Crime Update Discussion

[kingchub]

Just ban them.

and if new players come and commit the same crimes, they should be banned as well? what if some people petition their bans and win for reasons. then there is a cascade of h8 coming at FD for not treating eveyone the same.

X guy was greifing by rammming but u let him back in why not us etc?

i think they have to excercise caution with who they ban and why.

 

[MrReynolds]

Since I'm a good boy I don't get fines etc often. I would love a little clarification on the proposed new wanted status please.

I'm in the Zaonce RES, collecting bountys for the Alliance. I shot a pirate too early (totally my fault - no worries). I got a wanted status. 300 cr. Hey ho. Went back to the station and paid it off. Cool.

In the planned new system, would that be me out of the community goal for the week as I would be wanted for the whole week?

Little bit confused as it was only a little bit of pre-emptive fire. Didn't kill him or anything. Seems REALLY harsh if this is going to be the case.
Thanks.

EDIT: Happened again. Red blip shooting at me & wanted. Shot at it..........I got wanted........................erm.....and I killed it by mistake as it was a ickle Eagle on it's last legs. Back to Station. Again.

 

[Zueuk]

I would say that it is obvious that confirmation is needed or you will get a bounty,

Obviously it is NOT obvious for me, and for a number of other players.

as per micheals response in the dev update thread that if we do not wait for confirmation then a bounty will be issued and so that is the way the system is designed to work...

And that's why I'm saying that, if this is designed that way - then it is a bad design.

It is not realistic. It is unrealistic enough to be perceived as a bug.

It's nothing but a hassle. It is not fun. It adds nothing to the gameplay experience. It must go.

 

[Javert]

Obviously it is NOT obvious for me, and for a number of other players.



And that's why I'm saying that, if this is designed that way - then it is a bad design.

It is not realistic. It is unrealistic enough to be perceived as a bug.

It's nothing but a hassle. It is not fun. It adds nothing to the gameplay experience. It must go.

This argument has been done to death in other threads. The solution chosen by the devs at this time is that you have to have confirmed "permission to engage" before you fire on any other ship. It only takes a couple of seconds for the scan to happen whether someone is wanted or not, and frankly, if you've taken the trouble to fly around and be 100% sure that someone is shooting at the police (rather than shooting at the ship that happens to be just behind the police in the 2 seconds you are waiting for your scan to complete, or possibly shooting at t rogue police ship that has gone bad), you could more quickly just scan them anyway.

I do get the argument that there are a few players who feel aggrieved that they are totally sure another ship is wanted, and they fire on it, and end up with a bounty, and then you turn out to be correct that they were wanted, but the devs have chosen that in the Elite world you have to complete the initial short scan before you can open fire (permission to fire).

If they chose another way, and said OK, you can fire on any ship that you like, and if that ship happens to be wanted by luck, you won't get a fine or bounty, would that make the game worse? I'm not sure - I guess I would just go along with it. However my game is not ruined by the current solution either - I understand it, I understand the consequences, and it's fine for me. It doesn't bother me at all.

The other ways to resolve this dispute
- to say that when you target a ship, the information whether it's wanted or not in the current system appears instantly rather than after 2-3 seconds. However I think the idea from the devs is that this suspense of having to wait to find out about another ship is something that the devs believe is, on balance, a good thing that many players like.
- Your scan to determine whether a player is wanted or not does not require keeping the player in your front view sights, but just to target them. Again, I think this is not necessarily something that makes total sense, but something that the devs think is fun in the game.

I suggest we program the "legal appeals" module. If you feel you have been unfairly given a bounty, you can launch a legal appeal when you return to the station, and there is a whole sub game around the legal process and the forms you have to fill in, videos you have to present, etc, to prove that you knew that other ship was wanted, with cut scenes from the legal courts of the local minor faction and wigs and everything. However, your ship will be clamped with a big yellow clamp pending the resolution of the dispute...

 

[Zueuk]

Ok let's go over it once again:

1. This is counter-intuitive. If somebody got a price on his head thet means that people are encouraged to kill him. If somebody kills him by accident - the worst thing can happen is not getting the bounty, but no way this should be punished, period.

2. This is not logical anyway. Nobody in the game world knows that I scanned the target or not - except our personal computer that runs the game. The current implementation just screams "the game world is not real!", this surely qualifies as immersion breaking.

If they chose another way, and said OK, you can fire on any ship that you like, and if that ship happens to be wanted by luck, you won't get a fine or bounty, would that make the game worse?

Just like in the real world? Of course it will make the game world more believable.

However I think the idea from the devs is that this suspense of having to wait to find out about another ship is something that the devs believe is, on balance, a good thing that many players like.

"suspense of having to wait" for scanner,
"suspense of having to wait" for discovery scanner,
"suspense of having to wait" for docking lifts,
"suspense of having to wait" for anything else -
is NOT my idea of having fun, sorry.

But suspence of shooting the guy that you are sure is wanted, and then seeing that you were right is definitely more risky & rewarding.

 

[Rankaze]

Since I'm a good boy I don't get fines etc often. I would love a little clarification on the proposed new wanted status please.

I'm in the Zaonce RES, collecting bountys for the Alliance. I shot a pirate too early (totally my fault - no worries). I got a wanted status. 300 cr. Hey ho. Went back to the station and paid it off. Cool.

In the planned new system, would that be me out of the community goal for the week as I would be wanted for the whole week?

Little bit confused as it was only a little bit of pre-emptive fire. Didn't kill him or anything. Seems REALLY harsh if this is going to be the case.
Thanks.

EDIT: Happened again. Red blip shooting at me & wanted. Shot at it..........I got wanted........................erm.....and I killed it by mistake as it was a ickle Eagle on it's last legs. Back to Station. Again.

Yes, you would have a bounty and be wanted for 7 days under the new system as described.

 

[Rankaze]

Ok let's go over it once again:

1. This is counter-intuitive. If somebody got a price on his head thet means that people are encouraged to kill him. If somebody kills him by accident - the worst thing can happen is not getting the bounty, but no way this should be punished, period.

2. This is not logical anyway. Nobody in the game world knows that I scanned the target or not - except our personal computer that runs the game. The current implementation just screams "the game world is not real!", this surely qualifies as immersion breaking.

Your ship is tattling on you. It is the only way to explain it.

Now, as someone who grew up in Texas, having an environment in which such a thing occurs described as being like the Wild West is comical. It's like the gunslinger's horse reporting him to the sherrif! But that is beside the point.

That said, I assure you that fringe operators in a universe like this one would find ways to override that functionality! Do you think Boba Fett's ship tattles on him if he shoots someone he's not supposed to? I think not.

This is the point where the logic of the system breaks down. The only entities that are aware that you had not fully scanned that target before you fired are you and your ship. So, clearly, you are getting a bounty because your own ship is reporting you! I would expect black market computer modules to crop up in starports everywhere that disable the function (of course, they might be illegal, but detecting one would not be easy, either).

 

[Javert]

Ok let's go over it once again:

1. This is counter-intuitive. If somebody got a price on his head thet means that people are encouraged to kill him. If somebody kills him by accident - the worst thing can happen is not getting the bounty, but no way this should be punished, period.

2. This is not logical anyway. Nobody in the game world knows that I scanned the target or not - except our personal computer that runs the game. The current implementation just screams "the game world is not real!", this surely qualifies as immersion breaking.

Just like in the real world? Of course it will make the game world more believable.
"suspense of having to wait" for scanner,
"suspense of having to wait" for discovery scanner,
"suspense of having to wait" for docking lifts,
"suspense of having to wait" for anything else -
is NOT my idea of having fun, sorry.

But suspence of shooting the guy that you are sure is wanted, and then seeing that you were right is definitely more risky & rewarding.

You are right in most of this in that it's a valid point of view. I guess all I can say then is that maybe this isn't the right game for you.

In the real world, your right to respond with lethal force (or any force) to someone else committing a crime if you are not one of the authorities is actually pretty limited in most countries, and you should be very careful about shooting somebody that you are sure is a criminal in the real world as well - I'm not sure where you are from in the real world, but in the UK where I am from, the police do not take kindly to vigilante type activities. In the UK if you attack someone on the street that they turn out to be the no 1 most wanted person in the country, trust me when I tell you that you will not get away with it - you will be treated as if you attacked someone randomly on the street.

Now I'm sure you will respond by saying that this is more like you see a person on the street pulling a gun and shooting at a police officer and you therefore shoot them. Firstly, I could say how do you know it isn't a villain dressed up as a police officer and the person you saw is an undercover police officer tracking down the criminal gang who like to disguise themselves as police. You should not let your immersion in the game world be overridden by your perception of the programming limitations of what's been done in the game so far.

This has been a theme on another thread last week where the argument was that the other ship was definitely wanted "because every ship that exhibits behavior x in the game and posts y quote on the comms screen is always wanted". That might be true in the programming of the game today, but it's not true in the game universe or our imagination, and it might not be true when the next upgrade rolls out. The person making this argument was stating that their immersion was broken, and yet their argument was predicated on the fact that they had found a pattern in the programming of the game that they were exploiting to know that an NPC was wanted....

Bottom line - if every single ship in the game is a unique character behaving in their own unique way, you can't be 100% sure they are wanted. You might be able to figure it out in the current implementation of the game within the limitations of the current programming, but Elite has partly always been about immersing yourself in an imaginary galaxy - a galaxy where maybe that one police ship that's being attacked is part of another story that you don't know anything about - perhaps a galaxy where one day the authority ship will come up "wanted"...

I'm sure that won't suit some, but I think quite a few of us like to think of it that way.

 

[Beauseant]

***So I do a lot of work for Btarsucks their competition Cafe Caligula becomes very upset with me because I'm indirectly working against them by doing side jobs for Barstucks.

Now I have broken no laws but the people at Cafe Caligula get so upset at me they declare me a Hostile enemy. (Seems a little drastic)

So I'm out shopping at the local Recreational Entertainment Store and someone loyal to the Cafe Caligula company walks up and starts stabbing me. In the middle of a busy store. With cops all around.

No one considers him to be breaking the law (he never gains a wanted status or I don't take the time to check his ID and phone the police station to make sure I'm ok to attack him back) and as soon as I defend myself I'm breaking the law and all the cops and little old grandmas that were ignoring the situation until now start shooting at me and hitting me with their purse.***

This is exactly how the game has been working for me and many others lately.

In no universe I've seen but this one is someone allowed to attack an innocent person and the victim gets in trouble for defending himself.

 

[Rankaze]

You are right in most of this in that it's a valid point of view. I guess all I can say then is that maybe this isn't the right game for you.

In the real world, your right to respond with lethal force (or any force) to someone else committing a crime if you are not one of the authorities is actually pretty limited in most countries, and you should be very careful about shooting somebody that you are sure is a criminal in the real world as well - I'm not sure where you are from in the real world, but in the UK where I am from, the police do not take kindly to vigilante type activities. In the UK if you attack someone on the street that they turn out to be the no 1 most wanted person in the country, trust me when I tell you that you will not get away with it - you will be treated as if you attacked someone randomly on the street.

Now I'm sure you will respond by saying that this is more like you see a person on the street pulling a gun and shooting at a police officer and you therefore shoot them. Firstly, I could say how do you know it isn't a villain dressed up as a police officer and the person you saw is an undercover police officer tracking down the criminal gang who like to disguise themselves as police. You should not let your immersion in the game world be overridden by your perception of the programming limitations of what's been done in the game so far.

This has been a theme on another thread last week where the argument was that the other ship was definitely wanted "because every ship that exhibits behavior x in the game and posts y quote on the comms screen is always wanted". That might be true in the programming of the game today, but it's not true in the game universe or our imagination, and it might not be true when the next upgrade rolls out. The person making this argument was stating that their immersion was broken, and yet their argument was predicated on the fact that they had found a pattern in the programming of the game that they were exploiting to know that an NPC was wanted....

Bottom line - if every single ship in the game is a unique character behaving in their own unique way, you can't be 100% sure they are wanted. You might be able to figure it out in the current implementation of the game within the limitations of the current programming, but Elite has partly always been about immersing yourself in an imaginary galaxy - a galaxy where maybe that one police ship that's being attacked is part of another story that you don't know anything about - perhaps a galaxy where one day the authority ship will come up "wanted"...

I'm sure that won't suit some, but I think quite a few of us like to think of it that way.

Well, the problem is that the developers seem to want to have it both ways. The want a frontier justice ."Wild West" bounty system, but restrictive not-at-all-Wild-West rules about how you can go about the business of collecting those bounties.

In the Wild West, the gunslinger lived by shooting first! If a man with a gun threatened him, he shot that man down before that threat could become action. This is still reflected in the laws of those once-frontier states today... in Texas, if an armed man witbout a badge or other legal authority brandishes a weapon and threatens me or someone else in my presence, and I shoot him, that's justifiable homicide (self-defense or defense of a third party). I am, of course, accountable for proving that he took those actions and that be was armed, and if I'm unable to prove those things after the fact (most likely by providing witnesses) then I am in deep trouble.

But that is modern law. In the Old West, away from the big cities, a man did what he had to do to survive.

Of course, in the Old West, you'd never have more cops than miners at a mine, either!

There is a reason that "One riot, one Ranger" is an unofficial motto of the Texas Rangers.

 

[Beauseant]

You are right in most of this in that it's a valid point of view. I guess all I can say then is that maybe this isn't the right game for you.

In the real world, your right to respond with lethal force (or any force) to someone else committing a crime if you are not one of the authorities is actually pretty limited in most countries, and you should be very careful about shooting somebody that you are sure is a criminal in the real world as well - I'm not sure where you are from in the real world, but in the UK where I am from, the police do not take kindly to vigilante type activities. In the UK if you attack someone on the street that they turn out to be the no 1 most wanted person in the country, trust me when I tell you that you will not get away with it - you will be treated as if you attacked someone randomly on the street.



.

While I understand your perspective. This game even tho it is developed in the UK, is set in the future, not in a futuristic version of a space UK.

Bounty Hunting and vigilante justice has been constantly encouraged by All of the Major Factions (maybe with the exceptions of the Alliance but they have been a little absent from the main plots of the game anyways). I know for a fact the Empire and Federation have multiple times commissioned Independent Pilots to go and kill as many criminals as possible to help with their current situation or goal in the form of Community Goals asking for Bounties.

This game is thus obviously set in a time where vigilantes are accepted and encouraged. Presumably because there are only so many System Authorities and 400 billion systems where pirates and murderers can prey on the innocent and the Authorities welcome the help in keeping the peace. This is the future after.

 

[Zueuk]

Your ship is tattling on you. It is the only way to explain it.

Still won't do - in this case the option "report crimes against me" would not make sense.

 

[Javert]

not in a futuristic version of a space UK.

I love that. I can imagine we will all be queuing up outside the docking portal saying "After you", " no, after you", and so on in the future where the UK took over space.

In fact, I can't see any other future for the Universe right now. I am heading right off to the Reorte tea rooms.

I used the UK as an example but I said "many countries". I'm not sure they really mean that it's a wild west future, more a mish mash of the history that comes from Earth, plus a bit of the old wild west thrown in, so we get a weird computerized bounty system combined with missions that sanction criminal acts against other parties. Those missions usually point out that they are off the record and that you may become a criminal whilst carrying them out. Quite similar to the US government trying to assassinate foreign leaders or the Russian government killing various civilians in other countries.

Actually, I'm not even sure that in the old American Wild West you could really shoot first and ask questions later - I suspect there is a bit of poetic license in that legend.

I think the use of the term wild west by the devs was a bit unfortunate because I don't think that's really what they were shooting for

 

[Zueuk]

Well, the problem is that the developers seem to want to have it both ways. The want a frontier justice ."Wild West" bounty system, but restrictive not-at-all-Wild-West rules about how you can go about the business

Exactly. "You are free to play the game any way you want - but only the way we want you to play"

 

[Javert]

Exactly. "You are free to play the game any way you want - but only the way we want you to play"

I don't really agree. It's pretty clear that if you follow the vigilante missions you are at risk of committing crimes in the system targetted, sometimes even in the system that gave you the mission. You are taking on a "black" mission and you have to take the consequences if you get caught.

As I said before, I think the use of the phrase "Wild West" by the devs was in a certain context, but I don't think it was meant to be a general rule for everything in the game.

 

[Rankaze]

I love that. I can imagine we will all be queuing up outside the docking portal saying "After you", " no, after you", and so on in the future where the UK took over space.

In fact, I can't see any other future for the Universe right now. I am heading right off to the Reorte tea rooms.

I used the UK as an example but I said "many countries". I'm not sure they really mean that it's a wild west future, more a mish mash of the history that comes from Earth, plus a bit of the old wild west thrown in, so we get a weird computerized bounty system combined with missions that sanction criminal acts against other parties. Those missions usually point out that they are off the record and that you may become a criminal whilst carrying them out. Quite similar to the US government trying to assassinate foreign leaders or the Russian government killing various civilians in other countries.

Actually, I'm not even sure that in the old American Wild West you could really shoot first and ask questions later - I suspect there is a bit of poetic license in that legend.

I think the use of the term wild west by the devs was a bit unfortunate because I don't think that's really what they were shooting for

I don't entirely disagree with you. That was why I made the point about the number of cops in a resource extraction site.

The reason the Wild West was the way it was, was because there was not enough law enforcement to go around! This doesn't actually seem to be a problem in the Elite universe... with one very notable exception: Anarchy systems ARE very much like the Wild West. Except the sheriff has already been shot, so the only law is the law you make! For the most part, though, there seem to be plenty of authority ships in the Elite universe, and the primary need for bounty hunters seems to be that it's too easy for criminals to just run away from the cops. The police appear to be able to protect the populated areas very well, they just don't have the resources to CHASE the pirates.

For this reason, I would suggest that the best solution is to give bounty hunters better ways to actively pursue pirates so that we don't have to spend all our time in RES where the cops have things fairly well under control! I am hoping the changes to the mission system will address this.

As for your other note, the movie version of the Wild West is certainly highly romanticized... but the historical records indicate if anything it was more lawless (and far less glamorous) than the movies would indicate.

Warning: Texas history lesson follows:

Spoiler

The badguys won a lot more often than you'd see in the movies, too. Well, at least for a while. Trust me on this one, not only am I a Texan, but Texas history is one of my fascinations and I've done a lot of study of it. Outlaws like John Wesley Hardin, who killed 31 men before being captured (in Florida!) by a Texas Ranger, or the train robber Sam Bass who operated in Texas for 8 years before he was finally cornered and shot down by the Rangers in 1878, stand as proof of the dangers of the time.

One of the reasons the Texas Rangers were formed is because the local sherrifs simply could not handle the roaming outlaws. A force of justice was needed that was not bound by local jurisdiction, and could travel anywhere in the fledgling Republic of Texas (Texas was its own country between winning independence from Mexico in 1836 and joining the US in 1845 by treaty) and deal with problems. The Texas Rangers were (and remain!) the Long Arm of the Law. In the old days, they answered only to the President (and later Governor) of Texas - now they answer to the director of the Texas Department of Public Safety. But the Rangers couldn't be everywhere - there simply weren't that many of them. And so, in a lot of towns, justice was dispensed more by those who had the ability than by those who had the authority. As described by Adjutant General W.H.Mabry in 1896, "This branch of the service has been very active and has done incalculable good in policing the sparsely settled sections of the state where the local officers...could not afford adequate protection."

Interestingly enough, while the first Rangers were commissioned in 1823 - when Texas was still a Mexican province - by Stephen F. Austin, and their numbers swelled substantially after 1836, the term "Texas Ranger" does not appear in historical legislation until 1874 (before that, they were simply "rangers").

It was not uncommon for an outlaw to go unpunished for quite a while simply because nobody had the skill to bring him down until finally the locals sent to Austin for a Ranger, who came and took care of matters. Rangers were greatly respected and feared - and for a reason! It was about as dangerous a job as you could have, and if you lived very long at it, you were obviously a very dangerous man!

As an interesting historical note, all Texas Rangers are (since Texas joined the US) also deputy US Marshals. This means that a Texas Ranger can legally pursue a criminal anywhere in the United States. When a Ranger makes the boast, "I'm a Texas Ranger, my jurisdiction is wherever I happen to be," that is not hyperbole!

 

[Beauseant]

Actually, I'm not even sure that in the old American Wild West you could really shoot first and ask questions later - I suspect there is a bit of poetic license in that legend.

My great great great grandfather. Had a twin. His twin was shot and killed on account of mistaken identity (no need to go into details) my ancestor. Rounded up a group of guys. A posse you might say tracked down his brothers killer and they killed him. After the fact the sheriff asked what happened, they told their story. The sheriff just said "well I'm sorry to hear about you brother".

- - - Updated - - -

I don't entirely disagree with you. That was why I made the point about the number of cops in a resource extraction site.

The reason the Wild West was the way it was, was because there was not enough law enforcement to go around! This doesn't actually seem to be a problem in the Elite universe... with one very notable exception: Anarchy systems ARE very much like the Wild West. Except the sheriff has already been shot, so the only law is the law you make! For the most part, though, there seem to be plenty of authority ships in the Elite universe, and the primary need for bounty hunters seems to be that it's too easy for criminals to just run away from the cops. The police appear to be able to protect the populated areas very well, they just don't have the resources to CHASE the pirates.

For this reason, I would suggest that the best solution is to give bounty hunters better ways to actively pursue pirates so that we don't have to spend all our time in RES where the cops have things fairly well under control! I am hoping the changes to the mission system will address this.

As for your other note, the movie version of the Wild West is certainly highly romanticized... but the historical records indicate if anything it was more lawless (and far less glamorous) than the movies would indicate.

Warning: Texas history lesson follows:

Spoiler

The badguys won a lot more often than you'd see in the movies, too. Well, at least for a while. Trust me on this one, not only am I a Texan, but Texas history is one of my fascinations and I've done a lot of study of it. Outlaws like John Wesley Hardin, who killed 31 men before being captured (in Florida!) by a Texas Ranger, or the train robber Sam Bass who operated in Texas for 8 years before he was finally cornered and shot down by the Rangers in 1878, stand as proof of the dangers of the time.

One of the reasons the Texas Rangers were formed is because the local sherrifs simply could not handle the roaming outlaws. A force of justice was needed that was not bound by local jurisdiction, and could travel anywhere in the fledgling Republic of Texas (Texas was its own country between winning independence from Mexico in 1836 and joining the US in 1845 by treaty) and deal with problems. The Texas Rangers were (and remain!) the Long Arm of the Law. In the old days, they answered only to the President (and later Governor) of Texas - now they answer to the director of the Texas Department of Public Safety. But the Rangers couldn't be everywhere - there simply weren't that many of them. And so, in a lot of towns, justice was dispensed more by those who had the ability than by those who had the authority. As described by Adjutant General W.H.Mabry in 1896, "This branch of the service has been very active and has done incalculable good in policing the sparsely settled sections of the state where the local officers...could not afford adequate protection."

Interestingly enough, while the first Rangers were commissioned in 1823 - when Texas was still a Mexican province - by Stephen F. Austin, and their numbers swelled substantially after 1836, the term "Texas Ranger" does not appear in historical legislation until 1874 (before that, they were simply "rangers").

It was not uncommon for an outlaw to go unpunished for quite a while simply because nobody had the skill to bring him down until finally the locals sent to Austin for a Ranger, who came and took care of matters. Rangers were greatly respected and feared - and for a reason! It was about as dangerous a job as you could have, and if you lived very long at it, you were obviously a very dangerous man!

As an interesting historical note, all Texas Rangers are (since Texas joined the US) also deputy US Marshals. This means that a Texas Ranger can legally pursue a criminal anywhere in the United States. When a Ranger makes the boast, "I'm a Texas Ranger, my jurisdiction is wherever I happen to be," that is not hyperbole!

That sir brought a tear to my eye.

Got to love history. The good, the bad, and the ugly.

 

[Beauseant]

I don't really agree. It's pretty clear that if you follow the vigilante missions you are at risk of committing crimes in the system targetted, sometimes even in the system that gave you the mission. You are taking on a "black" mission and you have to take the consequences if you get caught.

As I said before, I think the use of the phrase "Wild West" by the devs was in a certain context, but I don't think it was meant to be a general rule for everything in the game.

I think it's important to note there is a difference between bounty hunting for pirate/assassinating a pirate lord missions and the ones that are in themselves piracy, black ops, or smuggling missions.

 

[MrReynolds]

Originally Posted by MrReynolds
Since I'm a good boy I don't get fines etc often. I would love a little clarification on the proposed new wanted status please.

I'm in the Zaonce RES, collecting bountys for the Alliance. I shot a pirate too early (totally my fault - no worries). I got a wanted status. 300 cr. Hey ho. Went back to the station and paid it off. Cool.

In the planned new system, would that be me out of the community goal for the week as I would be wanted for the whole week?

Little bit confused as it was only a little bit of pre-emptive fire. Didn't kill him or anything. Seems REALLY harsh if this is going to be the case.
Thanks.

EDIT: Happened again. Red blip shooting at me & wanted. Shot at it..........I got wanted........................erm.....and I killed it by mistake as it was a ickle Eagle on it's last legs. Back to Station. Again.

Yes, you would have a bounty and be wanted for 7 days under the new system as described.

Well I can only hope FD SERIOUSLY tweak this.
With my 5 lasers hitting a ship JUST ONCE I'm automatically WANTED with a 300 bounty and need to bug out and pay the fine. Maybe up the threshold for WANTED to 700cr, allowing for a mistake or two?

As it stands, the quote above would ruin the game for me. CGs are the thing keeping the game alive for me and to be excluded FOR A WEEK due to an accidental / over-zealous mistake would be too much. Surely MURDER is worth a week?
Guess we'll need to wait for Beta................

 

[EdzUp]

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/images.frontier/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by MrReynolds [url]https://forums.frontier.co.uk/images.frontier/buttons/viewpost-right.png[/URL]
Since I'm a good boy I don't get fines etc often. I would love a little clarification on the proposed new wanted status please.

I'm in the Zaonce RES, collecting bountys for the Alliance. I shot a pirate too early (totally my fault - no worries). I got a wanted status. 300 cr. Hey ho. Went back to the station and paid it off. Cool.

In the planned new system, would that be me out of the community goal for the week as I would be wanted for the whole week?

Little bit confused as it was only a little bit of pre-emptive fire. Didn't kill him or anything. Seems REALLY harsh if this is going to be the case.
Thanks.

EDIT: Happened again. Red blip shooting at me & wanted. Shot at it..........I got wanted........................erm.....and I killed it by mistake as it was a ickle Eagle on it's last legs. Back to Station. Again.



Well I can only hope FD SERIOUSLY tweak this.
With my 5 lasers hitting a ship JUST ONCE I'm automatically WANTED with a 300 bounty and need to bug out and pay the fine. Maybe up the threshold for WANTED to 700cr, allowing for a mistake or two?

As it stands, the quote above would ruin the game for me. CGs are the thing keeping the game alive for me and to be excluded FOR A WEEK due to an accidental / over-zealous mistake would be too much. Surely MURDER is worth a week?
Guess we'll need to wait for Beta................

Well tbh if this becomes the norm piracy will become rife as there will be loads of players who will start ignoring bounties and shooting everything. After all who wants to stop playing because an idiot flew in front of them.

If they dont tweak this their galaxy will burn with all the pirates it will create.