or Combat Zone)
      1st degree = murder of clean pilot + playtime less than X hours outside of Powerplay, Combat Zones or Lawless systems:
      200% credit bounty ± a value based on his reputation
      -150 rep ± a value based on his reputation
      (basically a noob-protection)


    also there could be another one:
    Protector: Killing a player who is figthing a clean commander
    no bounty
    +25 rep ± a value based on his reputation (bad rep = more) + additional rep when the attacked commander survives.
    Commander Name: Lazerus Artificial

  11. #11
    Originally Posted by LazerusKI View Post (Source)
    Interesting ideas, the only thing where i disagree is the bounty part.

    your idea would make the current exploit even worse than it is now. the exploit that allows the murderer to switch to a sidewinder and get shot by a friend, who then receives all of that bounty as a bonus for cleaning the murderers crimes.
    so instead of that i would again want to see a percentual based system, based on the murdered commanders ship and cargo value. also i would change a few other things

    • 4th degree = self-defence (when wanted vs clean opponent) or sanctioned kill (Powerplay) : 10,000 credit bounty & no rep-loss
      4th degree = Contract-Kill (With a Contract from the Mission Board, Combat Zone or in Powerplay):
      10% credit bounty
      no rep-loss
      (the contractor should pay the remaining 10% bounty once you complete his contract)
    • 3rd degree = murder of equal or higher level clean pilot or Powerplay Agents : 25,000 credit bounty & low rep-loss (-25 rep if not Powerplay, Wanted or Combat Zone)
      3rd degree = murder of clean pilots that are wanted in another system OR have a bad reputation:
      50% credit bounty ± a value based on his reputation
      -25 rep ± a value based on his reputation
      (a punishment for killing a murderer outside the system where he is wanted or killing someone who is known as a bad guy)
    • 2nd degree = murder of clean lower-level pilot (all ranks less or equal to 'Mostly xx') : 50,000 credit bounty & med rep-loss (-50 rep if not Powerplay, Wanted or Combat Zone)
      2nd degree = murder of clean pilot outside of Powerplay, Combat Zones or Lawless systems:
      100% credit bounty ± a value based on his reputation
      -50 rep ± a value based on his reputation
    • 1st degree = murder of clean lower-level pilot + ship value under 100k credits : 75,000 credit bounty & med rep-loss (-75 rep if not Powerplay, Wanted or Combat Zone)
      1st degree = murder of clean pilot + playtime less than X hours outside of Powerplay, Combat Zones or Lawless systems:
      200% credit bounty ± a value based on his reputation
      -150 rep ± a value based on his reputation
      (basically a noob-protection)

    Balance of bounty/rep-loss values is something FDev would definitely have to look at in detail. Your suggestions may work better, it's a very hard thing to get right without trials. My suggested values were just to demonstrate proof-of-concept really.

    Originally Posted by LazerusKI View Post (Source)

    also there could be another one:
    Protector: Killing a player who is figthing a clean commander
    no bounty
    +25 rep ± a value based on his reputation (bad rep = more) + additional rep when the attacked commander survives.
    The problem with any artificial way of gaining rep is that it could be farmed by player-killers to give themselves an artificially high rep.

    Players awarding each-other rep, based on their own rep-tier is the only real way to do it without providing a loop-hole.

  12. #12
    Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post (Source)
    Using the 15 second 'graceful exit' menu system to log-out during combat (with players only)
    Great post. Only one thing here and that I've seen in similar threads: Combat logging should be treated equally versus players and NPC's.

  13. #13
    Originally Posted by shizulte View Post (Source)
    Great post. Only one thing here and that I've seen in similar threads: Combat logging should be treated equally versus players and NPC's.
    Thanks. I generally agree with that yes, but 'rep' should only be affected by player interactions in my opinion.

  14. #14

  15. #15
    Why are people constantly trying to find a way to rid this game of any danger? If you don't like the chance of getting killed then stick to solo or private. Stop trying to ruin open play because you don't understand the concept of the word OPEN.

    You consent to PvP the moment you click open. Nothing is going to change that.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast