I mean...sure, if you're suggesting it would encourage some deep-space gankers with dreams of piracy to roleplay instead of griefing explorers, I'll admit there's a possibility. But it seems slim from where I sit.
Aside from organised expeditions with known locations, deep space ganking is not a thing. The further away you go the chances drop dramatically. Its when you are returning which is the danger point (which as I've said, can be made to be virtually risk free if you do some planning).
I can't view exploration in the same overall category - hauling courier data will never place your commander name on a system where all other commanders can find it forevermore. The 'fast' and 'motherlode' data ideas could be interesting where exploration is not concerned, however.
I haven't come across much in the way of posts involving ego stroking based upon the credit worth of hoarded exploration data and flaunting about how safe it is, so I really just don't see the merit in seeking to punish that behavior. It's already generally shared advice to hand in data regularly, to not be in Open when doing it, and to do it at relatively quiet corners of the bubble if you insist on staying in Open. Take away any chance of using exploration to abuse the BGS, and what harm is it to anybody else playing the game?
Data (imo) is data. Mission data has a value just as scan data does, its just one can have no limit.
If you are in Open, then whatever you are doing needs to come with careful situational considerations. What I'd like to see is more cut-throat exploration competition- explorers quite often hoard and hide names of places until they get the name / money for it- if exploration had a role in game (such as dictating faction expansion, general bubble expansion etc) you'd create an interesting micro economy that makes sense in game.
Other players are not necessarily 'content for you'. Other players are trying to enjoy the content alongside you, because it's fun to see other people in the same game. Nowhere has FDev put up a disclaimer for new players stating, "If you go into Open, you are assumed to accept that you are potentially content for other players to engage and disrupt as they see fit". That's never been what Open is, that's merely what it has been treated as in bad faith. Should that experience exist for those that want it? Sure, but you have to also then permit the experience that does not include that factor for those that also want that. So, in the end, it's back again to whether Fdev will bother implementing an official PvE mode, which is as up in the air as it has been for the past 5+ years, instead of keeping this confused status quo where Open is serving both roles.
Well, you are content, thats why other modes and block that cut it out exist. Thats why people need to stop whingeing about being attacked and learn to cope by using the tools and features the game has to overcome and mitigate other players. The most dangerous ships will always be players because you never know what they intend to do, and flying about in a ship tuned to be as light and bendy as possible is asking for trouble.
As for pirate NPCs...if you want to please the "it's got Dangerous in the name" crowd and alienate the less frustration-inclined crowd, then sure, that would accomplish that. Experienced players would probably find it trivial, but I could very much see it turning away yet more new players. e.g. "I spent 3 months exploring only to get blown up and waste everything because this NPC blew me up right before I could land and even though system security was tearing it apart". I wouldn't want to go on playing, either. This game has too many complaints about disrespecting player time and investment as it is.
So having NPCs do NPC things is bad?
If anything its actually making the game better. Missions that deliver data have pirates and hired goons after you that by default want to destroy you- by making NPC pirates want to hack and take your mission data its actually making a very ordinary mission more interesting. Remember I'm not advocating for NPC pirates to blow people up because they hold data, I'm advocating for NPCs to want to grab that data for themselves. So this:
turning away yet more new players. e.g. "I spent 3 months exploring only to get blown up and waste everything because this NPC blew me up right before I could land
is a strawman. The NPC would launch a very obvious and slow limpet that could be defeated by PD or ECM, modules forgotten in todays game.
Player v player hacking could use the old exploration spinny game in that once locked on the hacker has to quickly match the electronic tumblers. You could even make it like interdiction where the victim of the hack has to counter the hacker in the same way (or fly off)- and if the hack goes bad it might leave the criminal vulnerable.
In short its substantially backfilling an area of the game thats lacking.
'Punishing' or 'fail state', it's the same thing.
All games have ways to fail. Its only punishing if you continually fail to the point where there is no defence, something which this idea does not create because the game and proposed feature have mechanisms that allow defence.
For what it's worth...this conversation has given me an idea about 'nefarious exploration' - mission types that have you exploring for less-than-legal aims, to be handed in at factions that are into that sort of thing, and which could then justify introducing the risk of being intercepted and blown up; it could even just be for reasons of industrial rivalry. That way, you get the experience you're after and players that don't want that can go on not being forced into that. Win-win!
Its a good idea, a bit like what I suggested earlier. It really comes down to making more of exploration and giving it a purpose, because currently it has none.
not being forced into that
By having data you are potentially a target by default, simply as there is a direct BGS link and benefit- you are not forced into it. If anything its a lack of understanding as to the ramifications.
