Improving Elite Dangerous for (almost) everyone

First of all, I know there is a Suggestions forum, but before actually making these suggestions I'd like your oppinion. That's why I'm posting this here first ;)

There are some changes that I'd like to propose to improve the game and make it more enjoyable to all of us:

1- Player standings. i.e. After being wanted in X systems, and/or after breaking the law X times in X time frame you become a Criminal, which has more implications than just being wanted.

2- System security levels (working that is). Something like 0 to 100; 100 being the safest and 0 being no security at all. Noticeable difference between them. Higher security should have active security patrol ships, promptly destroying outlaws. Many of them always on the entry point around the star. Outlaws shouldn't be able to even enter higher security systems. You can think of it like a PvE-only zone, but instead of using a different server group, it just uses a different system.

3- More logical insurance system. Implement insurance company standings. The cover of the insurance should be calculated dynamically, taking in account player standings and how many ships the player lost over a determinated time frame. Every time you lose a ship, your insurance company standings drop. And at the same time, the insurance standings should increase SLOWLY but gradually over time while the player don't loose any insured ship. This should be a reward for players who are careful and also encourage the use of smaller, less expensive ships for PvP and Pirates.

4- Commodities market changes. We need reasons for traders and miners to go to lower security systems. Maybe moving rares to those systems would do. But we would also need some kind of protection to stop pirate associates from exploiting this trade system. This last thing is really important. Suggestions are welcome.

5- We have to do something with the ramming problem. Maybe just disable ramming between players in higher security systems? Not the most elegant solution but I can't really think of anything better right now. Open to suggestions.

6- The reward of killing a wanted ship should be based on the % of damage done instead of who shot it last.


What would we accomplish with these changes?

1- Having safe areas for people who want to play in community but doesn't want to be harassed by anyone.

2- Adding some excitement for pirates, who at this time have almost nothing to win or loose except maybe a few seconds of shooting.

3- Add a calculated risk for traders. Some of them will prefer to stay in higher security but make less credits. Other may take the chance and go to lower security for higher profit.

4- PvE players would enjoy sharing a RES a lot more than now, because bounties would now be fair and the ramming exploit (I mean with no consequences at all) should be a thing of the past.

5- Add a reason to use smaller ships. These are pretty much neglected right now by almost anyone except people who just started the game and have no credits to buy something bigger.


Let me know what you think. Constructive criticism, please :)
 
Last edited:
Well thought out. I'll take your points in the same order you posted them.

1- Player standings. i.e. After being wanted in X systems, and/or after breaking the law X times in X time frame you become a Criminal, which has more implications than just being wanted.
Great! This would add depth of gameplay for pirates. As their "Criminal Rank" increases, black markets should offer increased payouts for their loot.


2- System security levels (working that is). Something like 0 to 100; 100 being the safest and 0 being no security at all. Noticeable difference between them. Higher security should have active security patrol ships, promptly destroying outlaws. Many of them always on the entry point around the star. Outlaws shouldn't be able to even enter higher security systems. You can think of it like a PvE-only zone, but instead of using a different server group, it just uses a different system.
This just feels like Eve Online to me. All it really does is split the population into those who want to PVP and those who don't...which is what Solo already does. I'd like to combine this with your #4:
4- Commodities market changes. We need reasons for traders and miners to go to lower security systems. Maybe moving rares to those systems would do. But we would also need some kind of protection to stop pirate associates from exploiting this trade system. This last thing is really important. Suggestions are welcome.
This won't actually pull people into Open, nor entice Traders to populate low-sec systems. If profits increase at lower security, people will just log into Solo and trade in Null-Sec. These two goals are also directly opposed to each other. Trying to entice Traders into Low-Sec to profit but preventing Pirates from being as effective in this area, completely negates the purpose of having Low-Sec to begin with.


3- More logical insurance system. Implement insurance company standings. The cover of the insurance should be calculated dynamically, taking in account player standings and how many ships the player lost over a determinated time frame. Every time you lose a ship, your insurance company standings drop. And at the same time, the insurance standings should increase SLOWLY but gradually over time while the player don't loose any insured ship. This should be a reward for players who are careful and also encourage the use of smaller, less expensive ships for PvP and Pirates.
I really like this idea, too. Would make insurance fairly realistic.


5- We have to do something with the ramming problem. Maybe just disable ramming between players in higher security systems? Not the most elegant solution but I can't really think of anything better right now. Open to suggestions.
Perhaps by making ramming do no damage unless the target has no shields? Also, if a ship blows up, any CMDR that did any damage at all to it (in any way) gains a fine and WANTED status. Reckless driving is a crime, as is vehicular manslaughter.


6- The reward of killing a wanted ship should be based on the % of damage done instead of who shot it last.
Absolutely. Additionally, The Sim needs to track how many fines a CMDR has had in the last 24 hours (or more?) and increase the fine amount for pilots with multiple infractions.


It would be good to encourage players to move toward Open play more. I, myself, have yet to even try it, unless you count a misclick once on my mouse. I play exclusively in Group. I don't like being interdicted while I trade, which I do quite a bit. I also don't want increased wait times for docking, and competition in RES's where people can both snipe last hits and combat log doesn't appeal to me, either. Until these things change, I gain nothing from joining Open but a few headaches.

If Open had better trading, more fairness in sharing kills, an automatic timer added to logging out if you've been in combat within the last minute, and prevented people from clogging docks, I'd be there in a heartbeat.

Your ideas are very good, for the most part, and would certainly help draw me to Open.
 
I really like the proposition regarding blackmarket reputation vs loot payouts. Having a reputation among shady NPCs as a good smuggler and someone not to be crossed would be cool, but I also don't want to become a kill on sight criminal for running goods - so a balance would have to be struck, and the game would have to differentiate different types of crime when considering your notoriety.

I would also like to see a change made whereby actions made in solo/private play cannot affect the background sim. Sorry, Mobius, it's not your fault. Groups are chipping away at border systems in solo/private play where nobody can resist them.

boxfox; I'm part of a small group that specializes in freighter escorts. If you want to try open, give us a shout. Interdictions can be fun if you aren't guaranteed to lose.
 
Last edited:
1- Player standings. i.e. After being wanted in X systems, and/or after breaking the law X times in X time frame you become a Criminal, which has more implications than just being wanted.

Yup, can't see many people disagreeing with this.

2- System security levels (working that is). Something like 0 to 100; 100 being the safest and 0 being no security at all. Noticeable difference between them. Higher security should have active security patrol ships, promptly destroying outlaws. Many of them always on the entry point around the star. Outlaws shouldn't be able to even enter higher security systems. You can think of it like a PvE-only zone, but instead of using a different server group, it just uses a different system.

Yes, up until a point. Outlaws should be able to go anywhere, just like anyone else. They should just get pursued more vigorously and with more capable ships in systems with a stronger security force.

I don't like the idea of systems security levels such as you propose. It's basically eve online. Nope.
However there could maybe be a middle ground, where based on system population, controlling faction etc a system could have a higher security presence. This should not be something you can simply look at from the map, you need to view the economic and political status of a system and make an assumption about the security force.

Some systems should be very difficult for the outlaws to operate in due to active police and maybe military pursuits.

3- More logical insurance system. Implement insurance company standings. The cover of the insurance should be calculated dynamically, taking in account player standings and how many ships the player lost over a determinated time frame. Every time you lose a ship, your insurance company standings drop. And at the same time, the insurance standings should increase SLOWLY but gradually over time while the player don't loose any insured ship. This should be a reward for players who are careful and also encourage the use of smaller, less expensive ships for PvP and Pirates.

Nice idea. Apart from the fact that backers received set insurance values at discount from standard as part of their perks package. So it would be bad form for FD to change this.

4- Commodities market changes. We need reasons for traders and miners to go to lower security systems. Maybe moving rares to those systems would do. But we would also need some kind of protection to stop pirate associates from exploiting this trade system. This last thing is really important. Suggestions are welcome.

Solo kills this idea. Unless the NPC's in lower security are also going to be extremely difficult to outrun/escape

5- We have to do something with the ramming problem. Maybe just disable ramming between players in higher security systems? Not the most elegant solution but I can't really think of anything better right now. Open to suggestions.

Once again, not eve. If my ship hits another I expect damage!
I'm not sure it needs addressing, not in open space at least. Unless you are in a tiny ship then it would usually take a couple of rams to destroy you.


6- The reward of killing a wanted ship should be based on the % of damage done instead of who shot it last.

Nope. Killing blow = bounty! First to the prize gets the cash.
There is no reason other that making bounty hunting easier that means this should be done.


1- Having safe areas for people who want to play in community but doesn't want to be harassed by anyone.

No area should be safe. But I do agree some areas should be safer, especially systems new players are places in.

2- Adding some excitement for pirates, who at this time have almost nothing to win or loose except maybe a few seconds of shooting.

Yup

3- Add a calculated risk for traders. Some of them will prefer to stay in higher security but make less credits. Other may take the chance and go to lower security for higher profit.
Needs careful thought to ensure solo is not 'even easier than it is now mode'

4- PvE players would enjoy sharing a RES a lot more than now, because bounties would now be fair and the ramming exploit (I mean with no consequences at all) should be a thing of the past.
Bounty hunting should not be fair IMO.

5- Add a reason to use smaller ships. These are pretty much neglected right now by almost anyone except people who just started the game and have no credits to buy something bigger.

I must have missed the reason this makes folks want to use smaller ships.

Seriously, well thought out, and even though i do not agree with many points, respect for taking the time
 
Well thought out. I'll take your points in the same order you posted them.
Great! This would add depth of gameplay for pirates. As their "Criminal Rank" increases, black markets should offer increased payouts for their loot.

Actually I didn't think of that, but it's a very good idea. Maybe not just increased payouts but access to different black markets which would be unreachable without the proper ranking. When I first started to play I thought it was strange having access to a black market just like that, without any kind of standings.


This just feels like Eve Online to me. All it really does is split the population into those who want to PVP and those who don't...which is what Solo already does. I'd like to combine this with your #4:

This won't actually pull people into Open, nor entice Traders to populate low-sec systems. If profits increase at lower security, people will just log into Solo and trade in Null-Sec. These two goals are also directly opposed to each other. Trying to entice Traders into Low-Sec to profit but preventing Pirates from being as effective in this area, completely negates the purpose of having Low-Sec to begin with.

Well that's a good point. Let's see... I know it does feel like EVE Online, well actually more like "the idea" of EVE Online since I hope that if they ever implement this in ED it will be much less exploitable than EVE's. Still, the idea of this is actually unite the population. If you really think of it, the population in ED is already split between Solo, Groups and Open. If this implementation goes right, it should attract people from both Solo and Group to the same "universe" because it will give them the chance to play the way they like without being gratuitously attacked or harassed, and at the same time, it will allow PvPers to keep fighting and doing all they like, EXCEPT ganking people who has a different definition of "fun" and likes to play in a different way. And, at the end of the day we would be a few jumps away if we change our minds.
Many people like the Coop kind of play. Sharing the space in Open with other (probably unknown) people but not having to see everyone as an enemy all the time, anywhere. This is different than playing on a reduced group of people.
And about the traders going to solo for rares... that's an issue. I'd completely separate Solo from Open, but since the game started differently it may be a bit difficult to change that at this time. Still, it's the only good solution I can think of right now.


Perhaps by making ramming do no damage unless the target has no shields? Also, if a ship blows up, any CMDR that did any damage at all to it (in any way) gains a fine and WANTED status. Reckless driving is a crime, as is vehicular manslaughter.

Still not so sure about this... as it would be exploitable. It's difficult to know for sure who rammed who... maybe the faster ship could be interpreted as the rammer, but I'm still not sure of the best way to implement this. But without any doubt it's really important.


It would be good to encourage players to move toward Open play more. I, myself, have yet to even try it, unless you count a misclick once on my mouse. I play exclusively in Group. I don't like being interdicted while I trade, which I do quite a bit. I also don't want increased wait times for docking, and competition in RES's where people can both snipe last hits and combat log doesn't appeal to me, either. Until these things change, I gain nothing from joining Open but a few headaches.

If Open had better trading, more fairness in sharing kills, an automatic timer added to logging out if you've been in combat within the last minute, and prevented people from clogging docks, I'd be there in a heartbeat.

Your ideas are very good, for the most part, and would certainly help draw me to Open.

Well, that's the idea. I see many people on the forums that say they prefer to play solo or in groups... and that's really a shame since the game is an MMO (or at least some kind of) and having unknown (but decent) people around enriches the experience, in many ways.
 
Yes, up until a point. Outlaws should be able to go anywhere, just like anyone else. They should just get pursued more vigorously and with more capable ships in systems with a stronger security force.

I don't like the idea of systems security levels such as you propose. It's basically eve online. Nope.
However there could maybe be a middle ground, where based on system population, controlling faction etc a system could have a higher security presence. This should not be something you can simply look at from the map, you need to view the economic and political status of a system and make an assumption about the security force.

Some systems should be very difficult for the outlaws to operate in due to active police and maybe military pursuits.

I understand what you are saying, as it feels like they'll taking away access to many systems... but the reason behind this is to try and unite solo, group and open on a single server. This would be about the same as having a dedicated PvE server, but in a more elegant way (IMO of course). We have 400 billion stars in ED, so I don't think any group (PvP or PvE) should feel constrained in any way.
The only thing they will be taking away from "pirates" is access to harass people who want to play in a different way (just PvE) but still share the universe with other, maybe unknown, people.
Assumptions about the security background of a system doesn't sound right to me... I mean, if you're going to a civilized system you should be able to know in advance how is the security there, right?
Medium security systems could be more permissible, and pirate ships should be able to fight and sometimes to run away. But higher security systems should kill any pirate instantaneously, because it should effectively be a PvE zone.



Solo kills this idea. Unless the NPC's in lower security are also going to be extremely difficult to outrun/escape

Right, that is a problem. I'd just separate assets from Solo and Open, but that's just me. Can't think of a better solution atm.


Once again, not eve. If my ship hits another I expect damage!
I'm not sure it needs addressing, not in open space at least. Unless you are in a tiny ship then it would usually take a couple of rams to destroy you.

Fair enough. "Hit a ship = damage done" always sounds right to me... but we need some way to prevent kids from exploiting this feature and harassing people who just want PvE. Maybe something like:

Rammer=Ship that's flying faster
If Rammed got XX% damage then Rammer is wanted
If Rammed got 1% damage and Rammed is in No Fire Zone then Rammer is wanted

I know it's not so good, but it's a start.


Nope. Killing blow = bounty! First to the prize gets the cash.
There is no reason other that making bounty hunting easier that means this should be done.

The reason would be again, allowing people who want PvE to enjoy the game. Even if you're not shooting another player, the merely fact of trying to compete transforms PvE into PvP.


I must have missed the reason this makes folks want to use smaller ships.

Because they are cheaper!! :)
And because they are there. It took lots of works to make them, and many small ships are just getting about a week of use until you can buy a bigger ship. We need more balance on this. Everything should have something good and bad. And right now, with the insurance as it is, there is no value at all on using a small ship. Having more people using smaller ships will add variety and enrich the gameplay. Right now every time I go to a RES I just see Vultures and FDLs... where are the Vipers and the Eagles? They last only a few days just because there's no point on using them. And they are nice little ships, and they should give us a reason to enjoy them.


Seriously, well thought out, and even though i do not agree with many points, respect for taking the time

Thank you for taking the time to read it and answering.
 
I'm always up for the security level train of thought. :)


Note that this stuff isn't "From EVE Online". It's "From Elite 1984". System safety/risk was presented based on system of government. From safest to most dangerous, we had:

  1. Corporate States
  2. Democracies
  3. Confederacies
  4. Communist States
  5. Dictatorships
  6. Multi-Governments
  7. Feudal Worlds
  8. Anarchies

All Frontier has done is package up the (terribly under-utilised) concept of system safety as SECURITY LEVEL (High/Medium/Low/None).


Safer areas could indeed be great "starter newbie systems".

Dangerous places could indeed be for more experienced, well kitted out players.


And much more.


But SECURITY LEVEL needs work! More thoughts here. :)
 
I'm always up for the security level train of thought. :)


Note that this stuff isn't "From EVE Online". It's "From Elite 1984". System safety/risk was presented based on system of government. From safest to most dangerous, we had:

  1. Corporate States
  2. Democracies
  3. Confederacies
  4. Communist States
  5. Dictatorships
  6. Multi-Governments
  7. Feudal Worlds
  8. Anarchies

All Frontier has done is package up the (terribly under-utilised) concept of system safety as SECURITY LEVEL (High/Medium/Low/None).


Safer areas could indeed be great "starter newbie systems".

Dangerous places could indeed be for more experienced, well kitted out players.


And much more.


But SECURITY LEVEL needs work! More thoughts here. :)

Yep, the security levels are in place- all we are waiting for is an appropriate security response for high to medium security areas (and for this info to be easier to see on the system map); we've already got the response for low and nil sec areas :p
Crossing my fingers for improvements in 1.3..
 
Back
Top Bottom