Resolving the Griefer Issues

[StiTch]

That's what FD has been doing with the bans they're handing out for it. It's hilarious now that once notorious loggers are no longer doing it since FD is actually taking action regarding the reports and netlogs.

Ty FD

Lol.

The great FD dark secret: "Yes our premises contains several pigs, no you can't ask why, and no I am not starting to put a Brick Top accent on".


On a side note, I'm eagerly waiting for CP to come out so that we can observe absolutely nothing changing in the PvP community...and the complaints coming in from "legit" CLing CMDRs being the ones relegated to anarchy systems for breaking Karma rules. Irony has a beautiful flavour <3

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

That's what FD has been doing with the bans they're handing out for it. It's hilarious now that once notorious loggers are no longer doing it since FD is actually taking action regarding the reports and netlogs.

Ty FD

I'm glad FD are taking action!

That's now another reason I don't do PvP though.
My internet has a habit of deciding to combat log for me!
Really need to call them and complain...
But then I just get sent through the same hoops.
"Is it switched on?"
"Yes"
"Is it plugged in?"
"Yes"
"Do you have a dial tone?"
"I'm on the phone..."
"But do you have a dial tone?"
*Click* *boooooooop*
"I do now"

 

[NeilF]

I propose the following system for crime and punishment of players who kill others for lulz...

Any player who kills an unwanted player should get a persistent wanted status based on the number of players he/she has destroyed. That wanted status does not reset upon death, but runs out after a set time of 1 player kill = 1 week. The AI will hunt down the wanted player and the response will be dependent upon how many players they've killed with a star rating similar to GTA. Killing 1 player will give you a wanted level of 1 star which lasts for 1 week. The AI on this level will be small numbers of standard system security Vipers or other small fighters that will interdict the player. The response from the AI will become much more deadly the more players that have been killed until you get to 5 player kills, which is 5 weeks wanted and lots of high level security and military ships attacking and interdicting the player. Stations not in anarchy systems will also fire on the player should they approach. Basically going into any civilised system should be a living hell with a high wanted level. However, a player skilled in combat should be able to fight his/her way out of trouble. It should be tough though! The more busy they are defending themselves from AI, the less time they have to go around shooting other players.

Now, all this may seem a little lop-sided against the criminal player, so I propose that if the wanted player enters an anarchy system, they're safe from AI attack (this, of course, doesn't mean player bounty hunters can't come looking for them) and they will not be attacked by stations while wanted in an anarchy system. Wanted players can hide out in anarchy systems until their wanted period expires, and killing other players there does not result in a wanted status.

The only things I'd raise there are:-

1. This makes anarchy systems the goto gank/grief location? At the moment it's generally busy spots such as CGs, busy systems/locations. Some of these are at times in anarchy systems, especially when we're talking about aliens or remote bases and the like. Personally I'd not want "exploration locations" made even more desirable gank locations so I see no reason why the illegal destruction of a Pilots Federation member anywhere is not taken into account.
2. I'd propose any penalties:-
   • Come into play after X amount of illegal destructions in period Y. So some illegal destruction is permitted/tolerated (piracy at the very least needs some "threat").
   • Are of a ramping scale of more subtle penalties, such as denying landing permission at certain station. Permits denied to even get to system. Giving you a perminent bounty no matter where you are. Highlighting you on other CMDRs scanners as a known "psycho"...

In this fashion, it would not stop illegal destruction, as it wouldn't be aiming to. But it would hopefully significantly rein it in. If you want to mindlessly destroy me you could... But if you did this too often you'd get noticed, warned, and if you continued penalised - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-Reputation-quot-and-quot-Risk-Hot-Spots-quot

 

[Nutter]

I'm glad FD are taking action!

That's now another reason I don't do PvP though.
My internet has a habit of deciding to combat log for me!
Really need to call them and complain...
But then I just get sent through the same hoops.
"Is it switched on?"
"Yes"
"Is it plugged in?"
"Yes"
"Do you have a dial tone?"
"I'm on the phone..."
"But do you have a dial tone?"
*Click* *boooooooop*
"I do now"

You still have a 56k Modem? There's ya problem

- - - Updated - - -

The only thing I'd raise there are:-

1. This makes anarchy systems the goto gank/grief location? At the moment it's generally busy spots such as CGs, busy systems/locations. Some of these are at times in anarchy systems, especially when we're talking about aliens or remote bases and the like. Personally I'd not want "exploration locations" made even more desirable gank locations so I see no reason why the illegal destruction of a Pilots Federation member anywhere is not taken into account.
2. I propose any penalties, a) Come into play after X amount of illegal destructions in period Y. So some illegal destruction is permitted/tolerated (piracy at the very least needs some "threat"). b) The are of a ramping scale of more subtle penalties, such as denying landing permission at certain station. Permits to even get to system. Giving you a perminent bounty no matter where you are. Highlighting you other CMDRs scanners as a known "psycho"...

In this fashion, it would not stop illegal destruction, as it wouldn't be aiming to. But it would hopefully significantly rein it in. If you want to mindlessly destroy me you could... But if you did too often you'd get noticed, warned, and if you continued penalised - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-Reputation-quot-and-quot-Risk-Hot-Spots-quot

Can't they just gain a RNGneer commodity in the cargo hold that they can't jettison for a week? All that 'tasty' cargo and that?

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

You still have a 56k Modem? There's ya problem

Nope, standard broadband.
But some days it runs that fast!

It's supposed to be around 550kb/s.
Most days it's ~200.
Or 0.

I miss my old fibre connection!

How you guys hit F5 for updates about beta is how I'm currently treating the openreach rollout of fibre in my street. Lol
It currently says "within 12 months", so some time around 2031 then.

 

[Sundae]

I'm glad FD are taking action!

That's now another reason I don't do PvP though.
My internet has a habit of deciding to combat log for me!
Really need to call them and complain...
But then I just get sent through the same hoops.
"Is it switched on?"
"Yes"
"Is it plugged in?"
"Yes"
"Do you have a dial tone?"
"I'm on the phone..."
"But do you have a dial tone?"
*Click* *boooooooop*
"I do now"

You are a rational person with good opinions and I wish more were like you.

 

[korombei]

I'm not sure 'griefing' is possible in a game where you can instantly switch to an offline solo mode.

 

[krylite]

A couple of ideas which could stay in roleplay:

implement a top "notoriety" list via a bulletin board like the multicrew list. Everytime a player is killed or attacked by another player, the game asks them via the messaging if they want to "report" a murderer/harrasser. The top 50 or 100 gets listed in the galnet wide accessible bulletin board i.e. name, rank, current bounty, etc. similar to a view of a powerplay control list view. Other players can put additional bounty on a cmdr in the list provided their log shows they've been attacked or killed by said cmdr in their log. (only one time to add to bounty per incident in log).

npc or player hired wing/protection contracts. A first step in credit transaction. The npc ship or player ship gets paid if they accompany the hirer for an agreed number of jumps until hirer reaches safe docking. If hired escort leaves wing early they don't get paid. likewise, maybe a "rep" mechanism where if log shows they were helped by a player ship in a completed escort contact satisfied customer can add "rep" points to the hired player which can be translatd into some reward such as rep/rank for a faction/power and a top 50 to 100 list of most helpful hired bodyguards.

 

[jasonbarron]

OP--there is no "griefer problem." There isn't even a "ganker problem." The only thing that needs to be fixed is the greater public perception that flying in Open they should be exempt from unwanted player aggression, and that if they are subjected to aggression that the aggressor is somehow "bad" or "causing a problem" or engaging in a form of gameplay that needs to be "fixed." The day we get people more broadly educated and teach them that the possibility of being shot at in a game that provides us big guns for the express purpose of shooting at one another is indeed part of the game itself and a possibility they expressly consented to by clicking "Open" the sooner we can all get on with actually playing the game and having fun.

Maybe as a community instead of creating imaginary problems and proposing zany fixes to them, we should expend our energies on real substantive issues that could truly benefit from our input.

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

You are a rational person with good opinions and I wish more were like you.

Great.

Now I don't know if you're being serious or not.

 

[VR StarLightPL]

The one-minded approach in all these so called C&P threats baffles me. Either there are so many carebears here that nobody wants a CRIMINAL CAREER (clarification: no, we don't have that now), or the lynch mob mentality is still to strong and happens to be also in the most vocal members here.

You only yell PUNISH! PUNISH! PUNISH! SHAME! SHAME! SHAME! while offering nothing in return. I know this is wasted bandwith but I will try to voice it once again in different words as apparently seeing consequences of one's own actions is lost on almost all of those people.

Dear Ganker's Lynchers!

If having more diverse gameplay avenues does not interest you (in a form of a karma system and both lawful and criminal careers), perhaps a warning that you failed to predict what your proposed changes (can't land, rebuys, fines, spikes and whips) will do. Namely, removing all aspects of player to player fight in game. Because you will drive all PvP from E: D, there will be one less activity to do in game. That's good, right? Well, except for the fact that
a) you will have only sterile "hunt X criminals" - of which all will be NPCs because CMDRs would be AFRAID of getting wanted status,
b) if accident happens (for example an in station collision, not so unheard of) with a shieldless paperweight trader (no gankers = no shields, right?) will result in all that god's wrath being brought upon you
c) you will invalidate all engineer gameplay besides FSD upgrades (why bother, not like there is need for that outside pvp)
d) you will the dead body of powerplay even more because it requires you to get your hands dirty each week

All in all - you will remove the only one dangerous element this game still has. And trust me, less gameplay choices are not good.

 

[DaveB]

If you fly in Open at a CG, Jameson or an RNGineer base you may be attacked.

If you fly an A-ranked FdL, Cutter, Clipper, Courier or Viper III and have taken a few hours beforehand to RNG up a decent shield, boosters and drives, plus have an understanding of lateral thrust, basic evasion and chaff that can be gained by anyone inside 45 minutes, your attackers will not be able to harm you in any whatsoever, irrespective of their outfits or numbers.

You will actually have time to google 'high wake' and then to troll until your wit is exhausted in local chat, before leaving.

One of the paradoxes of Elite Dangerous is that it simultaneously has the most bomb-proof defensive options and escape mechanics in the entire history of computer gaming and yet also generates continual complaints over unavoidable PvP death.

In fairness, though, we are in an era of the most absurd TTK polarity. Essentially, TTK on heavily-defended builds needs to come down dramatically, while TTK on explorer/trader type builds needs to go up somewhat, imo.

Except the lulzbunnies would never take on that ship. While the ranks of dedicated PKers do include skilled pilots eager for that kind of challenge, they are not the folks we're talking about here. They'd take one look at that ship and loadout and go seek a softer target, if not immediately then certainly as soon as it became obvious that its pilot could actually fly it.

 

[verminstar]

I'm not sure 'griefing' is possible in a game where you can instantly switch to an offline solo mode.

So its very possible here, because ED doesnt have an offline solo mode, ergo its not possible to switch to something that doesnt exist...or do ye know something the rest of us dont?

Ill get a giggle reading the rest of this later, just spied this while browsing the most upto date and thought, 'there is now a level zero'

Anyway...carry on with the entertainment folks...

 

[Kyokushin]

Almost always at CGs. I'm limited to one system when I grief as my FDL has a .9 LY jump range.

Honestly i am impressed, because You did better job than isis.
They terrorised one planet, SDC made it in entire galaxy

carebears are shaking in one's boots at bubble, colonia and in deep exploration. Its extraordinary to me how stubbornly they are flying into well known CG's and pvp systems and dying over and over, then crying how elite is dangerous.

o7

 

[korombei]

So its very possible here, because ED doesnt have an offline solo mode, ergo its not possible to switch to something that doesnt exist...or do ye know something the rest of us dont?

Ill get a giggle reading the rest of this later, just spied this while browsing the most upto date and thought, 'there is now a level zero'

Anyway...carry on with the entertainment folks...

Well spotted, I missed that slight technicality haha

Still, I'm sure you know what I was getting at. You can choose to play alone anytime you like.

- - - Updated - - -

OP--there is no "griefer problem." There isn't even a "ganker problem." The only thing that needs to be fixed is the greater public perception that flying in Open they should be exempt from unwanted player aggression, and that if they are subjected to aggression that the aggressor is somehow "bad" or "causing a problem" or engaging in a form of gameplay that needs to be "fixed." The day we get people more broadly educated and teach them that the possibility of being shot at in a game that provides us big guns for the express purpose of shooting at one another is indeed part of the game itself and a possibility they expressly consented to by clicking "Open" the sooner we can all get on with actually playing the game and having fun.

Maybe as a community instead of creating imaginary problems and proposing zany fixes to them, we should expend our energies on real substantive issues that could truly benefit from our input.

Exactly. Well said. [up]

 

[peteuplink]

The only things I'd raise there are:-

1. This makes anarchy systems the goto gank/grief location? At the moment it's generally busy spots such as CGs, busy systems/locations. Some of these are at times in anarchy systems, especially when we're talking about aliens or remote bases and the like. Personally I'd not want "exploration locations" made even more desirable gank locations so I see no reason why the illegal destruction of a Pilots Federation member anywhere is not taken into account.
2. I'd propose any penalties:-
   • Come into play after X amount of illegal destructions in period Y. So some illegal destruction is permitted/tolerated (piracy at the very least needs some "threat").
   • Are of a ramping scale of more subtle penalties, such as denying landing permission at certain station. Permits denied to even get to system. Giving you a perminent bounty no matter where you are. Highlighting you on other CMDRs scanners as a known "psycho"...

In this fashion, it would not stop illegal destruction, as it wouldn't be aiming to. But it would hopefully significantly rein it in. If you want to mindlessly destroy me you could... But if you did this too often you'd get noticed, warned, and if you continued penalised - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-Reputation-quot-and-quot-Risk-Hot-Spots-quot

Well the reason I suggsted what I did is because I think anarchy systems should be more dangerous than they are now. As for CG's. Well, maybe CG's in systems that are at war or a state of civil unrest can be except from the 1 kill= 1 week wanted thing.

I also don't think that my 1 kill = 1 week wanted thing is too harsh. I mean, we get the death penalty for blocking the entrance to stations, so I think it's pretty lenient.

Security 1 "Hey, Joe, we got a guy here blocking the entrance to a station with his Asp!"

Security 2 "Kill him! Kill him with fire, NOW!"

Security 1 "Hey, Joe, we got another guy here who's murdured 23 commanders in cold blood."

Security 2 "Oh, don't worry bout him. He's fine!"

 

[grumpsalot]

We settled this earlier didn't we?

A PvE / PvP flag in open would resolve everything.

Frontier - make it happen, thanks.

 

[Earth Ultimatum IV.]

We settled this earlier didn't we?

A PvE / PvP flag in open would resolve everything.

Frontier - make it happen, thanks.

No. If you want to "close" yourself, you have nothing to do in "open" mode.

 

[peteuplink]

No. If you want to "close" yourself, you have nothing to do in "open" mode.

What they should do is what Blizzard did with WoW and give us open PvP and open PvE... problem solved.

 

[Sugarat]

TLDR, didn't read all posts..

.. "griefing" (FD's definition, not the anybody elses personal definition) is already punishable within the TOS, if FD identify a real "griefer" I'm sure they have easier ways to deal with it than sending an ingame moderator to deliver retribution.