Dying with Notoriety higher than 2 should mean no rebuys.

[Morbad]

They would have to do something like "lose one point of notoriety every two hours of gameplay, afk or no<finger to ear>"

You're not gonna believe this, but it turns out that's exactly what they already do.

I'm not sure how this response relates to my post.

I was pointing out how there is no way to enhance plausibility of the current system by making small tweaks to it. Simply making an absurd set of mechanisms harsher doesn't address any underlying issues in this regard.

 

[CMDR thefezzer]

I'm not sure how this response relates to my post.

I was pointing out how there is no way to enhance plausibility of the current system by making small tweaks to it. Simply making an absurd set of mechanisms harsher doesn't address any underlying issues in this regard.

I'd say rebuy right withdrawn anywhere is hardly a small tweak.

It would have an enormous chilling effect, and people wouldn't do high notoriety stuff in their G4 and G5 ships. Generally, a competent pilot can do any PvE and most PvP (other than countergank) well enough at G3.

 

[Rebel Yell]

Reverse engineering: CMDRs without a powerplay pledge don't have to pay for a rebuy or loss data/cargo if being kaboomed.

 

[Morbad]

I'd say rebuy right withdrawn anywhere is hardly a small tweak.

With regards to plausibility, it is.

It would have an enormous chilling effect, and people wouldn't do high notoriety stuff in their G4 and G5 ships. Generally, a competent pilot can do any PvE and most PvP (other than countergank) well enough at G3.

I'm doubtful most high-notoriety work even involves ships. The only activities where notoriety isn't trivial to avoid are surface missions where murdering everyone on the way to the objectives is the path of least resistance for most missions that don't specify non-violence. My CMDR quickly gets pegged at 10 notoriety and his most frequently used vessel in the last year is an Apex shuttle.

That said, I'm sure there would be some skewing of ship demographics for some activities, but it would have little bearing on the overarching plausibility of the system, would do nothing to further limit negative BGS influences (which is why notoriety exists), and probably wouldn't act as a deterrent to contextless PvP, other than the mutually consensual kind.

 

[CMDR thefezzer]

The only activities where notoriety isn't trivial to avoid are surface missions where murdering everyone on the way to the objectives is the path of least resistance for most missions that don't specify non-violence.

If you're taking the path of least resistance any notoriety you get is your own fault.

Those missions are so much more exciting if you don't murk everyone.

 

[Screemonster]

ganker

Aaaaaand here we have it.

Bro.

This is why crime and punishment is in such an awful state in the first place.

People are trying to mash together "I want to punish gankers for ganking" into the system for "making illegal PvE stuff in the BGS risky" and they are fundamentally separate things, mashing them together will result in a system that is bad at both.

Thanks to Odyssey not recognising Settlement Massacre mission as mission targets (and thus negating notoriety gain for killing them as with other mission targets) it's trivial to reach notoriety 2 for carrying out a single mission without killing any targets that weren't a mission objective.

 

[CMDR thefezzer]

Aaaaaand here we have it.

Bro.

This is why crime and punishment is in such an awful state in the first place.

People are trying to mash together "I want to punish gankers for ganking" into the system for "making illegal PvE stuff in the BGS risky" and they are fundamentally separate things, mashing them together will result in a system that is bad at both.

Thanks to Odyssey not recognising Settlement Massacre mission as mission targets (and thus negating notoriety gain for killing them as with other mission targets) it's trivial to reach notoriety 2 for carrying out a single mission without killing any targets that weren't a mission objective.

While that is fair feedback, I'm very comfortable with having similar penalties on my PvE play. I mean, if we can't just get gankers banned outright that is.

 

[Screemonster]

Only if they get caught.

In the heavily developed first-world nation I live in, almost half of homicides go unsolved and nearly one in ten people on death row will eventually be exonerated of all related charges.

Harsh consequences for meaningful crimes are fine, but if any plausible sort of immersion is the goal, there needs to be a fair chance to escape detection when committing crimes and a chance for justice systems to make mistakes, unless some equally credible facet of the setting skews things. In the Elite setting, where distances are enormous, FTL comms expensive, computers primitive, and polities as fragmented and uncooperative as ever, justice should be a highly uncertain thing. In most places it should be subjective to each pilot and extend no further than their own weapons...far more 'Wild West' than the actual Wild West ever was.

Panopticon delenda est.

 

[Morbad]

If you're taking the path of least resistance any notoriety you get is your own fault.

I'm not sure where 'fault' comes into this. Notoriety doesn't inconvenience my CMDR except where it was specifically designed to and removing insurance wouldn't change that in the slightest. Notoriety has never inconvenienced surface work.

Notoriety makes it hard to murder ships en masse and rapidly iterate the negative BGS influence of doing so, by causing ATR to drop in and force a retreat after a few kills at high notoriety values. No one has to get shot down for it to work, and removing the ability to rebuy for the once in a blue moon where ATR does manage to shoot someone down wouldn't improve it's functionality in this regard, which is the only function it's suited for.

Those missions are so much more exciting if you don't murk everyone.

I don't find the tedium associated with shoddy stealth mechanisms to be exciting. All other things being equal, my CMDR is going to get the job done in the most expedient way possible; it would be highly out of character for him to adopt the extra risk of allowing potential witnesses the ability to cross his path more than once. So, anyone expected to be an obstacle forfeits their existence.

Removing insurance that was never going to be used doesn't make it any less ridiculous that my CMDR can be flagged for crimes that were never witnessed, or that his victims will completely forget that he just murdered dozens of them if he stops murdering people somewhere else for twenty hours.

 

[CMDR thefezzer]

I'm not sure how this response relates to my post.

I was pointing out how there is no way to enhance plausibility of the current system by making small tweaks to it. Simply making an absurd set of mechanisms harsher doesn't address any underlying issues in this regard.

This relates as so:

• withdrawing rebuy right only affects the portion of criminals who get caught
• notoriety cool down is similar to going on the lam or laying low until the heat is off

 

[CMDR thefezzer]

I'm not sure where 'fault' comes into this. Notoriety doesn't inconvenience my CMDR except where it was specifically designed to and removing insurance wouldn't change that in the slightest. Notoriety has never inconvenienced surface work.

Notoriety makes it hard to murder ships en masse and rapidly iterate the negative BGS influence of doing so, by causing ATR to drop in and force a retreat after a few kills at high notoriety values. No one has to get shot down for it to work, and removing the ability to rebuy for the once in a blue moon where ATR does manage to shoot someone down wouldn't improve it's functionality in this regard, which is the only function it's suited for.



I don't find the tedium associated with shoddy stealth mechanisms to be exciting. All other things being equal, my CMDR is going to get the job done in the most expedient way possible; it would be highly out of character for him to adopt the extra risk of allowing potential witnesses the ability to cross his path more than once. So, anyone expected to be an obstacle forfeits their existence.

Removing insurance that was never going to be used doesn't make it any less ridiculous that my CMDR can be flagged for crimes that were never witnessed, or that his victims will completely forget that he just murdered dozens of them if he stops murdering people somewhere else for twenty hours.

I'm super confused, if you mostly get notoriety in Ody missions why wouldn't you just get a beater ship for it?

Also like... you do know that "notoriety" and "witnesses" are the same, right? Like you're aware there has to be witnesses to report it for you to become notorious, right? Even if it's just electronic witnesses like CCTV, right?

 

[nemolomen]

I'm super confused, if you mostly get notoriety in Ody missions why wouldn't you just get a beater ship for it?

Also like... you do know that "notoriety" and "witnesses" are the same, right? Like you're aware there has to be witnesses to report it for you to become notorious, right? Even if it's just electronic witnesses like CCTV, right?

And now you're just trying to tell other players HOW they should play the game...BINGO...

 

[Morbad]

I'm super confused, if you mostly get notoriety in Ody missions why wouldn't you just get a beater ship for it?

I find Apex more convienent if I'm not using my preferred set of controls, but I'd never get shot down were I using a ship anyway.

My CMDR does have a beater ship for negative influence work (cop killing) in space, but that's so he can throw it away once the bounty becomes prohibitively high to pay off, not because it's at risk of being shot down.

Also like... you do know that "notoriety" and "witnesses" are the same, right? Like you're aware there has to be witnesses to report it for you to become notorious, right? Even if it's just electronic witnesses like CCTV, right?

That's the crux of my complaint with the plausibility of the system.

Notoriety is accrued even if someone is killed from surprise well away from any sensors that could possibly identify the perpetrator, unless the perpetrator's own equipment is responsible, which is utterly absurd. No competent criminal would use such equipment, no matter how illegal modified equipment was.

In the case of settlements, even assuming sensors (like CCTV) were operational to witness these crimes and there was no way to delete data or destroy the medium upon which it was recorded, all that those sensors should be able to percieve is someone in a pressure suit. The idea that my CMDR would walk around with distinguishing equipment or insignia, let alone a damned name tag, while committing multiple felonies that could be recorded, is ridiculous.

I'm not against abstraction, but abstraction to absurdity is a problem, especially when the level of abstraction is highly inconsistent. For example, I can mange three or four notoriety in a large settlement without even setting off any alarms. How does that work? If omniscient surveillance systems that are recording everything my CMDR does and accurately identifying my CMDR in real time, why isn't settlement security being informed? In what world is making sure my CMDR pays a fine later more important than defending the lives and property of the settlement?

 

[CMDR thefezzer]

And now you're just trying to tell other players HOW they should play the game...BINGO...

I'm just asking questions my dude.

 

[CMDR thefezzer]

I find Apex more convienent if I'm not using my preferred set of controls, but I'd never get shot down were I using a ship anyway.

My CMDR does have a beater ship for negative influence work (cop killing) in space, but that's so he can throw it away once the bounty becomes prohibitively high to pay off, not because it's at risk of being shot down.



That's the crux of my complaint with the plausibility of the system.

Notoriety is accrued even if someone is killed from surprise well away from any sensors that could possibly identify the perpetrator, unless the perpetrator's own equipment is responsible, which is utterly absurd. No competent criminal would use such equipment, no matter how illegal modified equipment was.

In the case of settlements, even assuming sensors (like CCTV) were operational to witness these crimes and there was no way to delete data or destroy the medium upon which it was recorded, all that those sensors should be able to percieve is someone in a pressure suit. The idea that my CMDR would walk around with distinguishing equipment or insignia, let alone a damned name tag, while committing multiple felonies that could be recording is ridiculous.

I'm not against abstraction, but abstraction to absurdity is a problem, especially when the level of abstraction is highly inconsistent. For example, I can mange three or four notoriety in a large settlement without even setting off any alarms. How does that work? If omniscient surveillance systems that are recording everything my CMDR does and accurately identifying my CMDR in real time, why isn't settlement security being informed? In what world is making sure my CMDR pays a fine later more important than defending the lives and property of the settlement?

Yeah no joke all that requires high degrees of suspension of disbelief.

 

[Jmanis]

Can't believe this needs to be said out loud, but if your covered vehicle is involved in homicide your insurance provider should not have to pay. You should lose the ship and all engineering forever and ever.

Alternately, the user might be able to keep the base ship but lose any PP, tech broker, or engineered modules to be replaced by stock.

So where's the incentive for committing crime? The reward for risking my rebuy?

Until crime is incentivised, you can't punish it.

 

[Screemonster]

Put it this way.
If I were a ganker, and I stood to lose my ship and engineering upon getting blown up because I had more than 2 notoriety, I certainly wouldn't pick fair fights.
I'd slap together an unengineered (or lightly-engineered) missile or fragboat that I didn't care about losing, and go hit up whatever spot people were flying in paper exploration ships (such as an exploration CG, or Deciat, or just anywhere decently-trafficked) and continue as before.

'cause I'll let you in on a secret.

You don't need an engineered murderboat to gank. You certainly don't need one to gank a paper exploration ship.

 

[CMDR thefezzer]

Put it this way.
If I were a ganker, and I stood to lose my ship and engineering upon getting blown up because I had more than 2 notoriety, I certainly wouldn't pick fair fights.
I'd slap together an unengineered (or lightly-engineered) missile or fragboat that I didn't care about losing, and go hit up whatever spot people were flying in paper exploration ships (such as an exploration CG, or Deciat, or just anywhere decently-trafficked) and continue as before.

'cause I'll let you in on a secret.

You don't need an engineered murderboat to gank. You certainly don't need one to gank a paper exploration ship.

See now we're coming together on a decent compromise.

 

[Screemonster]

See now we're coming together on a decent compromise.

It's not a compromise, it's explaining how your "solution" won't solve ganking.

 

[CMDR thefezzer]

It's not a compromise, it's explaining how your "solution" won't solve ganking.

The compromise is that gankers would be incentivized to gank on a level playing field. Which is hardly ganking at that point, because ganking requires a vast power imbalance by it's very definition.