Criminal Factions

[DemiserofD]

It doesn't make much sense that all criminal factions are Anarchies. In reality, there are virtually no real-life criminal enterprises without some form of structure. In fact, many criminal organizations flourish because they give their members protection where the government has failed to do so.

It would be nice if we got a variety of several types of criminal factions, all of which would benefit from trade at Black Markets, and all of which would provide minimal protection to anything not directly in their own faction.

Examples could include:

Mafias

Gangs

Drug Empires

Syndicates

Pirates

'Families'

Terrorist Organizations

Secret Societies


Ideally, you'd have as many types of criminal governments as legitimate governments. This would be much more in keeping with the actual reality we see in real life.

The only time you should really see 'Anarchies', is in extreme cases of Reaver-like cannibal psychos, and they should be extremely finnicky to deal with.

 

[Screemonster]

The only time you should really see 'Anarchies', is in extreme cases of Reaver-like cannibal psychos, and they should be extremely finnicky to deal with.

I agree with everything you said apart from this bit, 'cause that's not actually what anarchy means. Then again, it doesn't mean what fdev says it means either - cooperative governments are probably closer to anarchies than criminal gangs are, since criminal gangs tend to have a boss.

I definitely agree that "lawless" should be a thing that multiple government types should have though - with the distinction being whether the ruling faction will bother to lift a finger to help anyone other than their own.

If you're flying in a mafia system there should definitely be rules, even enforcers that show up if you try to knock them over and prices on your head if you cross them - but they don't care in the slightest if you knock over some random trader passing through the system as long as it's not one of theirs.

 

[DemiserofD]

I agree with everything you said apart from this bit, 'cause that's not actually what anarchy means. Then again, it doesn't mean what fdev says it means either - cooperative governments are probably closer to anarchies than criminal gangs are, since criminal gangs tend to have a boss.

I definitely agree that "lawless" should be a thing that multiple government types should have though - with the distinction being whether the ruling faction will bother to lift a finger to help anyone other than their own.

If you're flying in a mafia system there should definitely be rules, even enforcers that show up if you try to knock them over and prices on your head if you cross them - but they don't care in the slightest if you knock over some random trader passing through the system as long as it's not one of theirs.

Are there any real-life examples of anarchies that would serve as reference? The trouble I'd foresee is that it's something of a contradiction in terms; an anarchy, by nature, cannot be a government, and wouldn't have a leader to talk to to get missions from.

Otherwise, I was thinking you could just have it so any system can become an anarchy system, if you just drive the influence of all the BGS factions down far enough. Have a pool of unclaimed influence, and if that pool becomes dominant, no faction has control and the system slips into anarchy.

---

But yeah, having some actual criminal faction types would really help to make the criminal lifestyle more tangible. For example, you might have missions to interdict passing traders and shoot at them until they pay you a toll; you get to keep half the credits, and you turn in the other half.

Especially since we can now freely transfer credits via fleet carriers, adding a way to charge people credits directly would be a very nice and logical feature.

 

[Screemonster]

Are there any real-life examples of anarchies that would serve as reference? The trouble I'd foresee is that it's something of a contradiction in terms; an anarchy, by nature, cannot be a government, and wouldn't have a leader to talk to to get missions from.

Unfortunately, none that weren't almost immediately invaded by their neighbours or else the national governments they were attempting to secede from.

Notably, anarchy doesn't necessarily mean no government or leaders, it means a lack of coercive power structures. (compare: monarchy - literally rule by a singular figure. No surprise that said monarchs have historically responded violently to the notion that monarchs shouldn't be required)

Otherwise, I was thinking you could just have it so any system can become an anarchy system, if you just drive the influence of all the BGS factions down far enough. Have a pool of unclaimed influence, and if that pool becomes dominant, no faction has control and the system slips into anarchy.

That'd be interesting, actually. Funnily enough, this was the description of Riedquat in the previous games - the system was controlled by a boiling pot of constantly-warring criminal gangs, of which none could gain an upper hand over the other. Alliances were uncommon, and tended to break the instant they'd achieved their goals.
This could have been replicated by pre-stacking the system with anarchy factions and nothing but anarchy factions back at launch, ensuring there was no room to expand in and nothing but a constant state of lawless conflict, but that ship has jumped by now.

Having the system stacked with a bunch of lawless-ethos factions with different underlying criminal behaviours would be pretty neat.

 

[Dragsham]

An anarchy system simply means no law n order. No accountability for ones dark actions. Those are too numerous to mention. And those that partake use these systems and unpopulated ones nearby, as respite from do gooders and feds bounty hunters etc.
Just my take on it.

 

[Screemonster]

An anarchy system simply means no law n order. No accountability for ones dark actions. Those are too numerous to mention. And those that partake use these systems and unpopulated ones nearby, as respite from do gooders and feds bounty hunters etc.
Just my take on it.

Why would I use an anarchy as my base as a criminal? I can just as easily use a small port controlled by a faction that doesn't want me dead and keep my nose clean in their space. Best of all, if I do that and run with crimes on, anyone that tries to claim my bounty becomes a criminal themselves.

Archon Delaine's rank 5 bonus is, oddly enough, the best representation of an actual criminal organisation with its roots dug into goverment - those on the inside can act with impunity in the faction's area of influence, while those that aren't are still bound by the law.

 

[Rebel Yell]

It doesn't make much sense that all criminal factions are Anarchies. In reality, there are virtually no real-life criminal enterprises without some form of structure. In fact, many criminal organizations flourish because they give their members protection where the government has failed to do so.

It would be nice if we got a variety of several types of criminal factions, all of which would benefit from trade at Black Markets, and all of which would provide minimal protection to anything not directly in their own faction.

Examples could include:

Mafias

Gangs

Drug Empires

Syndicates

Pirates

'Families'

Terrorist Organizations

Secret Societies


Ideally, you'd have as many types of criminal governments as legitimate governments. This would be much more in keeping with the actual reality we see in real life.

The only time you should really see 'Anarchies', is in extreme cases of Reaver-like cannibal psychos, and they should be extremely finnicky to deal with.

There's all of that in the game: it's called Kumo.

 

[DemiserofD]

There's all of that in the game: it's called Kumo.

Unfortunately, BGS and Powerplay remain rather completely separate. Even so, it's very odd that there's only one actual criminal organization in the universe.

There's great room in the various superpowers for different forms of criminal enterprise. Some could even be legitimate governments in some superpowers, but criminal factions when present in others.

The Empire, for example, might have legitimized Secret Societies, while they would be considered criminals in the Federation. On the flipside, Syndicates could be legal in the Federation but illegal in the Empire. And the Alliance, of course, would allow anything that pays their membership dues because mahon doesn't give a crap.

 

[Dragsham]

I said I use an unpopulated system near an anarchy system. Bit of rp on my part. My carrier has no cap. That's all that matters to me

 

[Vadim Kleitsin]

Slightly off-topic, but what happened to the Red Family cartel? Did they just sort of fizzle out with the GalNet fluff pieces?

Slightly more on-topic, you could probably divvy up the existing anarchy factions based on their names, given that we already have groups named Gang, Crew, Drug Empire, Boys, Syndicate...

Not sure what sort of organisation a 'Dragons of System X' would be.

Why would I use an anarchy as my base as a criminal? I can just as easily use a small port controlled by a faction that doesn't want me dead and keep my nose clean in their space.

I did that, took an extended break from being a pirate and came back to find that the guys who previously controlled my safe harbour with a black market were now the system's controlling faction. Unfortunately, said system doesn't have any stations with a black market or shipyard that isn't controlled by them and I need to find a new home base for my illegal stuff. Lately I've been flying back to my regular home port but that isn't too convenient as I can't just land, swap to a clean ship and then head off home like I used to. I suppose it's because I don't see piracy as a very sociable activity so I keep the pirate stuff separate from activities with friends which is why I kinda need a separate port to base the wanted ships out of.