2.2 Instadeath because of wanted passengers

[NeilF]

What a load of <oops>. Lets look at your bizarre ideological falsification on human morals. Mass murder by regimes and governments even those with a veneer of respectability have and will commit murder with "collateral damage". The thousands of years of human history is littered with it! And then in a game set in a thousand years in the future purposefully set in a chaotic galaxy with a myriad of regimes vying for power your rose-tinted view becomes utterly illogical as for your insistence on "believability" may I suggest your imagination and narrow-mindedness is at fault here!

He actually articulated a clear and concise argument, so as regards "narrow-mindedness", kettle black perhaps?

The point in question is simply the game behaving in a "sensible way" to help in the suspension of belief.

 

[Ydiss]

What evidence is there that someone purposefully picked up a Wanted passenger mission and got destroyed the moment the are about to launch? There is so much shrill hysteria about not being able to grasp a simple game mechanic that accurate descriptions of actions gets lost. It is clear people are carrying Wanted passengers without realising, so if they manage to enter a station without being scanned first time round, pick up additional passengers then relaunch and get destroyed, that would explain that.

I've not done any passenger missions but have noticed several times since 2.2 that you can get scanned on station exit without the warning message. This is likely causing players to perceive they're being destroyed without warning.

It's obviously a bug and is separate to this discussion but I just thought it worth pointing out.

The other point people are making is that no one actually gets killed (everyone is safely jettisoned in escape pods). This is actually a valid point.

So all it really comes down to is if the penalty for carrying a wanted criminal should be destruction or whether it should just be a fine and instant failure of all passenger missions (and their resulting fines).

I think it should be the latter if illicit cargo doesn't result in ship destruction. But if it does then so should illicit passengers. It's that simple, really. It needs to be consistent and I don't believe being scanned with illicit cargo results in ship destruction.

Carrying a criminal is no different to carrying illegal goods. More importantly, carrying a criminal shouldn't gain the same punishment for that criminal's crimes. So the penalty needs to work the same way as with illicit cargo. And it can. For me realism is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is consistent risk and reward and penalties.

 

[Ian Skippy]

So all it really comes down to is if the penalty for carrying a wanted criminal should be destruction or whether it should just be a fine and instant failure of all passenger missions (and their resulting fines).

I think it should be the latter if illicit cargo doesn't result in ship destruction. But if it does then so should illicit passengers. It's that simple, really. It needs to be consistent.

Passengers arent cargo. Ships with wanted people get blown up, regardless if the wanted person is the cmdr or a passenger. Ships with slaves onboard dont get blown up, because the slaves arent wanted.

 

[Ydiss]

Passengers arent cargo. Ships with wanted people get blown up, regardless if the wanted person is the cmdr or a passenger. Ships with slaves onboard dont get blown up, because the slaves arent wanted.

Currently, yes. The argument being made is that ships owned by wanted pilots should get blown up. The act of carrying anything illegal should be consistent.

As it stands now, I see little distinction between carrying a commodity or a passenger in the entire risk reward design. Except the risk is far, far greater for passengers.

I don't see the point in it. Mainly because it's totally inconsistent.

My reasoning is purely based on the whole idea that no one is being killed.