So the "professionals" pick on the "amateurs". A one sided encounter if there ever was one. Why should the amateurs have to devote their game time to becoming professional?
Steve 07.
Another solution to ganker problem
- Thread starter Condor
- Start date
Steve 07.
Because it does not need to be one sided, there is no such rule carved in stone anywhere. But only you can make it less one sided for yourself, no one in the world is going to do it for you.
And that's a good thing.
Over a certain bounty threshold, the game should be actively hunting you down, especially in high security systems. There are already times where you will be interdicted by system security, so having some patrolling system security actually scanning those in supercruise to assess bounties would be good to have as part of the game. Once they find someone with x amount of bounty/notoriety, they can call for back up as it were and then when the interdiction is successful there will be a heavily armored presence dropping in right with them. It would be even better if it actually triggered a sequence where you are told to surrender or else, in a similar way to being stopped on foot.
I don't think it's necessarily that. I wouldn't want it removed and I am completely opposed to pvp immunity flags being incorporated into the game, I think for some (many?), it seems that it's just too easy for the ganker to just pick off players and basically get away with it scot-free. There are other ways around what is an offputting problem for newer players who want to try open, that can help those who need and, yes, push gankers to lower security systems where they really should be. It's ok that there's an engineer or two in systems such as this, especially if the engineer deals with blackmarket stuff. It's a matter of balance, I've suggested things but so far no-one really seems interested in potential solutions that don't turn Elite Dangerous into Elite Carebear or actually make it more Dangerous for gankers to exist, which should it not be?
I did. Most of them lost or submitted. A few were really hard to pull, resulting in the longest interdictions I had experienced so far.
I found only one player that I couldn't pull even once, no matter how hard I tried: Dangerous.com. He does the spin-to-win thing unlike anyone else I've seen. I wonder what controls he uses. Most PvPers have relative mouse enabled all the time because of FA/off, so I guess in supercruise he uses either keyboard or stick. Either way, it's impressive. But he's an exception. Overall I do believe that the game gives the interdictor a slight advantage, whether intentional or due to bad netcode.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Exactly, paraphrasing it goes something like:
The compromise is expected to be all one sided, in which case it's not a compromise at all.
Last edited:
The reason the C&P system lets people get away with it "scot free" is twofold.
- There's no incentive for committing the crime in the first place, therefore the punishment can't be far beyond that; because
- There needs to be an ability to go "Well I did that, deliberately or not, and I don't like the outcome" that isn't "Potentially lose everything you own".
The first point is critical to making crime an actual viable activity. If an activity has no outcome other than unavoidable punishment, then people probably won't do it, but it begs the question why on earth even have that mechanic in the game?
That question is reinforced by the second point; even if C&P were that way, the people who will be ultimately tripped up by this aren't the ones who do crime on the regular... those players will already have made plans to avoid or mitigate this issue (or even just be content with their fate). The only ones who will be affected negatively are those who accidentally fall afoul of these rules. This literally already happens in the game, countless "I did crime X, now I'm wanted and notorious and can't play the game anymore, game is broken" threads exist out there from people who dabbled in crime and simply had no idea what they were getting into (incidentally, this kinda implies that the current system doesn't let people get off scot-free, if it's such an inconvenience to a one-time criminal).
I appreciate your position and perspective... however my post certainly wasn't considering positions like yours in mind, rather at suggestions like the OPs and a multitude of others in a similar calibre that aim to do nothing more than make crime literally an activity one does not, and can not reasonably undertake[1]. Which, ultimately, is just a suggestion to remove crime from the game.
I'd be happy to talk about reformation of punishments and C&P as a whole, in a discussion that opens up with incentivising crime, because right now, there's next to no incentive, whether it's PvE or PvP, and that's why the punishment aspect can't be ramped up. This is an old post i whipped up ages ago, but it's still relevant (if a bit dated) to the current crime system.... but ultimately, the current system punishes casual/accidental criminals who don't know how to manage their criminal profiles, and is managed well by career criminals, because the rewards of crime come from coming out clean at the end of it, instead of being dependent on wearing a bounty at the end of it in order to access those rewards.
[1] Let alone how crazy-exploitable this particular suggestion is.
Last edited:
Said it before but I'd like to see ship-insurance evolve in a variety of ways.
Basically, I'd have it go up by, say, 5% every time you make a claim and drop by 5% each week that you don't make a claim.
I'd also revoke the ship insurance for criminals with large bounties.
That's not to say losing a ship would be permanent but I'd set it up so you'd have to pay the full price of the rebuy and I'd probably also set it up so that the rebuy for a criminal's ship wasn't available in High Security systems just to create some incentive for criminals to stick to less lawful systems.
I wouldn't set it up so that losing a ship while simply being "Wanted" led to punitive costs.
It'd be far too easy for gankers to manipulate other players into becoming Wanted and then causing them to lose their rebuy.
I'd set it up so the game looked at historical activity and used that to decide whether or not the player should be denied a rebuy.
Basically, I'd have it go up by, say, 5% every time you make a claim and drop by 5% each week that you don't make a claim.
I'd also revoke the ship insurance for criminals with large bounties.
That's not to say losing a ship would be permanent but I'd set it up so you'd have to pay the full price of the rebuy and I'd probably also set it up so that the rebuy for a criminal's ship wasn't available in High Security systems just to create some incentive for criminals to stick to less lawful systems.
I wouldn't set it up so that losing a ship while simply being "Wanted" led to punitive costs.
It'd be far too easy for gankers to manipulate other players into becoming Wanted and then causing them to lose their rebuy.
I'd set it up so the game looked at historical activity and used that to decide whether or not the player should be denied a rebuy.
Exactly.
Said it before but I'd like to see FDev try to rebalance NPCs to match the stat's of human players so that, for example, it 45% of human players are Elite then 45% of NPCs should be Elite too.
FDev could look at stat's for things like DPS, shield and armor on player ships and ramp-up NPCs so that top-tier NPCs had ships equivalent to player-ships.
Not saying this would work "out-of-the-box" so I'd like to see FDev set up a beta-server where they could test this sort of thing out and see how players feel about it.
Bottom line is, though, that if NPCs provided a similar level of challenge to an equivalent player then there'd be no big "culture shock" when playing in Open.
And, of course, there's a good chance this would have an impact on outlaws too.
After all, if the police Annie that shows up is just as dangerous as the Annie somebody is using to gank other players, it's probably not going to be the pushover that cop-ships currently are.
Lol if you think gankers have ever been looking for a challenge...
How many gankers do you know?
Because I know hundreds of PvPers, only a minority of whom are totally "lawful" players, and all of them prefer challenging opponents. Fighting better, more experienced players is literally the only way to git gud, after all.
I don't doubt that there may be a couple of low tier career gankers who never really do anything else besides shooting at randoms, but these players themselves are not particularly good pilots, so if they are actually that much of a problem for someone, that tells more of the victims' skills tbh.
Sometimes you can encounter high tier PvPers ganking at hotspots (for example GCs), but they tend to switch to more challenging targets instantly, as soon as another wing of PvPers show up. All PvPers spend overwhelmingly more time shooting at other PvPers than they do shooting at randoms, that's a pretty clear pattern.
You are describing the difference between PvP'ers, and Gankers.
If you are in an engineered FDL, and you interdict a T-9, by definition, you are not looking for a challenge. Period. I see PvP'ers in discord constantly talking about fighting each other, and they sound like good, fun players. I never hear them laughing about interdicting cargo ships in CG.
If you're in a FdL and there is no other FdL but a T9 and you want pew... You pew the T9, laugh because it probably only costs you three salvos of your PAs and zero percent of your shields and you hope there will be a FdL in supercruise when you finished the T9
Most of them just tend to shoot at everything that moves, because why not. Although if there's a wing of T9s and another wing of FDLs in supercruise, they are more likely to pull the latter, because that's obviously more fun.
This^^If you're in a FdL and there is no other FdL but a T9 and you want pew... You pew the T9, laugh because it probably only costs you three salvos of your PAs and zero percent of your shields and you hope there will be a FdL in supercruise when you finished the T9
Last edited:
And then somebodies wonder why players with other playstyles consider them as jerks, whose main purpose is to ruin play sessions of others.If you're in a FdL and there is no other FdL but a T9 and you want pew... You pew the T9, laugh because it probably only costs you three salvos of your PAs and zero percent of your shields and you hope there will be a FdL in supercruise when you finished the T9
Nothing can stop you from hardening yourself and interdict them at every turn.It would be different if the victims cost was added to your bounty and there was hardened hunters interdicting you at every turn
The hand of God is not going to do it for you.
That's not their main purpose though.
They only want to have fun playing a cool space game. If you give them salt, that's only the cherry on top.