CRIME & PUNISHMENT - Reputation Loss for Committing Crimes

I realise some may not like this idea - particularly those who play the BGS - however, from my own recent experiences of crime (committing some), I think it's definitely needed.

Having participated in crimes against others - and having had crimes committed against me frequently for no good reason, I think Frontier need to hit commanders who commit crimes with influence/reputation loss in the systems wherein the crimes are committed. As things currently stand, and correct me if I'm wrong, it appears that no negative influence/reputation is gained - positive influence/reputation lost - by committing a crime.

I suggest that for serious crimes, a commander should lose influence with all factions in a system unless such actions are sanctioned by the faction(s) that the commander might be allied with in the system.

It seems bonkers to me that a player can be allied to a faction in a certain system (green station, police, etc.) and assault/murder another and the faction sends out the allied police force against its ally - while at the same time the offending commander/ally appears to suffer no loss of influence/reputation. What I believe should happen is that serious crimes will result in loss of positive influence/reputation - going into a negative state if such crimes are persisted in - eventually losing the allied/friendly state (reverting to neutral, and eventually becoming downright hostile - an enemy of the faction).

This could also extend to galaxy wide reputation loss with the Superpowers. Serious crimes committed in superpower territory should decrease as notoriety increases (serious crimes committed). How this is to be done is for Frontier to develop correctly as I don't have sufficient knowledge of how faction and superpower influence/reputation works. A criminal who persists in committing serious crimes should lose influence/reputation in the system the crime was committed, and also result in superpower faction influence/reputation loss - even going into the negative whereby the Superpower becomes hostile to the criminal Commander. Overtime, any negative reputation will increase back to 75% (I think), if further crimes are not committed in that superpower territory and faction system.

Ultimately, this will serve to push such persistent criminals into the Independent systems, and Anarchy systems where they rightly belong.

Again, this should only apply where a faction hasn't specifically sanctioned hostile actions against other ships.

Obviously, where systems have pirate/criminal factions the reverse should hold true - influence/reputation with such factions should not be lost regardless of whether the criminal/pirate faction is in control of the system or not (I'm not sure the influence/reputation should increase with such factions, but it certainly shouldn't be lost).
 
Last edited:
+1

Its a weird system all round. You can rank in both Feds and Empire, there are next to no negative reputation impacts, allies become bitter enemies if you accidentally scratch their paint, 400cr bounties (what?), powerplay allegiance pledge means nothing. Could do with an overhaul.
 
Having participated in crimes against others - and having had crimes committed against me frequently for no good reason, I think Frontier need to hit commanders who commit crimes with influence loss in the systems wherein the crimes are committed. As things currently stand, and correct me if I'm wrong, it appears that no negative influence/reputation is gained - positive influence/reputation lost - by committing a crime.
Incorrect.

All crimes carry reputation loss with the faction (and any associated superpower) whose jurisdiction you commit crimes in.

For violent crimes, particularly destroying ships, the faction whose jurisdiction this occurs in will suffer associated influence loss.

The corollary here is that there's no influence loss (but there is rep loss) for destroying ships in an anarchy faction, though I'd personally argue the jury is still out there... but other BGS'ers may have more experience with that.

Tangentially, while I can wholeheartedly agree with the general notion of more negative effects for conducting "bad things"... as the game currently stands there's a gross imbalance in favour of punishment, versus the benefits of committing crime. If anything, changes need to be made to incentivise crime more. To quip the usual observation, "Crime and Punishment" in Elite Dangerous is currently just "and Punishment". There's an absence of incentive or even activities to undertake to cause "bad things".

I wrote a post a while back about it here: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/c-p-is-back-to-front.449685/

And, for a better understanding the problem, and the evidence, being the lack of negative BGS states, check here: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/fixing-negative-states-discussion-suggestion-thread.519906/
 
Last edited:
Incorrect.

All crimes carry reputation loss with the faction (and any associated superpower) whose jurisdiction you commit crimes in.

For violent crimes, particularly destroying ships, the faction whose jurisdiction this occurs in will suffer associated influence loss.

The corollary here is that there's no influence loss (but there is rep loss) for destroying ships in an anarchy faction, though I'd personally argue the jury is still out there... but other BGS'ers may have more experience with that.

Tangentially, while I can wholeheartedly agree with the general notion of more negative effects for conducting "bad things"... as the game currently stands there's a gross imbalance in favour of punishment, versus the benefits of committing crime. If anything, changes need to be made to incentivise crime more. To quip the usual observation, "Crime and Punishment" in Elite Dangerous is currently just "and Punishment". There's an absence of incentive or even activities to undertake to cause "bad things".

I wrote a post a while back about it here: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/c-p-is-back-to-front.449685/

And, for a better understanding the problem, and the evidence, being the lack of negative BGS states, check here: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/fixing-negative-states-discussion-suggestion-thread.519906/
Thanks for the input.

It's actually more 'reputation' that I was thinking about initially. I referred to 'influence' in error throughout the post, but then simply added 'influence/reputation' following an edit some time later - after realising the blunder.

As far as my own experience has shown me, I have suffered no reputation loss with an allied faction - remaining allied even after committing wanton acts of destruction (in-game 'murder') against fellow space travellers for no reason (besides testing my ship capabilities against theirs - and I've been destroyed more times than I've destroyed in the same manner...).

Being allied is a very small percentage of the 'Minimum Reputation Bar' (whatever it's called). The below image is from a 'Neutral' faction from the Mission Board:

142596


And you have this (an allied faction) from the Status Panel:

142597


Ultimately, if what you say is true, I'd like to know how much time it takes for a player to LOSE reputation with a faction for the crime of murder - can you tell me?

The way I see it, a Commander who is intent on killing innocent visitors to a system (clean commanders) should lose reputation extremely rapidly. One murder should result immediately in the loss of 'allied' status. A notoriety of 10 in said system should mean that the MINIMUM REPUTATION should be somewhere near 0 and the factions in the system should be set to something like HOSTILE.

The result should be that rather than such players being able to 'camp' in the system around stars and other places, any security forces in super-cruise who detect their presence should always be actively engaging and trying to interdict such commanders.

As I stated in my original post, such criminal elements should be forced out of systems (especially High Security) due to reputation loss (with all factions - expect Anarchy factions), and factions becoming hostile (pursued by local police forces when their presence is detected in the system), and obliged to seek refuge in Medium Security, Low Security and finally Anarchy systems (as well as Independent systems).

It should not be the case that such players are able to fly openly and freely, unimpeded, particularly in a High Security system, as though all is fine, attacking clean Commanders at will - and the security forces doing little to nothing to try and interdict or remove such hostile elements (as well as seemingly taking no loss to reputation).

In an Anarchy system, no loss to reputation should occur - if you destroy ships belonging to the faction, or other factions in the same system, that should obviously have a negative effect.

Criminals should not be able to setup a home base in High Security systems. Criminals should only be entering High, Medium and Low security systems to commit crimes - such as acts of piracy - and then return to their own safe haven (should normally be an Anarchy type system) to sell their ill-gotten goods.

I do not think that the current system is too heavy on the punishment side. It's lacking balance on the punishment side, and the result is that gankers and griefers can run riot in supposedly High Security systems with little to no consequences - no interference (interdictions and otherwise from security forces; security forces taking too long to turn up to defend the victim; security forces being totally ineffective against such ganker and griefer ships - highly engineered).

Is it at level 10 notoriety - far too late for the 10 victims destroyed and forced to pay high rebuy costs for simply going about their business peacefully - that the more competent AI make an appearance (ATR)? I'm not sure.

Criminals need to be harassed far more by AI in super-cruise (especially in High Security systems), as well as reputation loss for murder.

Here is a very rough suggestion as to faction reputation loss for the crime of murder (assuming maximum 'allied' status):

142617


The reputation with the Superpower (single jurisdiction) also needs to be taken into consideration and negatively affected, too - I'll leave that to those better capable.

To make things even more difficult for the criminal, I'd suggest that PERMITS that were gained by becoming allied with a faction are revoked upon loss of ALLIED status (or perhaps when a player reaches HOSTILE status) - locking criminals out of such systems.
 
Last edited:
I think I agree that rep should go down faster for murders.

I actually do get pulled over quite a lot when I'm wanted in a system though, which is why I try to avoid it, and pay off bounties using interstellar factors often (which means avoiding notoriety -avoiding killing)

In high security systems, I have WAY less time to steal people's cargo as well.

So, for some, the system does work.

I don't think you could make a system that actually stops those who are out to just destroy shops over and over, often with seemingly no 'in game world' reason, without making a lot of 'legitamate' criminals careers near impossible.

And, if it's only possible to be the "pew lolz" kind of criminal then that's all you would have.

In short, it'd need to be exceedingly well thought out to work in a way that was t overall detrimental to the game.
 
I think I agree that rep should go down faster for murders.

I actually do get pulled over quite a lot when I'm wanted in a system though, which is why I try to avoid it, and pay off bounties using interstellar factors often (which means avoiding notoriety -avoiding killing)

In high security systems, I have WAY less time to steal people's cargo as well.

So, for some, the system does work.

I don't think you could make a system that actually stops those who are out to just destroy shops over and over, often with seemingly no 'in game world' reason, without making a lot of 'legitamate' criminals careers near impossible.

And, if it's only possible to be the "pew lolz" kind of criminal then that's all you would have.

In short, it'd need to be exceedingly well thought out to work in a way that was t overall detrimental to the game.
Thanks for the input.

From my own observations of gankers and griefers in Shinrarta Dehzra, these players act with impunity. The system is supposedly a High Security system. You would not think this was the case when a specific set of 'gankers' are present in a system. I have experienced being swarmed by around 4 - 5 of them all at the same time (no security forces make an appearance). This state of affairs can go on for a couple of hours. So, I do not agree with your assessment of the situation.

Of course, in High Security systems a criminal should find it extremely difficult to commit a crime - that's why it's supposed to be 'High Security'. It should become easier to engage in criminal activities as security levels decrease - Medium, Low, Anarchy.

As you point out, clearing a 'wanted' status is very easy - visit your local Interstellar Factor. This is only possible if you do not commit a murder - otherwise you gain notoriety of 1 and have to wait 2 hours (good).

Still, as we both know, there is a faction of players intent on killing regardless of all other considerations, and not for legitimate piracy. Such players should not be able to freely engage in killing sprees - especially in High Security systems - for hours on end (in the same said system) with no loss to reputation, very few security forces intervening (as well as incompetent at interdictions and woefully under-armed to face the player engineer ship), and ATR coming in far too late.

You shouldn't be able to easily commit crimes in High Security systems - sorry if you feel differently. Try Medium, Low or Anarchy (greater trade incentives should be provided to encourage traders into the riskier systems).
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the input.

From my own observations of gankers and griefers in Shinrarta Dehzra, these players act with impunity. The system is supposedly a High Security system. You would not think this was the case when a specific set of 'gankers' are present in a system. I have experienced being swarmed by around 4 - 5 of them all at the same time (no security forces make an appearance). This state of affairs can go on for a couple of hours. So, I do not agree with your assessment of the situation.

Of course, in high Security systems a criminal should find it extremely difficult to commit a crime - that's why it's supposed to be 'High Security'. It should become easier to engage in criminal activities as security levels decrease - Medium, Low, Anarchy.

As you point out, clearing a 'wanted' status is very easy - visit your local Interstellar Factor. This is only possible if you do not commit a murder - otherwise you gain notoriety of 1 and have to wait 2 hours (good).

Still, as we both know, there is a faction of players intent on killing regardless of all other considerations, and not for legitimate piracy. Such players should not be able to freely engage in killing sprees - especially in High Security systems - for hours on end (in the same said system) with no loss to reputation, very few security forces intervening (as well as incompetent at interdictions and woefully under-armed to face the player engineer ship), and ATR coming in far too late.

You shouldn't be able to easily commit crimes in High Security systems - sorry if you feel differently; Try Medium, Low or Anarchy (greater trade incentives should be provided to encourage traders into the riskier systems).
Ah, I think you misunderstood me, though I didn't explain it well.

I'm actually in agreement with you - I'm also saying that what is currently in place, actually does what it was designed to do, for a subset of the playerbase (players like me, who engage in crime a lot, but aren't "gankers" or "griefers" quotes because easy argument territory..)

I agree it doesn't work at all for another subset who are very very persistent in performing their own playstyle, which includes a lot of ship destruction.

What I'm also saying is, it would be very hard to design it so that it captures that subset, and simultaneously reduces their ability to destroy ships with almost total impunity, while not becoming overly harsh and stopping other, less adament and extreme forms of criminal game play.

That line would be very hard to define programmatically.

I agree though, ATR arrives too late, there isn't nearly enough granularity in the escalation of danger for a determined "murderer" (game term) and the top end of that scale doesn't cause enough of a problem to make a region dangerous enough for them, so as to make them want to leave for a less hot "playground" for a while.

A few thing that would help you suggested.

Interdictions from ATR that were much much harder to avoid (to the point submitting might be a better option, as with many player interdictions) currently ATR arrive, they never exist in supercruise, but should, and should passive scan for wanted status, and interdict.

When a player has notoriety, ATR should arrive a lot faster as it scales up, as should the general security forces, as well as their backup. All scaled on security level of the system.

But the exact set up of this, would be very hard to set up and balance to produce both a "semi" realistic system, and one which doesn't utterly destroy any possibility of "this is kind of ok" criminality.

Its possible to just not care about the cops, which is probably not the best set up
 
Last edited:
Ah, I think you misunderstood me, though I didn't explain it well.

I'm actually in agreement with you - I'm also saying that what is currently in place, actually does what it was designed to do, for a subset of the playerbase (players like me, who engage in crime a lot, but aren't "gankers" or "griefers" quotes because easy argument territory..)

I agree it doesn't work at all for another subset who are very very persistent in performing their own playstyle, which includes a lot of ship destruction.

What I'm also saying is, it would be very hard to design it so that it captures that subset, and simultaneously reduces their ability to destroy ships with almost total impunity, while not becoming overly harsh and stopping other, less adament and extreme forms of criminal game play.

That line would be very hard to define programmatically.

I agree though, ATR arrives too late, there isn't nearly enough granularity in the escalation of danger for a determined "murderer" (game term) and the top end of that scale doesn't cause enough of a problem to make a region dangerous enough for them, so as to make them want to leave for a less hot "playground" for a while.

A few thing that would help you suggested.

Interdictions from ATR that were much much harder to avoid (to the point submitting might be a better option, as with many player interdictions) currently ATR arrive they never exist in supercruise, but should, and should passive scan for wanted status, and interdict.

When a player has notoriety, ATR should arrive a lot faster as it scales up, as should the general security forces, as well as their backup. All scaled on security level of the system.

But the exact set up of this, would be very hard to set up and balance to produce both a "semi" realistic system, and one which doesn't utterly destroy any possibility of "this is kind of ok" criminality.

Its possible to just not care about the cops, which is probably not the best set up
Thanks for the further input.

I don't think it's so hard to do what you suggested. My point is more about loss of reputation. If a player is neutral with a faction(s), it will obviously require less murders to become hostile to the factions in the system - probably around 4-5 at most. At that point (upon losing all rep and factions becoming hostile), ATR should definitely be unleashed.

For the legitimate pirate who only commits, generally speaking, assaults and theft, they will warrant fines and bounties - easily cleared. ART should not be unleashed on such pirates. If, however, a pirate crosses the line and starts taking out victims (murder), then, with loss of rep (4-5 murders from neutral leading to hostile) and added notoriety (to which there should not be an upper time limit for clean commander murders - currently the max expected notoriety cool-down wait time is 20 hours, regardless of murder numbers), ATR should start to intervene in that jurisdiction. This gives the pirate a little leeway as regards the more difficult 'customer'.

The fact remains, reputation needs to be rapidly lost with factions (not including criminal/Anarchy factions - except when attacking their ships or allied players) in systems where murder is committed.

142614


And, as per my other recent suggestion, notoriety should not have a cap of 10 (related to the cool-down time for each clean kill) - 2 hour cool-down for every clean player killed (no upper limit). 20 clean players killed = 40 hour cool-down to 0 notoriety, 40 clean players killed = 80 hours cool-down to 0 notoriety, etc.

While notoriety could, effectively, still be displayed at a maximum of 10 there should be an underlying counter that records the amount of murders and this total should be added to the total cool-down time a player must wait for notoriety to settle at 0.

Reputation recovery could occur either by ceasing to commit crime (recovering over time to neutral) and doing missions - or a combination of both.

(See: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/crime-punishment-notoriety-should-not-be-limited-to-10-possibly-increase-time-taken-for-notoriety-to-decay.521166 )
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom