Elite: Harmless - Karma System aka "be the Tamagotchi" - FRESH SALT, MINED RIGHT HERE

[DefiledDragon]

Only in terms of the upper limits - and NPCs don't spawn with upper limit ships / loadouts against players, i.e. Frontier control what players meet with regard to NPCs. The same cannot be said of players.

Players min/max, of that there is no doubt.

The nature of the upcoming karma/c&p system seems to indicate that it's the upper limits that FD are concerned about, given that they talk of punishing players who vastly overpower their opponents in terms of ship/loadout.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

Attacking / destroying probably clean, probably trade ships, probably outfitted for cargo isn't really much of a challenge - what roleplay reason would be given?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unrestricted_submarine_warfare
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonnage_war
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_raiding
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Cavalry_raids_of_the_American_Civil_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid_(military)

Destroying and raiding the enemy's baggage trains has been a valid war tactic since the dawn of war tactics.

We may take it then that an army without its baggage train is lost; without provisions it is lost; without bases of supply it is lost. -Sun Tzu

Or, as the all-wise MRE bag says...

Spoiler

But it doesn't matter. Kill a non-combat player and they demand an RP reason. Give them an RP reason and they refuse to accept it as valid.

 

[Ian Phillips]

Can we please keep the legal system out of this discussion of game mechanics. Thanks.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I read that, I know what Sandro posted. Still ... I have opinions and stuff

Indeed.

The nature of the upcoming karma/c&p system seems to indicate that it's the upper limits that FD are concerned about, given that they talk of punishing players who vastly overpower their opponents in terms of ship/loadout.

Indeed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unrestricted_submarine_warfare
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonnage_war
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_raiding
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Cavalry_raids_of_the_American_Civil_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid_(military)

Destroying and raiding the enemy's baggage trains has been a valid war tactic since the dawn of war tactics.

We may take it then that an army without its baggage train is lost; without provisions it is lost; without bases of supply it is lost. -Sun Tzu

Or, as the all-wise MRE bag says...

Spoiler

https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3470/3922777501_54b323ea4e_b.jpg

But it doesn't matter. Kill a non-combat player and they demand an RP reason. Give them an RP reason and they refuse to accept it as valid.

Indeed.

.... and the karma system would seem to be aimed at curbing some them that stray into the realms of unacceptable player behaviours.

 

[Minonian]

Can we please keep the legal system out of this discussion of game mechanics. Thanks.

Sorry! But since to uphold the laws are non optional, especially if you just halfway serious about your volunteer order reinforcer state?

 

[Ian Phillips]

Sorry! But since to uphold the laws are non optional, especially if you just halfway serious about your volunteer order reinforcer state?

Take your views on this to Frontiers Legal department, this is not the place for any legal discussions.

Further posts on this topic will be removed.

 

[-Denali-]

Actually, as of v2.3 the NPC pirate dialog has been substantially improved. They now demand cargo either in terms of value or tonnage. The old griefer/ganker behaviour for NPCs seems to be a thing of the past, using such (past?) NPC behaviours as an excuse to justify comparable commander behaviours is very weak IMO - and as of v2.3, it would seem to be completely unjustified.

I'm glad they have better dialog. Does that change the fact that they're still programed to demand cargo and do their utmost to kill any player that doesn't comply? Didn't think so. Guess that means FDev still thinks that's a valid part of the dangerous universe our characters inhabit. In what way would it make sense to have a double standard for players? Simply because the offer more of a challenge isn't justification.

(As an aside, your conclusion in no way follows from your conditions. Did you mean something else?)

Frontier are in control of the NPCs - AI difficulty, ship and loadout. The same cannot be said of players - which is probably why a Frontier would seem to be considering a karma system to handle particular player behaviours that might be judged to be bad for the health of the game.

Ultimately FDev controls every outfitting option and stat of this game. They are in complete control of how powerful a player ship can be. I wasn't talking about ship loadouts anyways, but AI behavior. It's considered fun content when an AI interdicts me and demands cargo, attempting to kill otherwise. Why is it an egregious offense to all things holy if a player does it?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Ultimately FDev controls every outfitting option and stat of this game. They are in complete control of how powerful a player ship can be. I wasn't talking about ship loadouts anyways, but AI behavior. It's considered fun content when an AI interdicts me and demands cargo, attempting to kill otherwise. Why is it an egregious offense to all things holy if a player does it?

It very much depends on the actions of the player. Do NPCs destroy players who have dropped cargo that meets their demands? Some players would seem to.

PvP is not universally appreciated by the player-base, indeed, it would seem that Frontier are well aware that the majority of players do not get involved in PvP.

 

[mossfoot]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unrestricted_submarine_warfare
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonnage_war
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commerce_raiding
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Cavalry_raids_of_the_American_Civil_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid_(military)

Destroying and raiding the enemy's baggage trains has been a valid war tactic since the dawn of war tactics.

We may take it then that an army without its baggage train is lost; without provisions it is lost; without bases of supply it is lost. -Sun Tzu

Or, as the all-wise MRE bag says...

Spoiler

https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3470/3922777501_54b323ea4e_b.jpg

But it doesn't matter. Kill a non-combat player and they demand an RP reason. Give them an RP reason and they refuse to accept it as valid.

Something I've noticed, and keep in mind that I'm not singling out vindelanos here - people pick and choose when to use realism as a defense for game mechanics, even the purely fictional ones.

Ship transfers. Newtonian physics. Supercruise travel times. Telepresence. Crew death vs player death. Piracy and Law Enforcement...

But the reality is that realism needs to be weighed against player experience. That's the very nature of verisimilitude.

Realism is a starting point for action, but gameplay has to be the end result.

So in this case, while you can defend rampant and endless Harmless ship destruction from a realism perspective, it still doesn't jive against the player experience involved.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

Something I've noticed, and keep in mind that I'm not singling out vindelanos here - people pick and choose when to use realism as a defense for game mechanics, even the purely fictional ones.
...So in this case, while you can defend rampant and endless Harmless ship destruction from a realism perspective, it still doesn't jive against the player experience involved.

Understand that I'm not arguing against either karma or C&P. I think that if done right (i.e. to add compelling gameplay mechanics for all players) that they would be great additions to the game. And there is no doubt in my mind that a trader having his ship destroyed for no apparent reason results in a negative player experience for him.

There are times and places in-game wherein the destruction of trading vessels is seemingly meaningless, but there are also times and places (CGs for example) where the destruction of trading vessels could be argued to be perfectly meaningful. One faction puts out an appeal for materials and commodities to boost its position, and thereby threatens the positions of all other factions in the vicinity. Another example would be player faction A working their tail off to control a system and deciding that part of their strategy will be to cut-off access to the markets in that system.

Where the problem lies with all of this roleplaying talk is that the onus for roleplaying is constantly pushed onto the aggressor. - Give me one good reason why you think it was acceptable to blow up my trade ship!
But the aggressor could just as easily push that onus back on the victim - Give me one good reason why you thought it was acceptable to trade commodities at this market!

 

[X-Terminator]

KARMA in PvP...dudes, we are the Karma! It does not need passing onto other NPCs to alter any states of play.

 

[Goose4291]

I've been musing on this today, and think the first thing that needs to be quantified is a flow chart to make it clear as and when karma, c&p or penalties are incurred, such as this easy example below: two players, ATTACKER and DEFENDER, wherein ATTACKER has killed the other one at a Combat Zone. Thoughts?

 

[Zambrick]

Oh I'm not even talking about shadow bans per se, because none of us really know much of the C+P system punishments will be automated and how much will require someone to push a button. But I agree that people are getting a little hysterical for thinking a bot will ban them just for blowing up a clean player. I give SS a little more credit than that. It would be pretty stupid to begin banning people for just playing the game, and I can't see any historical precedent that might make people think it would happen.

What I'm talking about is any punishment at all for combat logging. It's something the a certain portion of the playerbase has been strangely silent about, either because something that's working correctly isn't worth commenting on, or they're combat loggers themselves and don't want to make that obvious by complaining about it.

Combat logging is an exploit, and punishment for that exploit is accepted as good. When asked about punishments for other exploits like suicidewinder, abusing the multicrew feature etc, nobody will talk about that.

Combat logging is griefing regardless which side does it. So it should be treated as such. But with the karma system tracking them the need for combat logging should be lessened considerably. As a player you know that when you get killed by another player without provocation, that the action is actually tracked and that there is an eventual punishment that could occur.

Humans so that every day. You walk down the street to get a cup of coffee understanding and knowing you are safe in that area. You know it because there are crime reports, visiable Policemen, and a history around the area of which you are walking. You know if its a safe neighborhood before you go there. That doesnt stop the chance of violence against you. But what it does do is give you the illusion of safety and that is all that is needed in the game.

in RL the illusion of safety has its opposite and that would be for the criminal to understand that if I do a crime here and now, I will probably get caught. The Policeman right there might shoot me or take me to jail or whatnot. Yes crime can ocurr but its less likely because each side has its own risk and reward. The coffee person well the risk is relatively small and the reward is coffee. The criminals point of view the risk his high due to police presence, but the reward is unknown. You dont have any idea if the crime will be profitable until you commit it. So for the criminal is generally a non starter.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

I've been musing on this today, and think the first thing that needs to be quantified is a flow chart to make it clear as and when karma, c&p or penalties are incurred, such as this easy example below: two players, ATTACKER and DEFENDER, wherein ATTACKER has killed the other one at a Combat Zone. Thoughts?

https://s26.postimg.org/xwqhx7i4p/20170520_185531.jpg

I don't understand why the defender incurs the penalty at the point he does. Explain?

You have the penmanship of a sociopathic griefer, btw.

 

[Zambrick]

C&P consequences are all well and good, and welcomed. Karmic consequences, the ones applied to players that repeatedly station ram, combat log and actually grief should not apply to anyone who is playing the game as intended.

I don't know how many times I can state this over and over. Karma for bad people. C&P for people who just play the game.

Do Karma for good people as well. Take them above neutral standing. That can incur rewards and also a buffer if you choose to do something untoward.

 

[Goose4291]

I don't understand why the defender incurs the penalty at the point he does. Explain?

Defender hasnt followed the spirit of the game and is flying around in a combat zone unpledged (which is usually the prelude to a hit and fade attack).

 

[Faybs]

Still ... it would be good if the actions towards NPCs also had consequences similar to actions towards players. Just for ... oh dear ... I hope everyone is seated ... well, you're on a computer ... immersion and persistence's sake.

Here we tread the fine line between playing the game and griefing. How many players have you seen ramming a heavily damaged sidey against an NPC cutter entering the station?

 

[Deleted member 115407]

Combat logging is griefing regardless which side does it. So it should be treated as such. But with the karma system tracking them the need for combat logging should be lessened considerably. As a player you know that when you get killed by another player without provocation, that the action is actually tracked and that there is an eventual punishment that could occur.

For you, maybe. I would venture to guess that most combat loggers are motivated by (a) the credits cost, and (b) the shame of being destroyed.

- - - Updated - - -

Defender hasnt followed the spirit of the game and is flying around in a combat zone unpledged (which is usually the prelude to a hit and fade attack).

Ah, gotcha! I think it's a solid flowchart.

 

[Zambrick]

It would be insane of them to punish players (beyond the C&P system) for doing things that they have programed the AI to do themselves. There can be no clearer example of what their intent was. The showed it when they programmed npc's to do exactly that.

That is because the NPCs are not supposed to be part of the Pilots Fed. They are assigned ranks similar to the Pilots Fed so a Pilots Fed member will know what they are getting into when fighting that NPC. NPCs with the exception of some named famous ones are all supposed to be the civilians of the game.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

Do Karma for good people as well. Take them above neutral standing. That can incur rewards and also a buffer if you choose to do something untoward.

I mean, most people don't walk away victims of violent crime, secure in the knowledge that the person who attacked them is "gonna git their come-uppins someday."

*edit*

Misquoted you.