Karma vs PvP Piracy

[Powderpanic]

Sorry but Pirates if they suffer from Bad Karma deserve it.
After all the Karma System is meant to Balance out the Unfair Risk distribution.

While an obvious troll post is obvious.

PVP pirates are not worried about a working Crime and Punishment system, in fact we would welcome some additional challenge.

What this Karma device is setting up to be is if you play in a way that daddy FDEV doesn't like, then FDEV will punish you or add in arbitrary fines, restictions to Open etc

This isn't crime and punishment, this is hand of god changes to a game that already has a ridiculous number of days to NOT get killed by another player.

Its not going to work in the way FDEV intend but it might screw up further, some of the career rolls.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

Karma = how god will judge you

C&P = how the cops will judge you

Except the two kind of go hand in hand. Here's how I see it:

If you want to be a Bad Boy (or Girl) in the game, you absolutely should be able to. But the consequences of that choice should affect how you are able to play your game. So, for instance, pirates (and worse, murderers) should find it increasingly difficult to operate in Hi Security systems, due to the Security Forces making your life difficult and stations increasingly denying you docking permission. You should find yourself forced/encouraged to lower and lower security systems, where your gamestyle adds content to the game itself! As it stands, I don't even look at the destination for a delivery mission, because the security of that system is currently effectively meaningless. However, if I take a delivery mission to a Low Sec area then I should be more likely to meet in-game players who are RPing bad guys, which increases the threat (and hopefully the payout). Similarly, the Bad Guy players should find High Sec areas dangerous for them. Balance.

Now, it has to be said that both sets of players need reasons to operate in areas of space that are dangerous for them, so that's something that needs addressing. But the karma and C&P systems are a good start.

 

[Riverside]

Dude, you're talking about crime and punishment, I think you're posting in the wrong thread.

This is a thread about karma,

think about it like this,

Karma = how god will judge you

C&P = how the cops will judge you

An excellent elevator presentation

I think Sunleader raises several good points, in particular about taking some pride in being the baddie rather than complaining that there may be consequences if it goes badly & the pirate ends up with blood on their hands. This puts the pirate into a similar dilemma to their victim, which I like.

I don't think anyone in this thread thinks the karma system will turn open into a PvE mode though.

 

[StiTch]

I think Sunleader raises several good points, in particular about taking some pride in being the baddie rather than complaining that there may be consequences if it goes badly

Actually I would be drooling for this - but most PvE folk that have put forward potential consequences have put forward not "changes to playstyle" that one could enjoy having to deal with (in a risk-filled manner), but instead direct penalties that aren't in effect something you "engage" with.

Will karma penalties be seen as a change to the offender's environment (requirement to use black markets etc.), or as "increase rebuy/remove insurance all together" for instance? Because the former is an engaging mechanic with consequence/risk that would truly embody "blazing your own trail". The latter has no more scope for being enjoyable than being ganked.

 

[CMDR ColD_ZA]

An excellent elevator presentation

I think Sunleader raises several good points, in particular about taking some pride in being the baddie rather than complaining that there may be consequences if it goes badly & the pirate ends up with blood on their hands. This puts the pirate into a similar dilemma to their victim, which I like.

I don't think anyone in this thread thinks the karma system will turn open into a PvE mode though.

I'm all for fair punishment for crimes, I just want to avoid extremists getting the vote.

I had someone once argue that destroying another player's ship was against the terms of service

I just don't want Fdev to listen to the nutters and implement a system where if you kill 10 player ships your account is revoked

 

[Robert Maynard]

I'm all for fair punishment for crimes, I just want to avoid extremists getting the vote.

Presumably that restriction would apply to both ends of the distribution?

 

[Shadowdancer]

* Yes, we will need to consider areas of lawless space that would normally be considered exempt from karma (such as barnacle sites), we're chewing this over.

With karma being somewhat orthogonal to law enforcement, why would it take legal status into account at all? If it is lore-wise meant to be a way of the Pilots Federation dealing with unwanted in-fighting among its members, why wouldn't it be universal, and only avoidable via obvious opt-out? Carrying power-play materials into "enemy" territory may be such an opt-out, as may be the report crimes setting (which could go on a cooldown and be tied to the safe logout mechanism to avoid surprise toggles), community goals involving both sides of a conflict could deputise players for the conflict parties and temporarily have the PF turn a blind eye (think conflict zone styled arena). Other means to avoid karma may be available in your region.

(edit) This isn't even meant to unduly penalise players, but to make their entire style of play have tangible consequences. I do not think that bad karma should be universally punished, there could be perks like anarchy factions taking a liking to the bad seeds, better access to black markets, new mission types, etc.

 

[CMDR ColD_ZA]

Presumably that restriction would apply to both ends of the distribution?

Indeed, that's I put emphasis on balance in my response to Sandro

 

[StiTch]

With karma being somewhat orthogonal to law enforcement, why would it take legal status into account at all?

It's neither mutually exclusive or inclusive of law.

The intention is to fairly temper what out-of-game is considered antisocial, but in the interests of it actually being "fair", it's understood out-of-game that anarchy systems are "anything goes". If the game is to actually be founded on risk/consequence, be reminded any player has the choice of avoiding anarchy systems - and players that want to play the game in an unreputable fashion need to have somewhere to do it, even if the average player not wanting risk can avoid those systems with relative ease. You even have a map filter that does the work for you now, and warning messages when headed to such a system.

This is about "playing your way", after all

 

[Cosmos]

Sandro, can we please be entirely honest here.

What is the point in you putting into this game, a Karma system?

Must admit it does seem like a wasted effort considering solo and pg will remain, and those moaning would continue to not use Open whilst still maligning actions/players they consider 'griefing'. What I've always found wrong is the way blame is put on the player when in fact the real problem is people view the game and play it in different ways. Yet despite this one playstyle gets called all the names under the sun, and the other mollycoddled by the developer.

What exactly about a cutthroat galaxy do people not understand? I'm not saying there shouldnt be a karma system, and I think addressing the wiping bounties in a sidey is a good one, but if implemented these changes need to go hand in hand with some comprehensive changes and improvements to the core gameplay.

To keep pg post karma/cp system doesn't make much sense because if its effective and addresses the main argument I've seen, that there are no consequences, why would pg be needed anymore?

 

[Riverside]

Actually I would be drooling for this - but most PvE folk that have put forward potential consequences have put forward not "changes to playstyle" that one could enjoy having to deal with, but instead direct penalties that aren't in effect something you "engage" with.

Will karma penalties be seen as a change to the offender's environment (requirement to use black markets etc.), or as "increase rebuy/remove insurance all together" for instance? Because the former is an engaging mechanic with consequence/risk that would truly embody "blazing your own trail". The latter has no more scope for being enjoyable than being ganked.

This system will affect my playstyle too, I like a good old dilemma & this new system presents me with some fresh ones, and hopefully gives you a challenge to overcome rather than just a straight punishment for not playing in the 'approved' manner.

I think if we take a situation where you are a particularly assertive pirate & I am a meek trader, I am now less concerned about losing my hull & more open to your persuasion, so less likely to just plain run. You are motivated to achieve your goal (by coercion or persuasion) without getting blood on your hands, the chances of us both having some fun is increased.

For me a threat of malice or a reputation for popping ships is meaningless, I'm the stupid kind of trader who would rather lose the hull than give in to a bully if I can help it, but I can be persuaded, bribed & lightly threatened in a joking manner.

I want you to try to pirate me, I want to be entertaining content for you, and I want you to be entertaining content for me. But I see piracy as an end-game activity for the fun & challenge of it far more than a profitable career choice. So if you rise to the challenge & do it well (and entertain) I want to see that rewarded (with engaging gameplay if not actual Credits), if you go in with little thought for your victim & only for your own entertainment I will not give you a second thought on as you starve at the bottom of a pit of your own making.

 

[Riverside]

I had someone once argue that destroying another player's ship was against the terms of service

I'd have popped them just for saying that (well, tried to )

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yet despite this one playstyle gets called all the names under the sun, and the other mollycoddled by the developer.

Possibly because the latter does not directly affect the enjoyment of the game of the former whereas the converse cannot be said.

In another thread Sandro specifically mentioned that the existence of Solo and Private Groups is not a reason to do nothing about improving Open.

The karma system would very much seem to be designed to discourage particular player / player interactions that Frontier consider to be detrimental to the health of the game.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

What exactly about a cutthroat galaxy do people not understand? I'm not saying there shouldnt be a karma system, and I think addressing the wiping bounties in a sidey is a good one, but if implemented these changes need to go hand in hand with some comprehensive changes and improvements to the core gameplay.

Which is what they're doing.

To keep pg post karma/cp system doesn't make much sense because if its effective and addresses the main argument I've seen, that there are no consequences, why would pg be needed?

For the same reasons it's needed now...some people are very particular about who they play with. And, like it or not, some players don't want any​ combat PvP at all, karma, C&P or otherwise. The game is big enough to support all three modes.

 

[StiTch]

This system will affect my playstyle too, I like a good old dilemma & this new system presents me with some fresh ones, and hopefully gives you a challenge to overcome rather than just a straight punishment for not playing in the 'approved' manner.

Repped for this.

For me a threat of malice or a reputation for popping ships is meaningless, I'm the stupid kind of trader who would rather lose the hull than give in to a bully if I can help it, but I can be persuaded, bribed & lightly threatened in a joking manner.

In its own right though, does this not come under "playing your way"?

Some traders can be asked, some have to be bullied, some have to have cargo forcefully removed. That's why people pirate CMDRs in the first place - more dynamic interaction - and is why it should be part of the pirate's job to gauge what the appropriate response is (or use the same response if they're good at it and fits their RPing)

But I see piracy as an end-game activity for the fun & challenge of it far more than a profitable career choice.

Just be careful with this, because newer players trying to pirate in a cobra or something deserve every last bit of respect a seasoned pirate in engineered monster has. "Particularly profitable"....hell no. "End game"? Also not. Props to anyone that pirates in an early ship for the fun, using successful capturing and extorting techniques, instead of racing up to engineered 'vette...

 

[Riverside]

Just be careful with this, because newer players trying to pirate in a cobra or something deserve every last bit of respect a seasoned pirate in engineered monster has. "Particularly profitable"....hell no. "End game"? Also not. Props to anyone that pirates in an early ship for the fun, using successful capturing and extorting techniques, instead of racing up to engineered 'vette...

Yeah I didn't cover this in my response. I guess what I would want here is for Piracy to be profitable like running rares. Initially worthwhile but does not scale well with bigger ships. Not sure how that would work, maybe flooding a black market with 50t of something slashes the price?

 

[StiTch]

Yeah I didn't cover this in my response. I guess what I would want here is for Piracy to be profitable like running rares. Initially worthwhile but does not scale well with bigger ships. Not sure how that would work, maybe flooding a black market with 50t of something slashes the price?

Hm, I think piracy rewards is part of a much bigger conversation. I don't think bulk pirating is a problem because you still have to run around collecting it in small amounts and isn't profitable to start with - and we need to decide how to make it financially viable before we start deciding when it will be less financially viable...

 

[Riverside]

we need to decide how to make it financially viable before we start deciding when it will be less financially viable...

Yes, my suggestion above assumed that. Sandro said it was something they were looking at earlier.

By '50t of something' I was thinking of a single large haul rather than lots of little ones.

 

[Robert Maynard]

and we need to decide how to make it financially viable before we start deciding when it will be less financially viable...

..... without making it so punishing on the target that they choose not to trade in Open, of course.

 

[Sandro Sammarco]

Hello Commander

While an obvious troll post is obvious.

PVP pirates are not worried about a working Crime and Punishment system, in fact we would welcome some additional challenge.

What this Karma device is setting up to be is if you play in a way that daddy FDEV doesn't like, then FDEV will punish you or add in arbitrary fines, restictions to Open etc

This isn't crime and punishment, this is hand of god changes to a game that already has a ridiculous number of days to NOT get killed by another player.

Its not going to work in the way FDEV intend but it might screw up further, some of the career rolls.

I respectfully disagree with you. We want to design a karma system that adds more appropriate consequences for certain actions between human players via in-game, in-lore functionality.

So to us karma, crime and punishment are related, specifically when it comes to ships destruction because of ramming at starports, or murder crimes where the disparity between player skill/stats, ship power is extreme.

The reason combat logging is also bundled in because a karma system is likely the best way to detect it, and if in-game consequences make folk less likely to combat log, then it's probably a win all way round.

As I have stated multiple times: karma is not the one fix solution to all player versus player issues, and it's not meant to prevent (it actually doesn't in any way prevent) players from taking actions that might be unpleasant or undesirable to others. It simply tries to apply reasonable and contextual consequences to those actions. If anything, it's a risk to reward rebalance for those actions, which currently feels out of kilter.

Of course, it's going to be an ongoing challenge, so we'll see how it develops.