General Change Notoriety

Jmanis

Jmanis
Fake Newts said:
Yeah they nerfed it as well, iirc at the same time as adding ATR. I'll find the stream, it was an... interesting window into their vision.
Click to expand...
Sadly FDs vision particularly for the BGS still seems to be that positive states come from player success, while negative states come from player failure....

What it should be is positive states caused by successful supportive actions by players, and negative states caused by successful player antagonism.
 

Rubbernuke

Rubbernuke
Jmanis said:
Sadly FDs vision particularly for the BGS still seems to be that positive states come from player success, while negative states come from player failure....

What it should be is positive states caused by successful supportive actions by players, and negative states caused by successful player antagonism.
Click to expand...

If this is true, then FD have diminished the game in my eyes and I'm much less inclined to play it.
 

Jmanis

Jmanis
Bulbulunufus said:
I don't see why not both.
Click to expand...
Me neither, though player antagonism should not be ignored as a gameplay path... and it really is at the moment. It's why there's 531 controlling factions in Investment (extreme positive economy state) and just 14 controlling factions in Famine; it's totally unbalanced in favour of being a good guy.

EDIT: And frankly, those famines are probably caused by drought or blight, not player action,,, whereas those investments will all be player activity.
 

SergMx

SergMx
Jmanis said:
PvP murder perhaps, but not PvE murder. But FD don't want to distinguish those two, for better or worse.
Click to expand...
Stop. I don't get it. What do you mean he doesn't want to distinguish?
I wrote in the thread and repeat: I see a hollow and painted square is who did it?
 

Jmanis

Jmanis
SergMx said:
Stop. I don't get it. What do you mean he doesn't want to distinguish?
I wrote in the thread and repeat: I see a hollow and painted square is who did it?
Click to expand...
They don't want to distinguish between PvP and PvE crimes. i.e murdering a player == murdering an NPC trader, in terms of punishment.

Not claiming it is equivalent, that's just FD's view.
 

SergMx

SergMx
Jmanis said:
They don't want to distinguish between PvP and PvE crimes. i.e murdering a player == murdering an NPC trader, in terms of punishment.

Not claiming it is equivalent, that's just FD's view.
Click to expand...
Hmm.
I remember a long time ago I was intercepted by a hunker and I killed him. I was given for him (like 2 million) for which of the NPC that intercepted me before was also given 2 million ?
 

Dillon Fallon

Dillon Fallon
Notoriety doesn't impede anyone though. Implement a system where it goes up when I commit any crime and raise the limit to 100 if you want.

Here's what I do- I get into or buy a clean ship and carry on as if nothing happened. If I'm doing something that may get a bounty on my ship, it's back to the naughty one.
 

Rubbernuke

Rubbernuke
Jmanis said:
It's mentioned somewhat in this very old BGS video a minute or two after the 20 minute mark, but has never had anything contradict that stance since then.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5DGyG6Qwvk&t=1200
Click to expand...

The problem is that it solves nothing- regressing the issue points back to engineering, which points back to ineffectual NPCs. Its also the only way you can rack up huge bounties, which are then redundant since NPCs behave the same either with a 2 billion or with a 200 CR bounty.

If the only way to 'fight' is to push your own faction in a race thats....weak really. Killing is effective, but it comes at a massive cost both in time, money and planning.
 

Jmanis

Jmanis
Rubbernuke said:
The problem is that it solves nothing- regressing the issue points back to engineering, which points back to ineffectual NPCs. Its also the only way you can rack up huge bounties, which are then redundant since NPCs behave the same either with a 2 billion or with a 200 CR bounty.

If the only way to 'fight' is to push your own faction in a race thats....weak really. Killing is effective, but it comes at a massive cost both in time, money and planning.
Click to expand...
That's why i keep arguing for the criminal mission board. Remove all illegal missions from the normal board, allow normal accesss to criminal board even when using anonymity protocols (and for the love of god extend anonymous docking to hostile rep).

Then you have:
  • normal board; missions grouped by faction, offered by faction rep. Mission supports that faction with positive effects. Higher Rep = Higher payouts and harder missions (normal board)
  • criminal board; missions grouped by faction, offered by anonymous contacts. Mission harms that faction with negative effects. Lower rep = Higher payouts and harder missions.

It does leave anarchies in a weird state, but that's fairly easy to resolve (either make them function more like normal factions, or flip the board functions over; normal board missions target an anarchy with negative effects... criminal board offers missions to support anarchy.
 

Rubbernuke

Rubbernuke
Jmanis said:
That's why i keep arguing for the criminal mission board. Remove all illegal missions from the normal board, allow normal accesss to criminal board even when using anonymity protocols (and for the love of god extend anonymous docking to hostile rep).

Then you have:
  • normal board; missions grouped by faction, offered by faction rep. Mission supports that faction with positive effects. Higher Rep = Higher payouts and harder missions (normal board)
  • criminal board; missions grouped by faction, offered by anonymous contacts. Mission harms that faction with negative effects. Lower rep = Higher payouts and harder missions.

It does leave anarchies in a weird state, but that's fairly easy to resolve (either make them function more like normal factions, or flip the board functions over; normal board missions target an anarchy with negative effects... criminal board offers missions to support anarchy.
Click to expand...

The other is scaling back engineering- if you did, suddenly sec forces and ATR can't be facetanked, meaning harvesting security is harder.
 

Fake Newts

F
Rubbernuke said:
Was your news after this, or before it?
Click to expand...

Source: https://gaming.youtube.com/watch?v=4ocPr8DlBQs&t=47m24s
Here's the part I was talking about. Thanks for your link!

Edit: I'm assuming the later additional nerfs came because it is, in fact, still possible to copkill with 10 notoriety, even without exploiting planetary installations etc. Post C&P we were able to get an average of 5 cop kills before ATR would show up, provided a 45 minutes - 1 hour grace period after each session. Heaven forbid "powerful" or "skilled" players have "an exaggerated impact" on the gameworld... yikes.
 
Last edited:

Kyokushin

Kyokushin
There is no crime and no murder. Its only a computer game and its obvious some of people are playing bad guys and some white knights.

And risk should=profit. Safe spaces should be not lucrative, but safe, but earning good money should be connected with a risk of being shooted both by npc or player. It does not matter who will destroy your ship, because in both cases you're destroyed and loosing stuff/cargo and get a rebuy.

There should be no difference on radar who is who, human player or npc. Just ship. It would be harder to find a player to gank in world full of NPC, without radar recogniction, and better gameplay for other side to hide like the shadow in npc crowd to catch a player. Only profits.

Of course a choice is good option, so the option to in menu to mark my ship as player or 'any other' would be great.
 
Last edited:

SergMx

SergMx
Kyokushin said:
There is no crime and no murder. Its only a computer game and its obvious some of people are playing bad guys and some white knights.

And risk should=profit. Safe spaces should be not lucrative, but safe, but earning good money should be connected with a risk of being shooted both by npc or player. It does not matter who will destroy your ship, because in both cases you're destroyed and loosing stuff/cargo and get a rebuy.

There should be no difference on radar who is who, human player or npc. Just ship. It would be harder to find a player to gank in world full of NPC, without radar recogniction, and better gameplay for other side to hide like the shadow in npc crowd to catch a player. Only profits.

Of course a choice is good option, so the option to in menu to mark my ship as player or 'any other' would be great.
Click to expand...
Proposal not to separate people and NPCs on the radar, I have long made.
 

Riverside

Riverside
I guess the proposal here is intended to go some way to address unwanted PvP hostilities primarily. Broadly speaking I would be okay with having notoriety decay linked to some sort of positive karma points score, potentially an imp player could commit horrendous crimes against feds but balance that out with positive actions for the Empire & so on.

That sort of encourages players to not just spend ALL their time being baddies.

But, as others have already said, it's a game & getting shot at is part of that, so learning how to deal with getting shot at is too, even for a pacifist.

I see notoriety as a part of the PvE play though, not really much of a deterrent to antagonistic PvP actions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom