Easy grief and trader fix via insurance

[to_boldy_go]

Hi had a thought. Too encourage traders into solo let them insure cargo at a cost of 5% buy back. Drop hull insurance on T6,7 and 9 to 1%.

But what about griefers? Well they dont care about a 5% rebuys as they often are billionaires via exploits. If you have a billion an 8 million buyback is nothing.

So I suggest that insuance is not valid above 10 million if you die with a bounty on your head. 10 million allows pirates eg Cobra mk 3 to role play. Griefers are hunted down by bounty hunters but no real effect. But if your 160 million insurance maxs out at 10 mill so all you get back is 9.5 million then a billionaire can only afford say 7 deaths. That will reduce griefing big time. Also make bounties stick after death for at least 30 days.

A boom for anti griefer bounty hunters as a kill would mean something!

 

[Lanceor]

Hi had a thought. Too encourage traders into solo let them insure cargo at a cost of 5% buy back. Drop hull insurance on T6,7 and 9 to 1%.

But what about griefers? Well they dont care about a 5% rebuys as they often are billionaires via exploits. If you have a billion an 8 million buyback is nothing.

So I suggest that insuance is not valid above 10 million if you die with a bounty on your head. 10 million allows pirates eg Cobra mk 3 to role play. Griefers are hunted down by bounty hunters but no real effect. But if your 160 million insurance maxs out at 10 mill so all you get back is 9.5 million then a billionaire can only afford say 7 deaths. That will reduce griefing big time. Also make bounties stick after death for at least 30 days.

A boom for anti griefer bounty hunters as a kill would mean something!

Ah, finally a thread to encourage traders to play in Solo! This is a very welcome change to all those threads suggesting that traders play in Open.

 

[SpeakerToAliens]

Simply expel griefers from the Pilot's Federation and make a couple of simple changes...

Non-members don't get IFF on their radar and no "CMDR" tag shown in the target pilot's name, so they can't differentiate CMDRs from NPCs - that would ruin their fun.
Add in the loss of Pilot's Federation re-buy insurance and that should cure the griefer problem.

 

[smiths121]

Simply expel griefers from the Pilot's Federation and make a couple of simple changes...

Non-members don't get IFF on their radar and no "CMDR" tag shown in the target pilot's name, so they can't differentiate CMDRs from NPCs - that would ruin their fun.
Add in the loss of Pilot's Federation re-buy insurance and that should cure the griefer problem.

I campaigned back in the day for Cmdrs and NPCs to have the same marker. It was an interesting debate, as originally no scans in SC. These days it a mute point, as I pretty sure most griefers couls use sub targets to determine players from NPCs in SC. It works both ways as well. You would not know if you were destroyed by griefer or NPC. Hey that might stop the I have been violated threads. Also no naming or shaming of NPCs!!!!

Simon

 

[Noctover]

With Multi-crews drop-in-drop-out group finder and bars looking like a thing in the future id say FDev are (quite rightly) trying to encourage players to play together, not "in to solo".

Why would we want to encourage traders in to Solo? If they want to fly in Open why shouldn't they? Maybe they don't want a monotonous risk free galaxy and a little excitement.

 

[Winterwalker]

Why would we want to encourage traders in to Solo?

I think that's a mis-speak myself.

Shouldn't deflect us from the basic idea .. that if you carry bounties (especially PvP bounties I'd suggest) you lose some if not all insurance priviledges. It 'might' nudge people into pirating NPC's rather than PC's if there was a difference between the two, but either way, goes a little way into the 'expel from elite pilots federation' idea.

From top of my head, I like it myself.
+1 and rep to the OP.

 

[TERMINATRIXXX]

Didn't know a working game need to be fixed, when there is no problem.

OP has unbalanced ideas, OP should learn to fight, OP need a better ship.

 

[Phazon Xenomorph]

Hi had a thought. Too encourage traders into solo let them insure cargo at a cost of 5% buy back. Drop hull insurance on T6,7 and 9 to 1%.

But what about griefers? Well they dont care about a 5% rebuys as they often are billionaires via exploits. If you have a billion an 8 million buyback is nothing.

So I suggest that insuance is not valid above 10 million if you die with a bounty on your head. 10 million allows pirates eg Cobra mk 3 to role play. Griefers are hunted down by bounty hunters but no real effect. But if your 160 million insurance maxs out at 10 mill so all you get back is 9.5 million then a billionaire can only afford say 7 deaths. That will reduce griefing big time. Also make bounties stick after death for at least 30 days.

A boom for anti griefer bounty hunters as a kill would mean something!

Or they can stop being shieldless or low MJ armorless scrubs that are easy prey for people like me. Rinzler actually made quite a good guide on what a trader should do to play in Open and not be a piece of space garbage:

[REDACTED]

Also most people, even the super big ship owners, don't have 8 billion. And for anyone who wasn't a kickstarter or beta backer the rebuy on something like a fully combat outfitted Corvette is FOURTY MILLION. That's $40,000,000. That's not something to joke about, a handful of deaths and you're not only broke but unable to rebuy your ship and leaving it parked somewhere as you fly around penniless (and a lot of big ship owners are gonna be high waking come 2.3 since super shields won't be a thing and hulls won't be making up the difference effectively enough.

Also your plan completely kills the Open PvP scene since most scrubby players will just suicidewinder/eagle into big ships to get them wanted for murder and build their bounties up. Your idea is horrible, bad, pathetic, and easily exploitable.

So I think I'll stick with "git gud scrub".

 

[Noctover]

I think that's a mis-speak myself.

Shouldn't deflect us from the basic idea .. that if you carry bounties (especially PvP bounties I'd suggest) you lose some if not all insurance priviledges. It 'might' nudge people into pirating NPC's rather than PC's if there was a difference between the two, but either way, goes a little way into the 'expel from elite pilots federation' idea.

From top of my head, I like it myself.
+1 and rep to the OP.

I'm all for crime and punishment, don't really care how they improve it as long as they do. But the line "But what about griefers? Well they don't care about a 5% rebuys as they often are billionaires via exploits." is so narrow minded, and i'm fairly sure all forms of PVP including piracy ransom seems to be lumped in to the "griefer" category here.

- - - Updated - - -

Didn't know a working game need to be fixed, when there is no problem.

OP has unbalanced ideas, OP should learn to fight, OP need a better ship.

Read that in a Yoda voice

 

[TERMINATRIXXX]

Read that in a Yoda voice

 

[Winterwalker]

so narrow minded, and i'm fairly sure all forms of PVP including piracy ransom seems to be lumped in to the "griefer" category here.

Hang on though, that's the irrelevant personal opinion bit. Question is, can revoking insurance privileges disincentivise 'killed for no reason' attacks? I'd suggest it does. May not be enough on it's own (better blackmarket prices for stolen goods could be the carrot to this OP's stick) but it's sometimes possible to get to the right answer even if reasons are (allegedly) wrong, opinion wise. (More thorough C&P system anyone?)

edit --
to the OP, I happen to know insurance payouts in ED aren't a fixed thing. You're probably on a 90% policy in game, but that's a floating (adjustable) value (because it's not 100%).

 

[CMDR_Elver]

Insurance should be more nuanced than it is now. It should reward good piloting skill by factoring claim rates. I.e. the more times you a destroyed per unit time the more your insurance goes up. Also I like the idea of having a Pilots Federation reputation for each CMDR based on your actions in game. So if you attack and destroy other CMDR's illegitimately this negatively affects your Reputation. This could also be factored into the insurance costs with PF rank discounts.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

Insurance should be more nuanced than it is now. It should reward good piloting skill by factoring claim rates. I.e. the more times you a destroyed per unit time the more your insurance goes up. Also I like the idea of having a Pilots Federation reputation for each CMDR based on your actions in game. So if you attack and destroy other CMDR's illegitimately this negatively affects your Reputation. This could also be factored into the insurance costs with PF rank discounts.

I'd like the idea of insurance fluctuating based on skill... But let's face it. All the bad pilots would flood the forums demanding their credits back because they can't be bothered to learn how to fly better. :/

 

[NeilF]

Simply expel griefers from the Pilot's Federation and make a couple of simple changes...

Non-members don't get IFF on their radar and no "CMDR" tag shown in the target pilot's name, so they can't differentiate CMDRs from NPCs - that would ruin their fun.
Add in the loss of Pilot's Federation re-buy insurance and that should cure the griefer problem.

Or, akin to these, illegal destruction of a Pilots Federation member soon builds up a reputation such that penalties are applied to deter such continued conduct. ie: If you're no longer able to dock at certain stations, or indeed even jump to some systems, you might no want to continue on with your psychotic behaviour.

I like the notion of also losing your Pilots Federation re-buy insurance as yet another penalty to add to such a mix - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-Reputation-quot-and-quot-Risk-Hot-Spots-quot

ps: I'm adding your insurance suggestion my list

 

[AgamemnonWhen]

+1 for Insurance Penalties & Selective Docking

Too many points on your licence? Nobody will insure you, Mr. Pirate.

Murdered a few people in Fed space? Then the local Fed stations will refuse docking requests (see also: Alliance / Imp).

Serial Murderer? Entire Faction-controlled station networks won't allow you to dock, try an independent.

Psychopath? Too many murders, and not even independent stations will let you dock now: Mate, you're only ever going to be able to dock at some dodgy lawless Pirate outpost who will let anyone land - too bad that 'Conda won't fit!

NB: Piracy is a legit career choice, and you still need somewhere for Pirates to actually be pirates, like a space Tortuga - stations in out-of-the-way locations where crims can repair and re-arm, and buy more gold teeth. It just needs some mechanics to make it profitable (better margins on Black Market?) but really very dangerous indeed (especially if you get 'caught'). Lawless pirate stations could even be blockaded by the navy, like in the olden days! Repent, or swing!

Points (karma, pirate points, kill marks, etc.) are gained every time you "murder" someone - IE: destroy someone's ship when they have NO bounty or they aren't a PP Enemy Faction. Someone in a previous thread offered a couple of other possibly 'legit' reasons for murder, but I forget what they are.

With that addition, suddenly we have a workable justice system!

 

[NeilF]

+1 for Insurance Penalties & Selective Docking

Too many points on your licence? Nobody will insure you, Mr. Pirate.

Murdered a few people in Fed space? Then the local Fed stations will refuse docking requests (see also: Alliance / Imp).

Serial Murderer? Entire Faction-controlled station networks won't allow you to dock, try an independent.

Psychopath? Too many murders, and not even independent stations will let you dock now: Mate, you're only ever going to be able to dock at some dodgy lawless Pirate outpost who will let anyone land - too bad that 'Conda won't fit!

NB: Piracy is a legit career choice, and you still need somewhere for Pirates to actually be pirates, like a space Tortuga - stations in out-of-the-way locations where crims can repair and re-arm, and buy more gold teeth. It just needs some mechanics to make it profitable (better margins on Black Market?) but really very dangerous indeed (especially if you get 'caught'). Lawless pirate stations could even be blockaded by the navy, like in the olden days! Repent, or swing!

Points (karma, pirate points, kill marks, etc.) are gained every time you "murder" someone - IE: destroy someone's ship when they have NO bounty or they aren't a PP Enemy Faction. Someone in a previous thread offered a couple of other possibly 'legit' reasons for murder, but I forget what they are.

With that addition, suddenly we have a workable justice system!

Piracy shouldn't be about mindless (illegal) destruction. If you keep destroying your victims there's something not right... so if the game introduced X illegal destruction in Y period meant you started getting penalised, and it ramped those penalties switfy up, then there would be some breathing space but if you make a habit out of illegal destruction you'd soon find yourself suffering those penalties.

I think this alone would help rein in lots of the griefing/ganking that makes the game a bit toxic at times...

 

[Quiquag]

actually....insurance not being viable with a bounty on your head is a really good idea.
I'd say it needs a little refinement (trying to think, accidental shot of an officer is bounty or fine? and look to see if there's ways to force a player bounty that may need to be addressed. Perhaps only for bounties over a certain amount...)

but that's a MASSIVE discouragement to kill people in secure systems, risk losing all your engineered stuff?! Dang... AND it makes sense in game, as insurance companies would naturally try to get out of paying a claim, and "Illigal activities" is a great way to implement that. It doesn't prevent people from doing it, but actually provides risk for them to do it!

 

[CMDR_Elver]

Didn't know a working game need to be fixed, when there is no problem.

OP has unbalanced ideas, OP should learn to fight, OP need a better ship.

The game is working but could massively be improved, especially regarding Crime & Punishment, bounty system is totally dysfunctional aswell. The game isn't just about fighting. Balance is important though and putting in place a system that is consistent with galaxy, lore and background sim etc.

 

[krylite]

Nice idea on affecting insurance based on bounty. I wouldn't use a flat cut off threshold. Instead something like a variable insurance premium cost increase based on amount of bounty per tick week. Then a decrease in premium cost per tick week when having no bounty, with minimum premium being the normal rate of course.

 

[CMDR_Elver]

actually....insurance not being viable with a bounty on your head is a really good idea.
I'd say it needs a little refinement (trying to think, accidental shot of an officer is bounty or fine? and look to see if there's ways to force a player bounty that may need to be addressed. Perhaps only for bounties over a certain amount...)

but that's a MASSIVE discouragement to kill people in secure systems, risk losing all your engineered stuff?! Dang... AND it makes sense in game, as insurance companies would naturally try to get out of paying a claim, and "Illigal activities" is a great way to implement that. It doesn't prevent people from doing it, but actually provides risk for them to do it!

There is some merit in the no insurance when a bounty is on a CMDR's head but you would have to tread a little carefully. The Pilots Federation is not just an insurance company for a start. Generous insurance deals are a bit of a perk of membership to the PF. Getting a like for like ship including replacement modules instantaneous is a pretty good deal even if it cost twice the price of your ship! The PF might of started off being a respectable traders and explorers union but over time has got a darker or more ambiguous edge to it. Therefore they don't ban CMDR's from the PF; this is mainly to setup the game without making it too complex rather than a realistic insurance system). However, it could be designed that through PF bounties/fines and insurance that the PF always makes a bit of money from a illegitimate ship destruction and has a hold over CMDR's.

1. If the Pilots Federation could charge higher insurance than the cost of your ship based on reputation and claim rates minus any discounts (rank etc.).
2. CMDR's loose Rep for illegitimate ship destructions. CMDR's will gain reputation by destroying CMDR's with negative reputation.
3. Have a bounty system where CMDR's with a Negative Rep are fair game. CMDR's with positive Reps have their bounties suspended or converted to fines that can be paid off.
4. Bounties placed on CMDR's will equal the cost of the destroyed ship + modules. Bounty claims would also be equivalent to the cost of the destroyed ship plus modules and only paid out if a CMDR has a positive Rep after all his/her fines are paid off.

Decisions for CMDR's about who, when and where they attack need to be introduced, basically to make the gameplay better. Consequences and jeopardy need to be enhanced to enrich the game, but getting the balance right is key. Let face it combat is a huge part of the game, we need game mechanics that make it a virtue that can channel it to players that play it the most. Every combat situation would have something riding on it and has knock on effects win or lose.