A group player's experiment in Open as regards the new crime & consequence mechanics.

[fergal]

Piracy is so awful at making money because;

You forgot to mention when ships have a point defense turret on the bottom of their ship.

Piracy is still (is the game really 6 months old now?) basically non existent. I don't mean players don't do it, I mean the game really doesn't have the tools for it. Everything Jordan said is spot on.

As I see it there are basically 4 ways, or reasons for lack of a better word, to attack another player, call it PvP if you like:
1) They are wanted and you want their bounty
2) They are on the other side at a combat zone
3) You want to steal some/all of their goods (what I call piracy)
4) None of the above (doesnt matter why, might just be for lulz, they might be in YOUR system, whatever)

Number 1 is hard to do. Finding wanted players is difficult.
Number 2 works fine for a community goal. Otherwise its not that easy to get players to fight at a CZ.
Number 3 is painful, you have to really like the idea of being a pirate to put yourself through it.
Number 4 is the easiest option to shoot at actual players.

Until piracy is made more viable and bounty hunting players is easier to do the majority of "pvp" will be for seemingly random (or non existent) reasons.

 

[Globusdiablo]

...Not even a "mwahahaha!" across the comms first so he could say it was role-playing a psycho....

Tl; dr.

Sorry Sandmann, made it half way. But I surely recognize the quote above.

Could you please boil the gist of it down to say 5 lines? Please?

 

[Kerrec Snowmane]

There is a fundamental divide among the two groups in this thread, and it comes down to risk threshold. One group, that is risk averse, thinks that "harsh" penalties need to be put in the game, and that they will work. The other group, that is not risk averse, thinks that "harsh" penalties won't do anything at all, and just complicates the game for nothing.
.
The way I see it, there are 2 kinds of killers:
.
1) Opportunists, that are risk averse and don't want to be a target. They choose who and when to fight, always making sure they have the upper hand. Then they "undo" their consequences. That means in the current system, they pay off their bounty. Or in the new proposed system, they leave the system so they don't fly with a wanted flag.
.
2)Thrill seekers. These are not risk averse, and the idea of being hunted is exciting. Facing a competent enemy is what they want. Bring it on! Whatever criminality system is put in place in the game, they won't care. Wanted in one system, wanted in many systems... denied docking at most stations... don't care. In their minds, their opponents have the choice to fight back, or die.
.
With respect to group 1, the Opportunists, there is another fundamental divide among people posting in this thread. There are people who think an Opportunist leaving a system for 7 days is a WIN. And there are people who think an Opportunist evading a punishment by leaving is a FAIL. It is my opinion that the second group are the type of people that will never be happy until the gameplay is so convoluted or penalizing to any form of gameplay but their own. And I am obviously opposed to that kind of approach.
.
With respect to group 2, FDev's solution or Sandmann's solution doesn't make one bit of difference. They are equally ineffective.
.
So in conclusion, FDev's solution will already force the Opportunists to leave a system, thereby giving the system's inhabitants a week long reprieve. No need to complicate the game mechanisms further. And as I have said, the Thrill Seekers will not be stopped by anything. So what GAIN is there to the over complication proposed by the OP?

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

You forgot to mention when ships have a point defense turret on the bottom of their ship.

I would categorize that under limpets being terrible. Not many players use point defense turrets, it's more an npc thing. But you're right, It's so bad you can't pirate an npc with a good ship and a high rating. They usually have 4 point defense turrets. I think high class limpets should be able to be fired rapidly. One limpet at a time won't get through a few point defense, but 5 might.

Piracy is still (is the game really 6 months old now?) basically non existent. I don't mean players don't do it, I mean the game really doesn't have the tools for it. Everything Jordan said is spot on.

As I see it there are basically 4 ways, or reasons for lack of a better word, to attack another player, call it PvP if you like:
1) They are wanted and you want their bounty
2) They are on the other side at a combat zone
3) You want to steal some/all of their goods (what I call piracy)
4) None of the above (doesnt matter why, might just be for lulz, they might be in YOUR system, whatever)

Number 1 is hard to do. Finding wanted players is difficult.
Number 2 works fine for a community goal. Otherwise its not that easy to get players to fight at a CZ.
Number 3 is painful, you have to really like the idea of being a pirate to put yourself through it.
Number 4 is the easiest option to shoot at actual players.

Until piracy is made more viable and bounty hunting players is easier to do the majority of "pvp" will be for seemingly random (or non existent) reasons.

This is definitely true, it's way easier to just flat out kill someone than to steal cargo or find a wanted player. If those two were fixed you'd see a massive drop in random killings. Player who want pvp, will be able to flock to one of the professions that can make money off of it. The only thing better than doing what you love, is getting paid for doing what you love.

 

[xkjacob]

Mentioning carebears when countering an argument about crime and punishment (or anything else for that matter) is the Elite equivalent of Godwin's Law (imo).

I disagree. Carebear isn't an insult, but a game play design.
I came from a game long ago that created two zones tramurel and felluca.
One was carebear, one was effectively open.
Carebear zones were great for learning the game, gathering resources and having civil events.
The felluca zone, which was a mirror of tramurel, was where you went for excitement.
What my issue is a lot of the "difficult" parts of the game that make the game are being contested. As follows;
- automate hyper space
- make docking easier
- make eagles as good as anacondas
- reduce/remove insurance cost
- PvP flags
Those are threads that have popped up recently.
It is not my intention to insult when using the term carebear, it is a description of the environment.
I'm sorry if that was insulting to you.

 

[Sandmann]

Tl; dr.

Sorry Sandmann, made it half way. But I surely recognize the quote above.

Could you please boil the gist of it down to say 5 lines? Please?

LOL fair enough, it IS a wall of text. Cmdr Vizvayu did a pretty good job of summarising it into dot points in post #169 on page 12 (your might have a different post number since I've ignored two people who've posted quite a bit in this thread and annoyed me). I'll cut & paste their summary into the original post for reference, and here for an update of the basic ideas.

Ok, in an attempt to try and refocus the thread on the original topic I made an extract of my interpretation of the OP:

1- Differentiate between lethal and non-lethal crimes.
2- Add a third legal status: Fugitive. Valid for all major factions.
3- Apply fugitive status to players who commit lethal crimes.
4- Fugitive status should last for about 12 in-game hours in the same game mode, with a minimum duration of about 7 days. After that it will become a Fine.
5- Bounties and Fines will stay mostly as they are but require X hours of gameplay in the same game mode, with a minimum duration of about 12 hours.
6- Upgrade the "Report crimes against me" option: Allow reporting all crimes, only murder or nothing.
7- New filters for creating player groups: Allow lawful, minorly criminal, lethal, truly anarchic.

- - - Updated - - -

Not many players use point defense turrets, it's more an npc thing. But you're right

I don't know about that... I pretty much always have one stuck on the outside of my ship someplace. It's rare that I don't have a spare slot, and it's a no-brainer for the rare occasions where you see limpets, missiles etc - means you can just ignore them and keep doing what you were doing. It's like "it costs very little to buy, has no disadvantages to having on the ship, and occasionally is helpful, so why not have it?". It's not my first priority, but it's something I always put on... it's like taking a small first aid kit when you travel overseas... you might never use it but it costs stuff all and if you DO want it it's nice to have.

 

[Globusdiablo]

LOL fair enough, it IS a wall of text. Cmdr Vizvayu did a pretty good job of summarising it into dot points in post #169 on page 12....

Thanks Sandmann and Vizvayu. I agree completely. These suggestions could go a long way in making the universe more "realistic" (cause and effect)...

 

[Slamhamster]

Just put the rebuy cost on the aggressor instead of the victim. After all, you don't usually pay for your own replacement car if an incident isn't your fault, you claim off the other drivers policy.

You now have a free replacement ship, the attackers rebuy just went up by the rebuy cost of your ship.

Naturally this only applies when a clean player is attacked in a high security system, the amount of rebuy transferred to the attacker could be on a sliding scale based on system security rating.