Capturing Enemy Escape Pods

[Greasetrap42]

Shouldn't we get the bounty when we hand in the enemy escape pod? These bad guys keep getting away!

Maybe get 50% bounty for destroying their ship. 75% for destroying the escape pod. 150% for retrieving the escape pod and handing it in.

This adds a ship build trade-off to include cargo rack and collector limpets.




Ya I know... someone is gonna reply "What if our escape pod gets destroyed?"

 

[HRDiagram]

This time is personal.

I like it, it has a narrative justification.

 

[aRJay]

Or more worrying
What if our escape pod gets sold to Ettiene Dorn?

 

[Rakk Jackham]

This would beat trying to blow them up……..

 

[DjVortex]

This adds a ship build trade-off to include cargo rack and collector limpets.

You don't need collector limpets for this.

 

[IstvaanDCIV]

In my head, Search & Rescue already run a background check on all pod occupants that they get handed in. Said folks may or may not have a bounty on their actual heads as opposed to their ships; in any case, that's not my business since they're S+R's custody, not mine.

I've already earned the bounty for spontaneously disassembling their ship, I'm not sure what the proposal in the OP adds apart from extra layers of faff. Why should my FdL be penalised in its ability to earn boom-bucks due to being too limited in its internals to spare a cargo rack? Come to think of it, Small ships would suffer even worse from this.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Or more worrying
What if our escape pod gets sold to Ettiene Dorn?

 

[Greasetrap42]

This adds a ship build trade-off to include cargo rack and collector limpets.

You don't need collector limpets for this.

That's why its called a trade-off. Whatever fits the cmdr's needs.
Size of rack? Collector limpet controller? Collection time? Location? Expected number of criminals per session? Collecting mats anyway?

 

[Greasetrap42]

I'm not sure what the proposal in the OP adds apart from extra layers of faff. Why should my FdL be penalised in its ability to earn boom-bucks due to being too limited in its internals to spare a cargo rack?

Its not being penalized. Its just doing what makes sense. Blowing up a criminal's vehicle isn't very useful if the criminal gets away anyway. Capturing the criminal makes sense.

Bounty hunters get paid for catching people. Not blowing up vehicles.

 

[Greasetrap42]

"I want him alive. No disintegrations."

 

[IstvaanDCIV]

Its not being penalized. Its just doing what makes sense. Blowing up a criminal's vehicle isn't very useful if the criminal gets away anyway. Capturing the criminal makes sense.

Bounty hunters get paid for catching people. Not blowing up vehicles.

View attachment 398311

Except that in the world of ED there are clearly bounties issued against spaceships. You get the bounty for blowing up the ship, regardless of what happens to any pods that might result from said explosion. It makes sense from the perspective that a ship is an armed asset capable of dishing out military-scale levels of damage. At no point is any mention made of capturing anyone.

I don't think using real-life bounty hunting as a point of comparison counts for much. In real life, bounty hunters are civilians who are not permitted to pursue their targets using military vehicles and weapons (unless I'm gravely mistaken about the limitations under which they operate), and their targets are not flying spacecraft armed with weapons big enough to fit on a main battle tank, but rather are civilians operating unarmed ground transport vehicles. On the other hand, Pilots Federation CMDRs are members of a world-wide paramilitary force that is not only legally empowered to pursue and destroy heavily armed and organised criminals, but can also choose sides in wars and civil wars, acting as mercenaries with impunity.

Of course, if you think that the way bounties operate should be changed to only be issued against persons and not ships, then that will make things a lot more awkward for players since any bounties incurred will be active no matter what ship they're flying. As I understand the current set-up, one can have a "hot" ship specially for doing naughty things in, while still being able to do normal things in other ships without being harassed by law enforcement and bounty hunters. Your proposal would seem to break that?

 

[Greasetrap42]

Except that in the world of ED there are clearly bounties issued against spaceships. You get the bounty for blowing up the ship, regardless of what happens to any pods that might result from said explosion. It makes sense from the perspective that a ship is an armed asset capable of dishing out military-scale levels of damage. At no point is any mention made of capturing anyone.

Hence my suggetion. To make the game better. Because obviously blowing up ships is not bounty hunting. And in the context of the ED universe with disposable ships that cost relatively little and escape pods facilitating... well... escape... , does very little to address the goals of the issuing government or faction.

Was my OP a suggestion? - Yes
Was it a reasonable suggestion? - Yes
Is it a realistic suggestion? - Yes
Does this move the game closer towards a realistic sim? - Yes
Does it make logical ingame RP sense? - Yes
Does it correct an ingame element that does not make sense? - Yes
Does it add gameplay? - Yes
Does it add additional depth to existing gameplay? - Yes
Does it use existing game assets? - Yes

Does it involve a significant overhaul of program logic? - Probably not.
Is there any way this could be abused or break the game? - Probably not.
Does this cause a game imbalance of any kind? - Probably not.
Does it create an ingame logical contradiction? - No.
Does this remove an existing element of gameplay? - No

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course, if you think that the way bounties operate should be changed to only be issued against persons and not ships, then that will make things a lot more awkward for players since any bounties incurred will be active no matter what ship they're flying. As I understand the current set-up, one can have a "hot" ship specially for doing naughty things in, while still being able to do normal things in other ships without being harassed by law enforcement and bounty hunters. Your proposal would seem to break that?

My suggestion is regarding bounty hunting NPCs. C&P rules and overall game interactions are a bit different for players and NPCs. But I suppose if you wanted to extend this to players... then yes... if a player is flying a ship with WANTED status is defeated by an NPC then your escape module gets collected and handed in and along with the rebuy you are forced to pay the fine or go to jail. And I guess the NPC gets paid a bounty voucher. Sure.

Regarding swapping ships, hot ships, etc. I suppose NPCs can do that too. Sure. But for whatever reason they don't. Whenever I find the bad guy described in the mission brief their ship has WANTED status.

 

[Tryohazard]

Yeah I like it. It makes sense and it further justifies the idea of spacewalking and trying to infiltrate the enemy ship.

 

[Rakk Jackham]

Except that in the world of ED there are clearly bounties issued against spaceships. You get the bounty for blowing up the ship, regardless of what happens to any pods that might result from said explosion. It makes sense from the perspective that a ship is an armed asset capable of dishing out military-scale levels of damage. At no point is any mention made of capturing anyone.

I don't think using real-life bounty hunting as a point of comparison counts for much. In real life, bounty hunters are civilians who are not permitted to pursue their targets using military vehicles and weapons (unless I'm gravely mistaken about the limitations under which they operate), and their targets are not flying spacecraft armed with weapons big enough to fit on a main battle tank, but rather are civilians operating unarmed ground transport vehicles. On the other hand, Pilots Federation CMDRs are members of a world-wide paramilitary force that is not only legally empowered to pursue and destroy heavily armed and organised criminals, but can also choose sides in wars and civil wars, acting as mercenaries with impunity.

Of course, if you think that the way bounties operate should be changed to only be issued against persons and not ships, then that will make things a lot more awkward for players since any bounties incurred will be active no matter what ship they're flying. As I understand the current set-up, one can have a "hot" ship specially for doing naughty things in, while still being able to do normal things in other ships without being harassed by law enforcement and bounty hunters. Your proposal would seem to break that?

So. First off. You can’t say “Well clearly in this game it works like this” when someone is suggesting you change the way the game works. Like… it’s not real, it’s a game and … they can change it to whatever, and that is what the person is suggesting.

Second, words matter (?) so, I mean, maybe don’t call it “bounty hunting?” My assumption is that FDev was going for more like a privateer letter of mark because this game is basically Port Royale in space.

But, man, if your entire argument against someone suggesting an improvement to the game is “we already have a sport called football” just save us the time and don’t bother

 

[IstvaanDCIV]

Like… it’s not real, it’s a game and …

Arguments like that are meaningless. None of this is real, it's all a game where we pretend that pixels on a screen are spaceships etc, so it can be used to defeat any argument. I'm choosing to suspend my disbelief because it's more interesting that way.

My assumption is that FDev was going for more like a privateer letter of mark because this game is basically Port Royale in space.

With the little complication that pirate groups and criminal gangs are usually not recognised as legitimate state actors (hence why they are usually classified as "anarchy"), while letters of marque were, as I understand the concept, issued for use against the ships belonging to a particular recognised polity. Although not against specific ships so far as I know, but happy to be corrected on that with examples.

But, man, if your entire argument against someone suggesting an improvement to the game is “we already have a sport called football” just save us the time and don’t bother

I'd be happy if there was more to individual NPCs in this game than a name. But since you're interested in ED being a game, the occupied escape pods in this game are nameless, so more changes than outlined in the OP would need to be implemented in order to avoid exploitative silliness like getting a 300% bounty for handing in two pods from one blown up pirate ship.