Easy grief and trader fix via insurance

[CMDR Adelind]

I don't think you guys realise, PvPer's of whatever flavour pretty much only die when we allow it. This insurance thingy just won't affect me or any of the people I fly with, except to save a ton of rebuy money. I die pretty often because I like fighting to the end, but if excessive penalties were imposed, then I would just concede and high wake.

I usually fly a mid-tier modded FDL, and it takes 6-8 SDC gankers to drop my shields before I escape. As far as I'm aware, there are no other PvP groups who can consistently output that much damage. I have no idea where anti griefer bounty hunters capable of killing us will come from. All of us know, or know of, pretty much everyone of noteworthy skill.

 

[CMDR Adelind]

My own idea for an insurance change would be to charge 7% of a CMDR's total credits. Maybe charge against total asset value but tweaked for the ship's cost, so billionaires don't run out of money playing with Sidewinders. A loan limiting profits until it is paid off if the pilot has low liquidity. Like the way Borderlands did it. If I remember maths class somewhat, that should mean 10 deaths will cost half your money, but you get to keep it to matter what. You just might not have money to fuel it after a while...

 

[ZeroAi]

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!

+Rep

I like the idea of lower insurance costs, but would also like to see a new Open PvE option added alongside the current Open PvPvE.

Also would like to see more Private Group options, like being able to set a PG as PvE only.

 

[CMDR Adelind]

Actually, I take all that back. I vote for traders insurance that doesn't lose cargo, grinder insurance that lowers the cost of death by NPC, PvP insurance that lowers the cost of death to a CMDR while having a huge cost for death by NPC, explorer insurance that lets them keep the data but lose the money or something. Etc.

 

[BL1P]

I don't think you guys realise, PvPer's of whatever flavour pretty much only die when we allow it. This insurance thingy just won't affect me or any of the people I fly with, except to save a ton of rebuy money. I die pretty often because I like fighting to the end, but if excessive penalties were imposed, then I would just concede and high wake.

I usually fly a mid-tier modded FDL, and it takes 6-8 SDC gankers to drop my shields before I escape. As far as I'm aware, there are no other PvP groups who can consistently output that much damage. I have no idea where anti griefer bounty hunters capable of killing us will come from. All of us know, or know of, pretty much everyone of noteworthy skill.

The idea is to punish the Griefers who Murder (kill none Wanted players outside of Anarchy systems and Conflict Zones) because they have no real threat involved. When a rebuy is nothing basically there is no threat.
That is quite different from PvP players.

 

[NeilF]

The idea is to punish the Griefers who Murder (kill none Wanted players outside of Anarchy systems and Conflict Zones) because they have no real threat involved. When a rebuy is nothing basically there is no threat.
That is quite different from PvP players.

I'd argue the notion that somehow The Pilots Federation care if its members are illegally destroyed in system X, but not Y, doesn't make real sense, and also isn't a good approach for the game. ie: Think of how much toxic behaviour takes place every time a new ruin is discovered (in anarchy systems typically), with fully engineered combat ships mowing down explorers for the lolz!

I'd suggest a simple approach of a having a criminal reputation based on the number of Pilot Federation members you illegally destroy over a given period. In short, if you illegally destroy more than X CMDRs in period Y, you start getting penalised, in such a fashion you really would not want to continue with your psychotic behaviour.

This approach would mean some illegal destruction would be tolerated, but it you decide to make a full time occupation out of it, be prepared for the outcomes! I feel this would rein in a lot of the more toxic mindless destruction being all but ignored by the game at the moment - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-Reputation-quot-and-quot-Risk-Hot-Spots-quot

 

[CMDR Adelind]

The idea is to punish the Griefers who Murder (kill none Wanted players outside of Anarchy systems and Conflict Zones) because they have no real threat involved. When a rebuy is nothing basically there is no threat.
That is quite different from PvP players.

Right, but the thing I was getting was that griefer or PvPer, it doesn't matter at all. It's kind of impossible to die once you learn how not to. Retract weapons, next target in route, high wake. Three buttons and no punishment. I'm assuming this is directed at SDC type folk, and won't apply to people fighting at bounty CG's? Surely the criminals should be allowed to shoot back...

Take the example of the Andrhimi (sp) CG. I spent lots of time hunting Feds who were opposing the Empire, I would have triggered lots of these punishment measures. Still wouldn't have died.

 

[Stealthie]

I reckon removing engineered parts from re-buys would go a long way to improving things.

One of the major advantages gankers have is that they've spent absurd amounts of time grinding mat's and working the RNG to get stupidly overpowered weapons, and once they've got those weapons, they've got them forever.
Get rid of engineered re-buys and they won't be able to carry on using those weapons.

You don't need stupidly overpowered weapons to fight NPCs (as the myriad of "the game is too easy" threads will testify) and the sort of upgrades than a non-PvP player needs can be recovered easily with an hour's worth of trips to engineers.

The only people who're relying on engineered weapons are PvPers and, without having those weapons constantly returned to them with re-buys they could carry on PvPing too if they wanted to, safe in the knowledge that they're no longer compelled to have overpowered weapons to keep up with other PvPers.

Let's face it, a person who's built a ship purely for PvP is already going to have a huge combat advantage over a ship intended for trading, exploration or mining.
The last thing such people need is constantly to have the weapons that make their lives so much easier returned to them.

The possibility of losing engineered components permanently would cause a lot of people to think twice about indulging in frivolous PvP and those who did so would inevitably lose them eventually.

 

[BL1P]

I'd argue the notion that somehow The Pilots Federation care if its members are illegally destroyed in system X, but not Y, doesn't make real sense, and also isn't a good approach for the game. ie: Think of how much toxic behaviour takes place every time a new ruin is discovered (in anarchy systems typically), with fully engineered combat ships mowing down explorers for the lolz!

I'd suggest a simple approach of a having a criminal reputation based on the number of Pilot Federation members you illegally destroy over a given period. In short, if you illegally destroy more than X CMDRs in period Y, you start getting penalised, in such a fashion you really would not want to continue with your psychotic behaviour.

This approach would mean some illegal destruction would be tolerated, but it you decide to make a full time occupation out of it, be prepared for the outcomes! I feel this would rein in a lot of the more toxic mindless destruction being all but ignored by the game at the moment - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-Reputation-quot-and-quot-Risk-Hot-Spots-quot

Yes but...
Killing a player in an Anarchy system isn't illegal as there is no law.

So your example could not work, You cannot kill a player illegally in an Anarchy system as they cannot have a wanted tag.
The only way we can call it an illegal kill (A murder) is when the killed player had no wanted tag or outstanding bounty and wasn't in a conflict zone in a lawful system.

As for the toxic kills in populated places like sag A or Ruins sites.
Fdev should make the Feds or Imps send a cap ship and make the system Lawful.

That way it all stays within the existing boundaries of the game.

 

[CMDR Adelind]

I reckon removing engineered parts from re-buys would go a long way to improving things.

One of the major advantages gankers have is that they've spent absurd amounts of time grinding mat's and working the RNG to get stupidly overpowered weapons, and once they've got those weapons, they've got them forever.
Get rid of engineered re-buys and they won't be able to carry on using those weapons.

You don't need stupidly overpowered weapons to fight NPCs (as the myriad of "the game is too easy" threads will testify) and the sort of upgrades than a non-PvP player needs can be recovered easily with an hour's worth of trips to engineers.

The only people who're relying on engineered weapons are PvPers and, without having those weapons constantly returned to them with re-buys they could carry on PvPing too if they wanted to, safe in the knowledge that they're no longer compelled to have overpowered weapons to keep up with other PvPers.

Let's face it, a person who's built a ship purely for PvP is already going to have a huge combat advantage over a ship intended for trading, exploration or mining.
The last thing such people need is constantly to have the weapons that make their lives so much easier returned to them.

The possibility of losing engineered components permanently would cause a lot of people to think twice about indulging in frivolous PvP and those who did so would inevitably lose them eventually.

I like this idea the most. This is the first thing I've heard that would make me careful. Proper peril tied in with the game's features. It also makes much more sense that these custom modules be rare, and not 3d printable at any station.

 

[NeilF]

Yes but...
Killing a player in an Anarchy system isn't illegal as there is no law.

So your example could not work, You cannot kill a player illegally in an Anarchy system as they cannot have a wanted tag.
The only way we can call it an illegal kill (A murder) is when the killed player had no wanted tag or outstanding bounty and wasn't in a conflict zone in a lawful system.

As for the toxic kills in populated places like sag A or Ruins sites.
Fdev should make the Feds or Imps send a cap ship and make the system Lawful.

That way it all stays within the existing boundaries of the game.

Yes, there is no local security (in an anarchy system), by that doesn't mean The Pilots Federation wouldn't give a damn about its members!?

If I rocked up to an anarchy system and started psychotically killing any/all CMDRs exploring there?
1) How is that a good thing for the game to ignore?
2) How is that behaviour a logical thing for the Pilots Federation to ignore (amongst its members)?

If you illegally destroy a Pilots Federation member too often there should be an outcome. This would give cause and effect for your actions and rein in mindless toxis psychotic destruction for the lolz - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-Reputation-quot-and-quot-Risk-Hot-Spots-quot


ps: The "existing boundaries" of the game - the bounty system - is not effective at managing mindless illegal destruction, and I'd argue simply cannot do so. Hence the above Pilots Federation Criminal Reputation specifically to deal with that!

 

[deyot]

OP's idea is silly.

I just don't get it people. You have Mobius. You have solo. So please leave Open alone.

I'm all for improved crime & punishment system and and karma system but some ideas like OP's one are simply ridiculous. Rebuy is a part of game mechanic that provides financial consequences for loosing a ship yet allows one to return to game relatively easily. It shouldn't differentiate whether one lost their ships by crashing planet's surface or by being blown up.

First of all any sane crime & punishment system shouldn't differentiate between killing human players and NPCs. You aren't special snowflakes.

Watering down things won't lead to the game being better.

 

[NeilF]

First of all any sane crime & punishment system shouldn't differentiate between killing human players and NPCs. You aren't special snowflakes.

Alas I think it needs to, and logically can do.

At the very least the premise of being part of the Pilots Federation could be used to explain any "special treatment"...

 

[Arindor]

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

It was an excellent debate, but some players argued that they would prefer to know if an opponent they wanted to grief was human.

 

[deyot]

At the very least the premise of being part of the Pilots Federation could be used to explain any "special treatment"...

That's a bit far fetched. Why being member of Pilots Federation should make you that special? Because reasons? Also how do you know NPCs (some of them at least) aren't members too?

Rebuy is game's mechanic, not part of the lore.

 

[Siranui]

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!

So basically your anti-griefer measures drag-net and punish anyone who likes to play a PvE or PvP pirate and *anyone* regardless of game mode who likes to break the law, and does absolutely nothing to stop griefers doing their normal business and then doing their normal suicidewinder trick.

This is a terrible, terrible suggestion, which punishes normal players and does *nothing* to punish griefers.

 

[NeilF]

That's a bit far fetched. Why being member of Pilots Federation should make you that special? Because reasons? Also how do you know NPCs (some of them at least) aren't members too?

Rebuy is game's mechanic, not part of the lore.

And far fetched or not, if the outcome is a good one? ie: If some illegal destruction of other CMDRs is "tolerated" over a given period, but too much is then penalised? How is that not a logical and fair mechanic? How is the outcome not a positive one?


BTW - "The Pilots Federation's zero tolerance policy regarding dishonourable behaviour..." - https://www.elitedangerous.com/en/gameplay/pilots-federation

 

[Marra Morgan]

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!

Those fellas who can't aim and end up shooting the police in RES spots will love this, I'm sure

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

I'm possibly being thick.
But I didn't understand the OP at all. Lol

 

[deyot]

And far fetched or not, if the outcome is a good one? ie: If some illegal destruction of other CMDRs is "tolerated" over a given period, but too much is then penalised? How is that not a logical and fair mechanic? How is the outcome not a positive one?

Fair. It's just a game. Multicrew and telepresence are far-fetched too. Yet IMHO the outcome isn't positive. Players are relatively safe in the game. NPC aren't really a threat. There's not much challenge for a good, A-rated, engineered, ship. So PvPers including so called griefers are the only element that can pose some danger to the players. I like that risk and that's why I play in Open. I don't want it to be restrained in non-sensible ways. I could tell you that lately almost all the interesting moments in the game I had were those when I was attacked by the "griefers".

I have 650+ ingame hours. I've never killed a human player. But I must admit that if proper C&P and security system was implemented I would consider living a life of crime just because prospect of being a fugitive chased around the galaxy seems quite an attractive one.