Crime and Punishment not fit for purpose - needs overhauling
- Thread starter rootsrat
- Start date
- Status
Colonia... (translator tried its best!)I think that got lost in translation
O7
That wasn't true though. It was much easier to get mats doing legal reactivates, it was the tubers that convinced a large portion of players that Iah Bulu (or whatever) was some kind of magic mat dispensary.
All the terminology has a finality to it. We commit murders. We are given assassination and massacre missions. I don't see escape pods in debris of destroyed ships very often, if ever; their presence would imply they'd need to be picked up for their occupants to survive and by extension that they'd die if I destroyed them. It's always been pretty clear that CMDRs are the exceptions, not the the rule; we survive 'murder', but that's not the norm.
Even if anything in game were phrased this way, what 'wanted dead or alive' traditionally meant is irrelevant as the tradition comes from a time when a body was the only reliable proof of someone's fate. NPCs aren't wanted dead or alive, they are assumed dead when their ships explode. We have apparently infallible, tamper proof, sensors/IFF capable of tracking ship destruction. NPC ships apparently don't get the personal escape system described in the player's guide for CMDRs, nor do I imagine they have the generous Pilots' Federation insurance policy either.
Reuse of call-signs doesn't say much and I've seen duplicate names that could definitely not be intended as the same individual (e.g. change of faction and large reduction in rank within a very short period of time). About the only evidence there is for survival of NPCs is that low population systems don't see spawn rates degrade or population figures shift in response to destruction of vessels, but that lack of demographic simulation is just an oversight/omission.
To this day the easiest way to get certain mid-tier mechanical components on short notice is to blow up transport ships, most of which are non-hostile.
Last edited:
"Lore appropriate" is a bit of a tricky one, though.
The PF has no problem with - in fact, certifies us as accredited and graded mercenaries for - all sorts of illegal activities including smuggling, theft, sabotage, civilian massacres, you name it they'll provide a pilot to do it ... to be hired out to every dictatorship, private corporation, feudal baron, corrupt official out there who can afford the exorbitant fees. The fastest ways to get the accreditations have often been through actions landlubbers might find "immoral".
The idea that they'd suddenly get really squeamish about the idea that sometimes two of their members might end up on opposite sides shooting at each other doesn't fit at all with that.
This is why FD should have (and did, at least to start with) stick to lore and use it. IIRC the blurb now on the games website talks about those who have turned their back on the PF.
Murder is by definition, unlawful killing, being mercenary does not equal being a murderer. I mention this because murder is often thrown about as a term by folk who do not appear to be using the word as it is defined, in most English dictionaries.
The Pilots Federation is key here, they do not condone murder, they do exist to generate trust in peoples own ability to know a pilots worth by their rank. They exist to separate pilots from pirates to establish confidence. Applying lore and law in game play regulatory matters does not strike me as being very difficult where this is concerned. It is a matter of honourable conduct, a massacre mission that serves one power, a power who is willing to both pay for that deed to be done, and assume its judicial burden; In such a case, any pilot vending their trade to achieve the desired outcome, is behaving honourably, very much in accordance with the federations raison d'être. A massacre for the sake of blood lust, is insanity, and directly counters the pilots federation main objective.
Obviously, taking on a mission with human cargo and self destructing, is completely against the pilots federations ethos ... worse really than combat logging.
Higher order logic is required to solve this conundrum, it is the only solution; Until such a system of higher order logic is applied, the law in the game is going to remain very basic and with that very frustrating, pretty much un governable.
For any who are not familiar with the term 'higher order logic', it means that when an event occurs, and simple boolean logic applies, true or false, black or white, the situation can also be evaluated using a higher order logic of logic, another way of scything that there is a graduated or more nuanced response. The outcome is dependant upon the state of the actors before and unto the moment the logical state is polled, vectors rather than atomic truths. The major overall implication of any higher order logic is that it requires a language and a log, a time vector, this is a fundamental for its operation.
The only way that I could envisage such a system being maintainable, would be to use groups, a wheel of groups, applying functions to polymorphic objects as responses to specific events and their conditions at their outset, logical modifiers, before assessing the actors overall topological position within the enveloping k dimensional space. In short, the logical space here being governed by a wheel of groups and their sets of applicable logical functions. Creating a very compact state glob that records a concise account of an actors current state.
To my mind: No amount of discussion about right or wrong on the level of first order logic, is going to make the slightest bit of difference.
The Pilots Federation is key here, they do not condone murder, they do exist to generate trust in peoples own ability to know a pilots worth by their rank. They exist to separate pilots from pirates to establish confidence. Applying lore and law in game play regulatory matters does not strike me as being very difficult where this is concerned. It is a matter of honourable conduct, a massacre mission that serves one power, a power who is willing to both pay for that deed to be done, and assume its judicial burden; In such a case, any pilot vending their trade to achieve the desired outcome, is behaving honourably, very much in accordance with the federations raison d'être. A massacre for the sake of blood lust, is insanity, and directly counters the pilots federation main objective.
Obviously, taking on a mission with human cargo and self destructing, is completely against the pilots federations ethos ... worse really than combat logging.
Higher order logic is required to solve this conundrum, it is the only solution; Until such a system of higher order logic is applied, the law in the game is going to remain very basic and with that very frustrating, pretty much un governable.
For any who are not familiar with the term 'higher order logic', it means that when an event occurs, and simple boolean logic applies, true or false, black or white, the situation can also be evaluated using a higher order logic of logic, another way of scything that there is a graduated or more nuanced response. The outcome is dependant upon the state of the actors before and unto the moment the logical state is polled, vectors rather than atomic truths. The major overall implication of any higher order logic is that it requires a language and a log, a time vector, this is a fundamental for its operation.
The only way that I could envisage such a system being maintainable, would be to use groups, a wheel of groups, applying functions to polymorphic objects as responses to specific events and their conditions at their outset, logical modifiers, before assessing the actors overall topological position within the enveloping k dimensional space. In short, the logical space here being governed by a wheel of groups and their sets of applicable logical functions. Creating a very compact state glob that records a concise account of an actors current state.
To my mind: No amount of discussion about right or wrong on the level of first order logic, is going to make the slightest bit of difference.
Last edited:
It certainly is that! My current kick is engineering an exploration/adventurer that is also capable of reasonable results killing NPC pirates, using my skills learned in PvP to better fly a less able attack ship. So much fun and the battles become epic ... The more that you have to loose in exploration or found artefacts, the greater the struggle to survive.
I don't really look at the rankings but it's always so nice when you do get that message arrive in the coms, informing you of another milestone passed, a new decal to put on the side of your prised vessel.
What I do remember was if you had a scoop and were close behind your target when it blew up there was a danger of scooping the escape pod as they ejected giving you a cargo of captured human which if the police in their Vipers were close by would get you in bad trouble for slaving.I very vaguely remember Elite1 but I think every ship there ejected an escape pod before the explosion. And I think we could buy one and use it...
I don't remember very well
If the distance or speed differential was wrong I think the cargo became meat not slaves but it is a long time ago so my memory might be wrong.
Kumo Burger confirmed in 84!
That used to happen if you had no life support in your cargo bay, then shipped live animals!
You are right about the lack of balance between Piracy and the others roles.
It is so big, in my opinion, that is a shame.
I agree with you. Galactic Penal System is becoming unfriendly and especially to play in "Open".
And I think "Open" is what it is meant to be.
Back in the beginning of Elite (playing in DOS and 52K internet by phone line) it was indeed a "Solo" game. The new Elite, in my opinion, "Open" is the natural way to be in it.
Who runs the game could consider think about it. To "Open" above all.
Another "philosophic" issue, in my opinion, as to do with other main "arm" of Elite, the "Community Goals" which are part of the main history of the game. You can choose to participate or not, but game needs goals done otherwise there's no "progress" and some new things.
To engage them in open, (and in certain way) in community, players have to deal with a type of pvp play (the one game privileges) with lots of players attacking the goal participants.
In open the lack of security should not happen. It´s, in my opinion, against game role.
Urge to lower the time needed to quit to menu, under attack from pirates, at least at "Community Goals" otherwise we can't lower shields and defenses to gain cargo space and goal never ends, and "later" players may yet need to improve their gear to go to goals in open.
We sure can play on a group...or solo...(which is sometimes the same) but I believe who develops Elite would prefer to see everybody "together" helping the development of the in game history.
"Community Goals" as an effort to players to deal with, should have the same commitment from in game and extra game authorities. Crime needs to be extremely hard to compensate. Pirates can't continue to have his attitude rewarded.
I'm not against pvp, despite I never had that practice and I prefer always retire to cruise or to menu.
Pvp and pve are styles of gaming. A style does not admit discussion about itself.
But is very said to participate in "Community Goals" in open and real community, as game balance is now, and it becomes a certain pain that leaves that takes me to go play another game (in and with my little "Game Friends" community).
Hope there is a lot of players with the same complains and someone in "command" find shares our opinions and change things. And "Open" is what sells better Elite too! (I believe)
But this is like life and politic and there's different ways to be in them. So I vote against the modern times "disease" "dystopia" style, and having the power game has to have influence people who play it, I vote for devs to help in finding a cure or a sustainable behave between "Community" and "every man for himself".
The ones with lots of resources and interests, who today are promising us the Moon, Mars, the Stars (Astropia) and etc, should first promise us an habitable Earth.
Last edited:
Because the gameplay of escorting someone is worth more to some people. I've been to a lot of trade CGs, usually with no intention of hauling any cargo...fighting pirates and 'terrorists', often involving running interference for or escorting people, was usually why my CMDR was there.
Most of what I've done at trade CGs looks something like this:
Ah, I must have missed the reference to that game.
I would be having more fun if the typical high-ranked NPC in a combat ship was a significant threat to my CMDR.
I don't agree.
It's a barrier to the acquisition of several ship and the gameplay associated with them; which can be significant in a game built around flying spaceships.
I've never personally found it to be that much of an issue, but my play-style resulted in my CMDR (who also started with a Shinrarta permit) in having these ranks before the ships that required them existed. However, there are plenty of players not interested in what interests me, who would never gain these ranks organically, and have to go out of their way to engage in gameplay they do not enjoy, to eventually experience what they really want. Not making any judgements on these barriers, but they definitely exist and it absolutely limits gameplay.
Plus, you get the bounty for destroying their ship, not their person. Same with CMDRs.
I think the point, as made by others further up, is that frontier design the NPCs to have a certain ‘reasonable’ level of skill, but they could, if frontier so desired, be unbeatable. I remember a comment years ago by frontier where they said that ii isn’t difficult to make a skilled npc, but it is difficult to give it the right skill to be a satisfying opponent for an average player.
The game has been around for a while now and there are plenty of players that find ship combat against NPCs to be easy, even in a high CZ, where the NOCs are engineered.
There is of course a sliding scale of NPC opponent expertise that relates to player combat rank, but it would be nice in my opinion to see the top end of the scale extended to a level which is beyond any player. The new power play of course would be an opportunity for this (what if I am aligned to a power and I stray into the home system of an opposing power and then start attacking them).
Frontier have shown a strangely heavy hand when it comes to nerfing or buffing certain aspects to do with payouts or engineering, but have been very reticent about combat, which has been limited to thargoids.
If you two want to have a private conversation, there are other places, until then we are all entitled to comment, at the risk of confusion ;-)
Wasn’t it?As long as it's civilised
rootsrat
Volunteer Moderator
- Status