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

[Morbad]

I don't really have a huge problem with the population of Open. Frankly, I'd rather see people the mode doesn't appeal to avoid the mode than try to neuter the most commonly complained about (and usually exaggerated) aspects to fit some of their tastes. The only issue I have with the existence of multiple modes is the propensity for some to mode swap for the purposes of opposing those in Open then evading retaliation when the going gets rough.

That said, there are obviously mechanisms I feel are harmful to plausibility that also exacerbate some of the issues some have with Open, but again, I don't think the outlined 'karma' system is the right way to improve Open.

Regarding the ability to distinguish CMDRs, I'm of the opinion that this is harmful to verisimilitude. In practice I do distinguish between CMDRs and NPCs, because CMDRs are generally more of a threat, but I think more competent, persistent, and varied NPCs, that didn't automatically stick out from CMDRs, would make the game as a whole more believable.

 

[lenna]

I think you miss the overriding point Morbad, this is not just about your preferences (or the preferences of the almost exclusively PvP commanders) but apparently the preferences of the majority and/or FD themselves it seems.

There are at least some that think a Karma system combined with other measures will help to mitigate certain PvP behaviours that are seen as at least a step too far beyond the original design intent. FD do have a reporting system for the more extreme behaviours but that relies on people using the reporting system which relies on players reporting all incidents that go beyond the pale. Those that are overly tolerant of such behaviours are part of the problem IMO because they almost certainly fail to report incidents that probably should be. This makes FD's job with dealing with reports harder and more labour intensive if not impossible. With a Karma system on place, FD can use it to more easily identify genuine and well founded complaints from complaints that are probably over-sensitive. Not only that, but it may actually reduce the overall level of complaints as some players may find the additional consequences of the Karma and supplemental systems sufficient payback.

In short, the Karma system could serve two purposes:-

1. Help reduce FD's workload wrt dealing with reported PvP incidents by giving them a metric to help filter complaints
2. Help reduce reported PvP incidents when combined with other in-game measures

Of course, whatever is eventually implemented would need to be done with careful consideration and FD have been chewing on this one for a long time. They are not rushing things and the community has been consulted on this. It does not matter if the players in question play in Open or not, the changes will almost certainly effect anyone that engages in PvP regardless of the mode they are in. There have been a few cases of certain PvP groups infiltrating private PvE groups and groups/solo should not be usable as an escape from the consequences of offenders actions.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I don't really have a huge problem with the population of Open.

Other opinions vary.

Frankly, I'd rather see people the mode doesn't appeal to avoid the mode than try to neuter the most commonly complained about (and usually exaggerated) aspects to fit some of their tastes.

Frontier seem to prefer that players play in Open, have previously talked about encouragement to play in Open and have talked of increased consequences for some actions against CMDRs for over a year - that suggests that they hold a different opinion.

That said, there are obviously mechanisms I feel are harmful to plausibility that also exacerbate some of the issues some have with Open, but again, I don't think the outlined 'karma' system is the right way to improve Open.

I hope that the karma system, if implemented of course, achieves Frontier's aims for Open.

Regarding the ability to distinguish CMDRs, I'm of the opinion that this is harmful to verisimilitude. In practice I do distinguish between CMDRs and NPCs, because CMDRs are generally more of a threat, but I think more competent, persistent, and varied NPCs, that didn't automatically stick out from CMDRs, would make the game as a whole more believable.

Frontier has to consider the player-base as a whole when setting NPC difficulty, not just those who don't find them to be a challenge.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

So the general argument these days to why people don't play, left, or never stood foot in Open, or at least the most rational argument made, is that there are no consequences for certain actions some consider to be unnatural. Assuming that the proposed karma c/p system is fit for purpose then surely both solo and private group modes should be removed from the game.

In addition if the C&P system has depth so it affects the wider game, thus making the experience much deeper and interesting, there would likely be more people who were genuinely wanted thus giving a 'reason' to seek and destroy there by eliminating claims 'I was killed for no reason'..

Seems only fair right..

I don't know. You just state if and then, but I'm not reading a because. "Surely both solo and private modes should be removed from the game because <insert reason related to crime and punishment system here>

Considering I along with others don't use solo/pg and have no intention of doing so it seems only certain people will be forced to be nice to others. Not that Frontier are biased or show favouritism towards certain players..

Oh deary me. Are we having a little martyr complex?

 

[Morbad]

There are at least some that think a Karma system combined with other measures will help to mitigate certain PvP behaviours that are seen as at least a step too far beyond the original design intent.

It will probably do that to at least some extent. I'm worried that the cost will be too high and the effect too little to appease the prime advocates of these changes.

FD do have a reporting system for the more extreme behaviours but that relies on people using the reporting system which relies on players reporting all incidents that go beyond the pale. Those that are overly tolerant of such behaviours are part of the problem IMO because they almost certainly fail to report incidents that probably should be.

I report people who are apparently cheating and for obviously out of character insults in chat.

I consider it unthinkable to report someone who simply attacks my CMDR for a reason I cannot immediately identify. I try to give people the benefit of any doubt and just assume my CMDR has ticked someone off, or that there is some other legitimate reason.

It's also very rare for me to witness an act that I think is clear cut 'griefing'. Someone downing CMDRs by the truck load at a CG? Well, pretty much every CG ever has been for the benefit of one faction or another...which means it was against the interests of others, which makes anyone reasonably thought to be a participant a very legitimate target for someone. Same can be applied to most activities in most places. Are you bounty hunting? Then you are almost certainly lowering minor faction influence for someone and propping it up for others...which makes you a legitimate target. Have a PP faction? Legitimate target. Even going to LHS 3447 and shooting anything that moves would be a legitimate way to harm Adle's Armada...and half of AA murderhobos any time they are outside LHS 3447/Eravate so they invariably tick off a lot of people.

Essentially, unless it's already a report I'd file for cheating, there is almost nothing that doesn't have a significant chat component that I could reasonably assume was reportable 'griefing' or harassment.

There have been a few cases of certain PvP groups infiltrating private PvE groups and groups/solo should not be usable as an escape from the consequences of offenders actions.

If this is against the rules (and if it isn't it probably should be), these people should just be banned.

I hope that the karma system, if implemented of course, achieves Frontier's aims for Open.

As I've mentioned, I don't see how it will. Those that avoid open because of CMDR actions now have been swayed by relatively rare events, or even the rumor of relatively rare events.

If the karma system goes through and CMDRs are still getting attacked on occasion, there will still be very vocal victims crying that the changes weren't extreme enough...and those cries will probably persist until the game flatly disallows any non-consensual PvP.

Without openly available, hard statistics, none of us are really going to know what the effects are.

Frontier has to consider the player-base as a whole when setting NPC difficulty, not just those who don't find them to be a challenge.

Plenty of room to do both. If someone has to run from an NPC every once in a while, or a few NPCs manage to escape, it's not going to be the end of the world.

martyr complex

I'll use this as the name for my stealth corvette, cause I know taking it into real combat will be a suicide mission.

 

[Robert Maynard]

As I've mentioned, I don't see how it will. Those that avoid open because of CMDR actions now have been swayed by relatively rare events, or even the rumor of relatively rare events.

Other opinions also vary on that expectation. If there were to be sufficient anecdotal evidence of karmic consequences then some players may well return to Open.

If the karma system goes through and CMDRs are still getting attacked on occasion, there will still be very vocal victims crying that the changes weren't extreme enough...and those cries will probably persist until the game flatly disallows any non-consensual PvP.

Without openly available, hard statistics, none of us are really going to know what the effects are.

Frontier have the statistics - and it is probably down to their analysis of the statistics that they are considering implementing a PF-CoC, with the specific aim of discouraging specific player behaviours that they consider are detrimental to game health in general.

Plenty of room to do both. If someone has to run from an NPC every once in a while, or a few NPCs manage to escape, it's not going to be the end of the world.

To an extent - probably not with free roamers (i.e. spawned in-system) though - more likely with increased Threat Level USS, Very Hi-Res, etc..

 

[Phosphora]

If this karma system goes through, then solo and private group should go.

If we are to accept yet more compromises, which all seem to go one way, then seems only fair.

Here was my post

No thanks. I like being able to play without meeting other people. This feature was clearly advertised in the game's marketing.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I'll use this as the name for my stealth corvette, cause I know taking it into real combat will be a suicide mission.

I'll apologize beforehand, but that reminded me off:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIVDxL2lgN4

And because FD is an impartial company, I'll add that other candy bars are available in the shops.

 

[Sandmann]

As I've mentioned, I don't see how it will. Those that avoid open because of CMDR actions now have been swayed by relatively rare events, or even the rumor of relatively rare events.

Something you may not have considered... you, along with many other open/pvp proponents, frequently claim that the reports of ganking etc are vastly exaggerated and that many/most people who've fled open have done so because of rumour, not fact. Assuming for the moment that you're correct then a karmic system doesn't actually have to WORK, it just has to give the appearance of working to give people the confidence to try open again. Then, if you're correct, the truth will be realised.

FD have the facts and figures, they know the truth, and they have a history of reaching for the lowest hanging fruit and putting in minimum effort. I doubt this karmic system, if it eventuates, will be any different so I strongly suspect that it's a tacit admission from that the problem IS real, but even if they're wrong and you're right it will STILL have the effect of bringing people back to open... either because it addresses a need or because it exposes the truth. The only way it WOULDN'T work is if the problem is REAL and the system fails to address it adequately.

- - - Updated - - -

I'll apologize beforehand, but that reminded me off:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIVDxL2lgN4

And because FD is an impartial company, I'll add that other candy bars are available in the shops.

Hehehe I've never seen the full version of that ad before. We get a cut down, 30 second version on tv here.

 

[T'Kitr]

If this karma system goes through, then solo and private group should go.

If we are to accept yet more compromises, which all seem to go one way, then seems only fair.

Here was my post

The post you quoted seems to overlook one factor: that I play Solo because I don't want to play with others. I'm sure I'm not the only one. Crime and punishment is neither here nor there for me.

At the risk of appearing unfriendly, I don't want you as part of my game, and I don't want to be part of yours. I don't need or want to meet or fight against or wing up with other players.

Why play a multiplayer game, then? Because Elite isn't a multiplayer game. Elites I, II and III weren't multiplayer games and they were perfectly good, enjoyable experiences even so. Elite Dangerous is a fairly basic, arcade-y game, but it's fun: I enjoy its realistic-sized galaxy, its graphics and audio, and I'm familiar with its universe from previous games.

Had FDev included the offline mode initially talked about, that's what I'd be playing. Solo mode caters for people like me. Now by all means argue for a separate Solo-mode server, and I'd happily support you. I have no interest in your background simulation, and no desire for my Solo play to affect your Open-mode factions and influences and such. As it stands I can't avoid it.

Better still, I've said before that if FDev took ED's graphics and sound assets and used them to make a remastered version of First Encounters (with at least some basic atmospheric landings), they'd have my money in an instant.

Argue for that and I'll happily get out of your BGS.

 

[NeilF]

The post you quoted seems to overlook one factor: that I play Solo because I don't want to play with others. I'm sure I'm not the only one. Crime and punishment is neither here nor there for me.

Yes and no... I personally think your behaviour towards CMDRs should be treated no differently (where possible) to NPCs. ie: If you act like a psycho and start blowing up NPC T9s for the lolz, then I personally would like to see a C&P (Karma) system taking that into account - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-Reputation-quot-and-quot-Risk-Hot-Spots-quot

 

[Robert Maynard]

I personally think your behaviour towards CMDRs should be treated no differently (where possible) to NPCs. ie: If you act like a psycho and start blowing up NPC T9s for the lolz, then I personally would like to see a C&P (Karma) system taking that into account

Except that CC&P and karma are, to an extent, orthogonal - crime, consequences & punishment deals with acts by CMDRs against CMDRs or NPCs whereas karma would seem to be specifically designed to target specific player behaviours that Frontier deem to be undesirable / unacceptable. The latter is unlikely to take CMDR vs NPC actions into consideration, unlike the former.

 

[NeilF]

Except that CC&P and karma are, to an extent, orthogonal - crime, consequences & punishment deals with acts by CMDRs against CMDRs or NPCs whereas karma would seem to be specifically designed to target specific player behaviours that Frontier deem to be undesirable / unacceptable. The latter is unlikely to take CMDR vs NPC actions into consideration, unlike the former.

Understood... Let me rephrase C&P to Criminal Reputation

I see a Criminal Reputation/Karma a similar things (if indeed not the same)...

Now, if theres a gameplay rationale for it, I'm all for NPCs be excluded to treated differently... But ultimately if you're behaving like a lune/psycho and destroying ships for no (legal) reason, what is counter productive about treating all victims the same (be they CMDRs or NPCs), and penalising the lune/psycho CMDR accordingly?

 

[Robert Maynard]

But ultimately if you're behaving like a lune/psycho and destroying ships for no (legal) reason, what is counter productive about treating all victims the same (be they CMDRs or NPCs), and penalising the lune/psycho CMDR accordingly?

Probably the fact that NPCs are in-game for the sole reason of providing gameplay for players - the same cannot be said of other players who play the game for their enjoyment and can be adversely affected by the actions of other players.

 

[Han_Zen]

Probably the fact that NPCs are in-game for the sole reason of providing gameplay for players - the same cannot be said of other players who play the game for their enjoyment and can be adversely affected by the actions of other players.

That is an immersion breaking attitude Mr. Maynard. If NPCs aren't allowed to evolve into full members of the galaxy, the game will never reach it's potential as a single player experience. ED will be a pure multiplayer game, with NPCs added as pure resources.

I think FD can do better than that.

 

[DaveB]

Except that CC&P and karma are, to an extent, orthogonal - crime, consequences & punishment deals with acts by CMDRs against CMDRs or NPCs whereas karma would seem to be specifically designed to target specific player behaviours that Frontier deem to be undesirable / unacceptable. The latter is unlikely to take CMDR vs NPC actions into consideration, unlike the former.

I wouldn't describe them as orthogonal, because they would definitely interact. I see it more as C&P being the consequences for a specific action whereas karma is taking into account a trend in actions - Obviously everything in C&P is purely in-game and should apply equally to crimes vs players and crimes vs NPCs. However, I wouldn't exclude actions against NPCs from having an impact on the trends in behaviour that FD seek to take account of in a karma system. It's true that certain actions that would contribute to such a rating only rise to significance when perpetrated against other players and may not carry any consequence under C&P but the inputs to the two systems would certainly overlap and where an action by a player is (at least theoretically) equally significant when perpetrated against a player or an NPC then it should count towards karma whoever you do it do.

 

[NeilF]

Probably the fact that NPCs are in-game for the sole reason of providing gameplay for players - the same cannot be said of other players who play the game for their enjoyment and can be adversely affected by the actions of other players.

Understood... BUT, action-outcome is an important thing IMHO. The more CMDRs and NPC can behave the same and be treated the same the better. Now if there's a better outcome for some elements of gameplay where this doesn't make sense, fine... But I'm still of the opinion when destroying other ships illegally (for the lolz), it should matter if its a hollow dot or filled dot as to any Criminal Reputation/Karma that is affected!

 

[jasonbarron]

That is an immersion breaking attitude Mr. Maynard. If NPCs aren't allowed to evolve into full members of the galaxy, the game will never reach it's potential as a single player experience. ED will be a pure multiplayer game, with NPCs added as pure resources.

I think FD can do better than that.

I concur. It's imperative that NPC's evolve beyond their current status as a low skill farmable resource. Make them more deadly, and make the consequences for interacting with them unlawfully in line with punishements slated to be levied against human players for unlawful conduct. For starters.

If the players who so ardently advocate for a karma system want anyone to believe it's anything other than an attempt to run PvPers out of the game entirely and literally nothing more, they'd probably back this idea. Given how one dimensional that aspect of the game is right now, I'm honestly surprised PvEers aren't begging for NPC's to have their collective game enhanced.

 

[Han_Zen]

I concur. It's imperative that NPC's evolve beyond their current status as a low skill farmable resource. Make them more deadly, and make the consequences for interacting with them unlawfully in line with punishements slated to be levied against human players for unlawful conduct. For starters.

If the players who so ardently advocate for a karma system want anyone to believe it's anything other than an attempt to run PvPers out of the game entirely and literally nothing more, they'd probably back this idea. Given how one dimensional that aspect of the game is right now, I'm honestly surprised PvEers aren't begging for NPC's to have their collective game enhanced.

I am begging for NPCs to have their collective game enhanced. It's the main reason I dislike a player oriented karma system. It's a slippery slope to demote NPCs to a pure income source. I like to think that even if you play solo, everything you do should have consequences.

 

[Sandmann]

. The latter is unlikely to take CMDR vs NPC actions into consideration, unlike the former.

I don't see why. Ship A attacks ship B. The system evaluates "ship power" difference, rank difference, wings or not, and wanted status and makes a karmic evaluation. Why would status as player or npc come i to it?