It is a matter of game mechanics. If you accept an illegal mission, you should be punished by the target faction with a fine / bounty if getting caught, but you should not be punished by fdev not beeing able to pay off your bounty and to keep your computer on for x-hours.
Yes ... I'm agreeing with you in that respect. Notoriety is a silly mechanism because it's faction agnostic - if you kill faction A on faction B's orders, notoriety also harms you with faction B. For the first time with Odyssey we have a situation where illegal acts are both strongly encouraged by the game and affected by notoriety, and so the fact that it was a bad idea before actually comes through.
On the other hand, I do think that it should also be impossible to pay off bounties at notoriety 0 - you attack a faction, they then don't like it. Faction B will be fine with you, but faction A shouldn't let you give a token payment to an IF and be back to normal.
That would solve the "keep your computer on to avoid dealing with the consequences issue" ... because you'd actually be stuck with that bounty permanently until killed or you did something more consequential than give 1000 cr to an IF to pay it off. Over time you'd develop a network of allies and enemies. The time-based delay is bad, not because you can't live with notoriety, but because it is so easily bypassed, which then makes it pointless.
Regarding Anarchy PMFs: They have chosen on purpose to not submit to any rules. As anarchist you cant blame other powers not punishing actions against your faction, whilst you claim to not get punished for crimes commiting against all other factions in your own terretories.
Not the point I'm making - and it applies equally to the various NPC anarchy factions.
Anarchies
say they don't submit to anyone else's rules. But actually, what they do is submit entirely to other people's rules when operating in that jurisdiction. Anarchy factions view it as perfectly legitimate to kill their people on someone else's say-so ... but more, they view it as illegitimate to kill their people outside their jurisdiction
if the jurisdiction owner agrees. If anything they're
more subordinate to other people's rules than a typical lawful faction is!
Maybe this table will make it clearer what I think the problem is.
| What does Anarchy A think if you shoot one of their ships | ...flying in Anarchy A's jurisdiction | ...flying in Corporate C's jurisdiction |
| ...which has a bounty issued by Corporate C | This is fine, go ahead and kill our colleague | This is fine, go ahead and kill our colleague |
| ...which has no bounty issued by Corporate C | This is fine, go ahead and kill our colleague | You murderer! You'll pay for that! |
If they don't submit to anyone else's rules, then which jurisdiction the kill takes place in (they don't recognise jurisdictions) and whether they have a corporate bounty (they don't recognise the legitimacy of that bounty) shouldn't be at all relevant. Bizarrely, they instead
only care in the situation which the Corporation says they should care about.
