Update Kill Warrant Scanner Feedback

[CMDR _BigJay_]

Right, I think I understand. However, I still don't understand why you want your rep with a faction to go up but you don't want the influence of the same faction to increase. You want their favour but you don't want to help them? If that's right then I find that odd, but I agree the current proposal will work for you! (even if it doesn't make sense to me).

At some point, it's a game. Sorry to break the immersion.

I want to be liked, so I can get the good missions. I am killing criminals for them so it's fair that they like me.

But at the same time, I may not want their influence in a given system to rise because I am supporting another faction in that system.

 

[nrage]

I'm pretty sure if I have to read the OP, which has a large number of if-then statements, and then several pages of data to extrapolate how the KWS works; and that none of this will actually be described in game, that my comment stands just fine.

What I read, tells me the KWS is now essentially occupying a slot that I can use for something else. This is what it tells most people.

What I think you're missing is that the old scanner was just as bad, the only difference is that no-one ever tried to explain how it worked because people "just got it". Sure, no-one "just got it" exactly the same way - as evidenced by the confusion in this thread, but the point is that no-one, in-game, was ever all that confused. It just seemed to work, and do something useful. The new scanner will be exactly the same. So, the fact that the underlying mechanics have changed, won't really make any difference to anyone .. except those people who understood the old scanner really well AND relied on old behaviour which is not longer supported.

 

[Riverside]

So we're all agreed it's a nerf to current KWS usage in a PvE setting.

Catching up on this thread and it seems a lot of the objections are either misunderstandings which should hopefully settle down with use, or issues with changes where the KWS previously made the BGS influence confusing for the novice and too powerful for the expert.

I'm not sure I'd describe that as a nerf overall.

The novice should get about the same payout increase as before (if it changes it's not because of the KWS), but the influence claiming the vouchers has is now easier to understand.
The Expert should now have finer control over how they use the vouchers to influence the BGS and should be less frustrated by novice activity having adverse effects.
Plus as a bonus in some circumstances we now get a licence to kill, which was a regular source of confusion for novice players, and it may encourage fitment in PvP which means one less shield booster.

 

[TeamGav]

Now for the gameplay you're describing - a bounty hunt across jurisdictions... this actually exists in the current live game already. They are the Assassination missions.

Do you think it's significant that these can't target CMDRs?

 

[madbilly]

At some point, it's a game. Sorry to break the immersion.

[ugh]

 

[Alec Turner]

At some point, it's a game. Sorry to break the immersion.

Wait ... what did he say ... WHAT!?!?!?!

We be like ...

 

[n13L5]

I too am surprised the amount of attention Sandro is giving this one item, considering all the problems with Powerplay, Multi-crew, CQC and lots of other stuff that has had more demand for fixing than this..

Maybe one day..

They are fixing what bugs THEM, not what bugs US...

 

[Alec Turner]

They are fixing what bugs THEM, not what bugs US...

Except, afaik, Sandro only got into this because of my original "Save the Kill Warrant Scanner" thread and then my subsequent nagging on twitter and via forum pm's. Originally the change in KWS behaviour was a tiny footnote in the original C&P feedback. In fact I feared it was going to go completely unnoticed, which is why I started that thread.

So no, I don't think that's a valid criticism.

 

[raymondo the great]

Except, afaik, Sandro only got into this because of my original "Save the Kill Warrant Scanner" thread and then my subsequent nagging on twitter and via forum pm's. Originally the change in KWS behaviour was a tiny footnote in the original C&P feedback. In fact I feared it was going to go completely unnoticed, which is why I started that thread.

So no, I don't think that's a valid criticism.

Yup you are right...without that thread I don't think we'd have had this discussion with the devs till well after 3.0 went live - if ever.

And ultimately the KWS was somthing they were changing in 3.0. Powerplay Multi-crew CQC etc isn't, and while I'd love changes to all of them, and think some would be easy (100x CQC rewards for example) the KWS is in scope for this update, the rest isn't. Pretty much as simple as that (except where PP impacts on C&P)

Oh and of course as always it's only being changed because "a group of people got very loud" Sadly there are very many good CQC PP MC suggestions etc...but they are not vocally backed. People sometimes ask why I won't stop banging on about the few topics I'm on about ATM (and I'm only on these boards in the beta periods usually) and the simple fact is that if you say what you think once and let it lie nothing gets done! Much as it annoys some people you have to keep on beating the drum!

So a big thanks to you and all who have been banging it...what is proposed now may not be the best solution...but it's far better than beta and previous proposals, so we have made progress at least

 

[nrage]

So no, I don't think that's a valid criticism.

 

[Jynessa Loraeyn]

At some point, it's a game. Sorry to break the immersion.

I want to be liked, so I can get the good missions. I am killing criminals for them so it's fair that they like me.

But at the same time, I may not want their influence in a given system to rise because I am supporting another faction in that system.

Actually, you know, if I was going to suggest a little tweak to the current changes, it would be that if you hand bounties to an Interstellar Factor, you shouldn't gain any rep with the faction who issued it AS WELL as not giving them any influence in their system.

I know someone else said (not you) that it doesn't make sense that handing in bounties to an Interstellar Factor doesn't give the issuing faction influence, and while I know what they were getting at, I'm with you in disagreeing on it - and not simply because of the quite nice gameplay angle that it allows you to be selective about which factions you help out.

Here's how it works for me - the factors are basically information brokers. When some faction places a bounty on someone, they have to set aside a certain amount of assets to pay the bounty if it's ever claimed. When you claim the bounty, you're basically giving them a piece of information that helps with some long-term plan they had, which they can now proceed with.

When you instead sell your claim to an information broker (at reduced price), you're basically selling the information that someone's ship got blown up and some faction had put a bounty on them. Now the information broker may have no ties to the issuing faction - this is just the meat and drink of their business, information. They may even be on the side of the rival faction who got their ship blown up. They might want the information to sell to the rival, which might actually help the rival's influence ("okay, we're going to get revenge on these guys... Slick Tony was caught in the rings at Pemoeri 4A, let's turn this around on them"), or be paid to keep the information secret, which means the original issuing faction are sat there like lemons, with some of their assets tied up ready to pay out as a bounty - with the bounty never being claimed. Which is hardly going to help their influence.

My point is, it's all an abstraction, if that sounds convoluted. Instead of properly going to the issuing faction, and saying, "you put this bounty on this guy... well, I got him so pay up", you've instead gone to some system of questionable legality and sold the information on the bounty to a lowlife cut-throat information broker to be used as they see fit. You have no guarantee the information broker is going to use that information to help out the original issuing faction at all, or even whether they'll use it against them. You just wanted those greasy creds quick and convenient, and so you took the hit on the lesser payout.

In this situation, it makes a lot of sense that your action should have no effect on the influence of the issuing faction, and it's also nice because it actually gives you this option in background sim gameplay terms. I think we're both in agreement there.

However, I also think that if that's what's happening, the rep gain with the issuing faction should also be a total loss. I mean, they don't even KNOW you killed the guy with their bounty, so why should you gain any rep with them? This also actually gives more fine-grained control to commanders in rep terms - it allows a commander to NOT gain rep if they don't want to... I know, who would want that, but some people might actually want to be Hostile to certain factions and stay that way, and it would be nice if they have that option too.

It's not a huge deal in something that already isn't really a huge deal - so I wouldn't fight for this. It just makes more sense to me if it worked that way.

 

[Bunkerkind Anni]

Except, afaik, Sandro only got into this because of my original "Save the Kill Warrant Scanner" thread and then my subsequent nagging on twitter and via forum pm's. Originally the change in KWS behaviour was a tiny footnote in the original C&P feedback. In fact I feared it was going to go completely unnoticed, which is why I started that thread.

So no, I don't think that's a valid criticism.

ok
so this is not "fixed"...
can we start giving multicrew, or more the lack of FDEV support for it, in Beyond's first chapter some attention?

like how the KWS is a Multicrew enabled module, but when the gunner uses it, the result is not automatically reported to the Pilot of the ship?

so, please Sandro - when you are fixing KWS,
- command your UI DEVs to put the scan bar on the helms HUD whenever it is used.
- write the scan result into the player journal so we can have our player made tools access the data

 

[Ralph Vargr]

Actually, you know, if I was going to suggest a little tweak to the current changes, it would be that if you hand bounties to an Interstellar Factor, you shouldn't gain any rep with the faction who issued it AS WELL as not giving them any influence in their system.

I know someone else said (not you) that it doesn't make sense that handing in bounties to an Interstellar Factor doesn't give the issuing faction influence, and while I know what they were getting at, I'm with you in disagreeing on it - and not simply because of the quite nice gameplay angle that it allows you to be selective about which factions you help out.

Here's how it works for me - the factors are basically information brokers. When some faction places a bounty on someone, they have to set aside a certain amount of assets to pay the bounty if it's ever claimed. When you claim the bounty, you're basically giving them a piece of information that helps with some long-term plan they had, which they can now proceed with.

When you instead sell your claim to an information broker (at reduced price), you're basically selling the information that someone's ship got blown up and some faction had put a bounty on them. Now the information broker may have no ties to the issuing faction - this is just the meat and drink of their business, information. They may even be on the side of the rival faction who got their ship blown up. They might want the information to sell to the rival, which might actually help the rival's influence ("okay, we're going to get revenge on these guys... Slick Tony was caught in the rings at Pemoeri 4A, let's turn this around on them"), or be paid to keep the information secret, which means the original issuing faction are sat there like lemons, with some of their assets tied up ready to pay out as a bounty - with the bounty never being claimed. Which is hardly going to help their influence.

My point is, it's all an abstraction, if that sounds convoluted. Instead of properly going to the issuing faction, and saying, "you put this bounty on this guy... well, I got him so pay up", you've instead gone to some system of questionable legality and sold the information on the bounty to a lowlife cut-throat information broker to be used as they see fit. You have no guarantee the information broker is going to use that information to help out the original issuing faction at all, or even whether they'll use it against them. You just wanted those greasy creds quick and convenient, and so you took the hit on the lesser payout.

In this situation, it makes a lot of sense that your action should have no effect on the influence of the issuing faction, and it's also nice because it actually gives you this option in background sim gameplay terms. I think we're both in agreement there.

However, I also think that if that's what's happening, the rep gain with the issuing faction should also be a total loss. I mean, they don't even KNOW you killed the guy with their bounty, so why should you gain any rep with them? This also actually gives more fine-grained control to commanders in rep terms - it allows a commander to NOT gain rep if they don't want to... I know, who would want that, but some people might actually want to be Hostile to certain factions and stay that way, and it would be nice if they have that option too.

It's not a huge deal in something that already isn't really a huge deal - so I wouldn't fight for this. It just makes more sense to me if it worked that way.

Nice walls of text.

And it wasn't a huge deal- until they changed it.

 

[Jynessa Loraeyn]

Do you think it's significant that these can't target CMDRs?

Yes, I do. It's significant because I imagine they thought about it, and then decided that mission boards which are exclusively dedicated to NPC factions offering jobs should not be muddying the waters of PvP. Those mission boards get people flying around, where they could potentially be spotted by other commanders, but I imagine that's as far as they were willing for it to go.

Can you imagine the can of worms you're opening if you have NPC factions randomly issuing missions targeted at specific commanders? Now I don't think you're suggesting that - you're simply wondering if it's significant.

I'd say that it's almost certainly a good idea to not mix PvP elements into the NPC faction mission boards - for one thing, Solo and Private Group would make that pointless.

What I do hope is that other tools, like the mentioned improved wake scanners and tracking limpets, will benefit PvP gameplay and then leave it to actual players to decide who they want to track down, and for what reasons. PvP remains something you actively choose to engage in, with other people who also actively choose to engage in it. Who knows? Maybe one day there could be a separate PvP bounty board that is for commanders and visible only to commanders.

However, this is way, way off the topic of this thread, which is the KWS and the changes being made to it - the main PvP element for that is the Interstellar Bounties you can now accumulate on yourself (over 2 million)... and I guess maybe that might make a few PvP'ers give up a utility slot to use a KWS and then try to scan a target at the start of the fight... but honestly, I'm not going to hold my breath. That sounds like a stretch to me. Most people are going to want that extra shield booster or that second chaff.

 

[Jynessa Loraeyn]

Nice walls of text.

And it wasn't a huge deal- until they changed it.

Heh yeah, I do tend to run my mouth, sorry.

And I didn't mean the overall KWS discussion wasn't a huge deal, but the specific issue of rep and influence gain/loss when selling bounties to Interstellar Factors is a relatively minor part of that, and my suggestion that there should be no rep gain is even more minor.

 

[sqzbox1]

It all just seems overly complex to me. I'm sure it is all great and wonderful and lots of subtle stuff is being attended to and all that - but I wonder - for a person who just picks up their controller and charges in to the game to just buzz around and play, will this level of subtlety be relevant? or even noticed? And how does an ordinary player get to know that this is how it works anyway? Because it is not obvious.

I don't really get it TBH. If a ship has a bounty from A and B and C then why shouldn't rep with A B and C be increased in proportionate amounts to the amount of the bounty? That is what I would expect without thinking about it - plain and simple. That would seem to me to be the purpose of the KWS - to get recognition and rewards from the factions issuing them - nothing more. Nothing to do with the superpowers - rep there would come from wherever you hand it in. If you want to buzz around all over the place and then hand them in at one local station then fine - do that. And pilot's federation bounties has no rep associated with it at all - just financial rewards.

OK - so I am probably naive - but truly - anything beyond the obvious intuitive and simple structure will be completely lost on most players I reckon. Complexity will not be understood and will possibly cause more issues later (when this discussion is forgotten). Nobody reads manuals - unless it is a gamebreaking situation for the player. And even then most times people come to the forum. And the forum is useful but in the end will become full of misinformation.

And finally, you asked why is Sandro sending time on this? Because that is his job and I do believe Sandro loves what he does and the game and wants to do the best job that he can, so of course he spends time on this - just like he does with everything else. Perhaps the question should really be - from a purely project management and efficient use of resources point of view, why should there be any effort spent on this at all? I would be interested to know - how many active ships (as a percentage) actually use KWS's anyway? I know I don't. There are much better things I can use that spot for.

 

[Poppa McNikap]

We'll have to wait and see what the KWS changes end up being in game, but it sounds like FDev are really trying to make the benefits the same, but work with the new system. However, I feel like the KWS changes would be more palatable for more players, if some of the other KWS module stats are adjusted as well. Namely, scan range, scan time, and power draw. I propose that the KWS is no longer a manual secondary scan, but instead, works passively through your ship's own sensor scan. To maintain a trade-off, the KWS could reduce scan range, and increase scan time, and could also add to thermal load. As you progress from E rating to A rating, the penalties get less, but perhaps not zero at A rated. And you can engineer sensors and KWS to help offset the penalties.

This would make kill-warrant scanning a much less tedious affair, and still make it take longer than a normal scan to gather this extra information. If you are done scanning for warrants, simply disable the KWS in your modules list, and your ship scan reverts back to full range and normal scan time. Want to scan ships for bounties again? Then turn on the KWS. But what if you scan a ship, but forgot to turn on the KWS, and the passive scan has already completed? I assume that the game tracks a variable state on each ship, whether it has been scanned or not; ships are scanned the first time targeted, but after it's completed, no more passive scan. It would only need to track if it was KW scanned as well, and if not, it runs the scan again, if you turn on the KWS and target a ship.

Power draw also needs tweaked, it's a bit excessive at A-rated. A linear increase in power draw would make more sense than exponential growth, especially since the only current benefit is a slight increase in range, but no change to scan time. I'd suggest that if it's going to remain a manual scan, drop the power draw a bit, to 0.2MW increase per rating. If it becomes passive as I suggested, that may justify it being so high. Another idea, if it is to remain a manual scan, is to drop the power draw a bit, and instead draw from the SYS capacitor while scanning. Then it becomes a trade-off of scanning your target, but risking making yourself a bit vulnerable if you bite off more than you can chew, as your SYS may be drained, delaying shields from recharging if you get hit hard by that ship. Or that might become annoying, I don't know.

The KWS could also generate heat while scanning. It would be generating more heat than your ship's sensors, because it's not simply scanning a target close to you, it's also straining to communicate with the Nav Beacon much farther away (I assume the Nav Beacon, unless there are other beacons or satellites strewn about every square AU of the bubble that connect to law enforcement databases, which seems ridiculous).

Just my thoughts, I'm looking forward to the 3.0 update, and I'm sure if the KWS is universally hated after that, it can be tweaked and fixed. Maybe we can at least try it and see for ourselves how it works, before assuming the worst and running away with that.

 

[TeamGav]

the main PvP element for that is the Interstellar Bounties you can now accumulate on yourself (over 2 million)... and I guess maybe that might make a few PvP'ers give up a utility slot to use a KWS and then try to scan a target at the start of the fight... but honestly, I'm not going to hold my breath.

Won't need the scanner to find the interstellar bounties:

The Kill Warrant scanner will detect only bounties issued by factions in the system. The Interstellar bounties will be revealed on a basic scan as long as they match the jurisdiction's superpower... I believe it will detect local component bounties, which is to say, bounties that were part of the Interstellar bounty that were issued by a faction in the system.

I think my concern here is about the inconsequence of having a big bounty with a faction that's not in your current system. The answer is probably similar to 'there's still the assasination missions' in that 'there's still the random chumps who interdict you for your bounties'. It doesn't make sense that they could somehow uncover bounties from light seconds away in supercruise. Therefore the implication was always that they had taken a contract and were targeting you specifically rather than trawling for bounties on the scanner - which is how I always imagined it (and is suggested by some of the dialogue). A lovely touch, I've noticed that these guys are clean when they first talk and have a bounty for interdicting and assaulting you to collect when you win the fight. So if part of the design goal is to make it seem like players and NPCs play by the same rules, that's a pass. Is the trigger for generating the chumps having one sizable bounty, or do they also come if you have a collection of tiny ones?

'trawling' is still a thing. Those guys who scan you at beacons and resource sites and the like and then apologize still make sense, depending on what faction they come from, and it now appears like they're searching for much smaller payouts.

I always thought the situation at stations was set up to suggest bounty hunters might hang out there, scan people leaving, and follow them through their wake if they found a tasty price on them. That's something that won't be applicable any more.

 

[Kaocraft]

Well, it all sounds good to me. Thanks, Sandro!

 

[Jynessa Loraeyn]

Won't need the scanner to find the interstellar bounties:



I think my concern here is about the inconsequence of having a big bounty with a faction that's not in your current system. The answer is probably similar to 'there's still the assasination missions' in that 'there's still the random chumps who interdict you for your bounties'. It doesn't make sense that they could somehow uncover bounties from light seconds away in supercruise. Therefore the implication was always that they had taken a contract and were targeting you specifically rather than trawling for bounties on the scanner - which is how I always imagined it (and is suggested by some of the dialogue). A lovely touch, I've noticed that these guys are clean when they first talk and have a bounty for interdicting and assaulting you to collect when you win the fight. So if part of the design goal is to make it seem like players and NPCs play by the same rules, that's a pass. Is the trigger for generating the chumps having one sizable bounty, or do they also come if you have a collection of tiny ones?

'trawling' is still a thing. Those guys who scan you at beacons and resource sites and the like and then apologize still make sense, depending on what faction they come from, and it now appears like they're searching for much smaller payouts.

I always thought the situation at stations was set up to suggest bounty hunters might hang out there, scan people leaving, and follow them through their wake if they found a tasty price on them. That's something that won't be applicable any more.

Oops, my bad on the Interstellar Bounties - well that's good! And even now, people like me are still misreading what Sandro actually stated clearly XD Brilliant, he must be overjoyed.

And yeah, you're right, there's no way the NPC bounty hunters who come after you if you're wanted in a different system could be KWS scanning you in supercruise, since KWS doesn't work in supercruise - and I actually have no idea what the triggers are for those NPC bounty hunters and whether they scale up in difficulty, numbers and danger as your bounty rises. That would be nice to know, but again, probably somewhat off-topic in this thread. But they must have effectively 'taken an assassination mission' as you say - how else do they know about the bounty otherwise? And they're probably being paid a lot more on top. I imagine the idea is the same for those mission wrinkles where you get told a bunch of ships have been dispatched to take you down, and then those named ships actually come for you and interdict you - the idea being those NPC pilots 'took an assassination mission' against you.

The inconsequence of the 'local crime bounties' in neighbouring systems with different factions might be deliberate - to give commanders the chance to say, "sure I have a death sentence in that system, but why do I care that some tinpot dictator on some irrelevant dirtball wants me dead?"... and then you get that whole - wanted criminal in one system, hero in another thing going on. Like you say, I think the NPC bounty hunters are an additional consequence to keep you on your toes, but at the same time one of the choices commanders can make is just high-tailing it away once you realise being Wanted by one faction doesn't mean you're Wanted everywhere... and then never going back.

And yup, guessing that the 'trawling', the NPCs are doing the exact same thing we are in a RES