Why? why always.. omg someone just kill me.. punish him.. give me a "press "B" to win" ? yeah Elite ships,weapons,PvP is to arcade almost no skill depending.. but why not to ask ..Hey just make a game where i can learn,i can use my skills in PvP,and then.. interdiction? wanna kill me? so try it...
Murder in Space - How it can be punished.
- Thread starter Snarfbuckle
- Start date
You miss the point by a far margin.
You want PVP you have the easy option - turn crime notification OFF. There, both parties are now safe if both parties have it set to OFF.
Let's ask you this instead - Does the punishment fit the crime?
I shoot someones ship who has a snowballs chance in hell to take me out after interdiction and I get 6K bounty. Victim suffers 200K insurance cost.
Even if you are a PIRATE you have a choice and If you CHOOSE to kill the hapless victim in this case why should you NOT suffer the consequences? Piracy is all about being on the wrong side of the law - Not being fined a ticket.
EDIT: And someone sitting in an Anaconda blowing up newbs in Eagles and Sidewinders ARE essentially pressing "B" to win.
Last edited:
It is after you've done it hundreds of times!!
You, I like you, you get the point I think.
The fact that it takes mass murder to become noticed is part of the problem in that case. But the second problem is that you are only wanted for a week...
I've always felt murders should incur a bounty that is exactly the target's insurance rebuy cost.
That is to say, whether or not the target chooses to rebuy, you get a bounty that matches the cost as if they had.
The only issue there, I guess, is that little ships shooting big ships would get vast bounties pretty quickly.
But nevertheless, it actually makes thematic sense too, as if you're destroying expensive ships, it's costing the insurance company a bunch of money and they're going to want to get rid of you.
That is to say, whether or not the target chooses to rebuy, you get a bounty that matches the cost as if they had.
The only issue there, I guess, is that little ships shooting big ships would get vast bounties pretty quickly.
But nevertheless, it actually makes thematic sense too, as if you're destroying expensive ships, it's costing the insurance company a bunch of money and they're going to want to get rid of you.
it is not your fault.. like i said poor game design,arcade for mass, grinding, and bigger is always better, do not let you use your skill,tactic and kill the attacker. But still you have a choice.. Solo Mode, or other game. Bigger bounty,punishment will not change a lot.
That I think is to excessive and grounds for abuse. But a bounty should be something that is significantly felt.
For example, harboring or giving refugee to a wanted criminal/murderer is usually a felony.
Perhaps a different punishment for being wanted should be used. Denied docking rights in Bounty/1000c Light Year Range.
If I have a bounty of 60K in SOL I would not be able to gain docking right in non-anarchy systems within 60 light years from SOL for 7 days.
This would promote Anarchy systems to become Pirate headquarters for scum and villains.
Docking rights would in that case be limited to major factions so if you are wanted in FED space you have docking rights in IMP space.
The system as is regarding faction reputation is fine. Looking at the mercs of mikunn and Lugh, they were promoting one faction by destroying other ship's factions, clean or otherwise. This in turn is meant to create issues for the oppossing factions, causing lockdown, civil wars etc... These weren't bulletin board based missions but the players taking it upon themselves to destabilise the other factions in the system. It wouldn't make sense for their faction and other unrelated minor factions for them to lose rep when going after competing factions' ships.
But solo mode is not the solution for creating a dynamic living universe.
I want to play open but with the way their peer-to-peer PVP is abused and limited instancing makes that a No-No if I at least cannot PvP on a somewhat equal footing.
What is need is that every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
You kill someone you take the fall for it. Regardless if the killer is a peaceful trader who ran over a small eagle with his Type9 or a Conda blowing up newwbie Sidies.
We need to shake up the reputation system so that every thing we choose to do have consequenses.
Faction warfare does this to a small point but it can be fleshed out so much more.
- - - Updated - - -
Good point.
Factions opposing the victim would give you a +rep of course but anyone allied with thevictime gives you negative rep.
The problem when it comes to PVP killings and griefers is that CMDR's dont HAVE a faction except pilot federation so there is essentially no penalty to be a player griefer.
You can be a NPC griefer and reap benefits for it but then you also take a rep hit.
There is no rep hit for being a griefer.
Whilst the pilot's federation could theoretically have their own bounty system they don't actually have jurisdiction ouside of their own system so the player would still be clean. The only factions that are allied are those that come under Alliance, Fed and Empire factions so your rep is already adjusted when it shifts with one of those associated minor factions.
Changes to this would also kill off consensual pvp, after all, how can the system really tell the difference between piracy, consensual pvp and non-consensual pvp. Killing other players isn't seen as griefing in and of itself, it's only repetition of stalking particular players. The Pilot's Federation (ie: the players) essential police the systems themselves, you should see the feeding frenzy when someone goes wanted when there are bounty hunters about.
I strongly disagree, and would like the distinction emphasized between Anarchy and systems where a functioning legal system and police force is present. It should be much harder to get away alive with murder in a high security system compared to low security, and even low security should be much harder than anarchy (and in general much harder than it is now). Anarchy systems, however, should be the cesspool of scum and villainy where you can expect to be interdicted and attacked, even for no reason at all, at any time.
And then the economy sim should consider trade routes passing through anarchy systems and have prices reflect the danger of such routes, so that it is much more profitable to go where it is inevitable to pass through one or multiple anarchy systems (or you make a large detour which reduces your profit/hour).
OK you just don't get it.. Someone just killed you? OK 3 choices 1) game is not for me i find another one. 2) I will try,learn,use tactic and skill and kill attacker. 3) Go to forum wine for pls punish attacker i want to play safe. 1) its not for you you like elite,just dont like to be killed. 2) Poor arcade game design.not possible. 3) Useless. Ok they will make not 6k but 60k or 600k bounty for pl kill.So? i will do this again.. you now why? its cose game alows me to do that..i have a 100mil.. its cose i have a bigger ship..a bigger means better in this game.. So what you asking for?
Add this to the current system:
If the person being attacked and then killed is not 'wanted', immediately subtract the cost of the rebuy of the ship destroyed from the killers' account.
Even a bitty T6 will set them back ~ 250K.
If their account balance goes negative, then so be it.
If the person being attacked and then killed is not 'wanted', immediately subtract the cost of the rebuy of the ship destroyed from the killers' account.
Even a bitty T6 will set them back ~ 250K.
If their account balance goes negative, then so be it.
I strongly disagree, and would like the distinction emphasized between Anarchy and systems where a functioning legal system and police force is present. It should be much harder to get away alive with murder in a high security system compared to low security, and even low security should be much harder than anarchy (and in general much harder than it is now). Anarchy systems, however, should be the cesspool of scum and villainy where you can expect to be interdicted and attacked, even for no reason at all, at any time.
And then the economy sim should consider trade routes passing through anarchy systems and have prices reflect the danger of such routes, so that it is much more profitable to go where it is inevitable to pass through one or multiple anarchy systems (or you make a large detour which reduces your profit/hour).
I think I worded that a bit wrong.
What I meant was that we remove Anarchy systems from the DISCUSSION in regards to bounty, not to remove anarchy systems.
My bad.
This is what I was also suggesting. It seems to me to be a fair system. You're worth what you cost your victim.
All it would do is alter playstyles so that pirates would be more willing to actually pirate, rather than get bored because the target is trying to run and just kill them, and also mean mindless killers will very soon be very lucrative bounty targets, as they should be.
If you're a member of a faction/power, then you're unlikely to care about the wanted status in enemy territory, so it doesn't matter to you.
Though if some intrepid bounty hunter can track you to a system you're friendly in, they should still be able to take you out and return to the system you were wanted in to collect your bounty.
Somehow I fail to see your problem.
If you enable your PvP flag then you are by choice affected by such players. If you don't activate it, then it doesn't matter to you what they do.
So the only "exploit" will be that some people can blow up NPCs for a mere 6k bounty. And that was not different in previous Elite games.
Haters gonna hate.
A simple thing. That an Action has an Equal and opposite Reaction.
Let's put this as a question. You have an Anaconda an 100 million.
Does Elite feels "Dangerous" to you or more to the people you shoot down?
The game is a sandbox about choice. Choices should have consequences.
If you CHOOSE to shoot someone down you should feel the consequences.
As the game is now ONLY the victim feels consequences.
Last edited: