The problem with the new C&P improvements

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

My philosophy is inclusive to everybody as it's only criteria is that you don't complain about how other people play the game and try to get them booted out.

This ^

Too many people (on both sides of the argument) fail to understand this basic principle.

 

[Riverside]

I've lost track of how many times people have referred to PvPers as "idiots" or similar in this thread. If PvPers have responded in kind I've missed it.

Also, to the point "A conversation where everyone is included... as long as their in-game experience meets your criteria?"
My philosophy is inclusive to everybody as it's only criteria is that you don't complain about how other people play the game and try to get them booted out. This, as opposed to the driving philosophy behind "PvPers who are karmically ran to financial ruin and thusly removed from the game." Do you see the difference? One philosophy includes all playstyles, one only includes playstyles that fall strictly in line with its narrow-minded confines.

I don't want anybody to not be able to play the game how they want to play it because an arbitrary ruleset tells them what they can and cannot do.

We agree on many points jasonbarron, as is often the case. I think the point about this ruleset (which we are almost entirely theorising) is that it won't be arbitrary.

Hopefully there can be rules implemented to discourage clear cases of cheating the game (eg CLogging), and rules which improve the gameplay value of being a 'baddie' . If you pirate, without killing your prey, this will make you wanted, and there is gameplay in that. If you regularly get frustrated IRL & just want to take it out on others, you will be able to go out in a blaze of glory instead of just doing it again & again for lols.
Personally I like player lead solutions like the AA, the fuel rats, the Code (as a notorious pirate group). But a lot of the players don't want to be part of the solution, balancing the goodie/baddie play. Curiously the banter between Fed/Imp/Alliance seems to work well, but for goodie/baddie there are just way too many baddies coz it's fun lol, so the game has to try to balance it instead.

A point we certainly disagree on is that somehow this karma system is doomed to failure. It may not solve every issue for every cmdr but it might reduce the number of complaints, and it might make the game more fun for quite a big part of the playerbase.

Or it might not, we shall see in due course. CQC didn't make PvPers happier (in general), station speed limits didn't make the docking more fun. Some players just seem to want to try to break what IMO is a pretty good game. I want it to work.

 

[jasonbarron]

We agree on many points jasonbarron, as is often the case. I think the point about this ruleset (which we are almost entirely theorising) is that it won't be arbitrary.

Hopefully there can be rules implemented to discourage clear cases of cheating the game (eg CLogging), and rules which improve the gameplay value of being a 'baddie' . If you pirate, without killing your prey, this will make you wanted, and there is gameplay in that. If you regularly get frustrated IRL & just want to take it out on others, you will be able to go out in a blaze of glory instead of just doing it again & again for lols.
Personally I like player lead solutions like the AA, the fuel rats, the Code (as a notorious pirate group). But a lot of the players don't want to be part of the solution, balancing the goodie/baddie play. Curiously the banter between Fed/Imp/Alliance seems to work well, but for goodie/baddie there are just way too many baddies coz it's fun lol, so the game has to try to balance it instead.

A point we certainly disagree on is that somehow this karma system is doomed to failure. It may not solve every issue for every cmdr but it might reduce the number of complaints, and it might make the game more fun for quite a big part of the playerbase.

Or it might not, we shall see in due course. CQC didn't make PvPers happier (in general), station speed limits didn't make the docking more fun. Some players just seem to want to try to break what IMO is a pretty good game. I want it to work.

Fair enough. I respect your opinion, too, CMDR. Now I'm off to protect Eravate from seal clubbers!

 

[CMDR Pugwash]

I don't really get the reference. Sorry.

I'm not even sure who Jack is, let alone why he would be fiddling with a ladder.

It's an English saying. Loosely translated it means that you're ok and don't care about anyone who isn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alright_Jack

 

[NeilF]

I confess that I haven't read the entire argument contained in this thread, so forgive me if there's some level of repetition of points that are already discussed.

Anarchy systems not being policed allows two gameplay choices:

Players can experience an extra element of risk by visiting areas which are outside the 'jurisdiction' of the Pilots Federation and where normal rules do not apply.
Players who wish to operate outside of the constraints of sociability have somewhere where they can play the game they way they wish.

I fail to see what is gained by NOT excluding Anarchy systems from the C&P/Karma system.

No problem...

Let's go through a couple of scenarios with the proposed C&P (karma) mechanic (that myself and some other posters are suggesting) that ramps up penalties against illegal destructions (against CMDRs or NPCs) no matter what the system type. If you see an issue with any of these scenarios point it out?

Piracy (only)
You pirate a CMDR.

Outcome: The C&P Karma mechanic would not apply to any of these as no illegal destruction has occured. The only difference would be the arrival of the security services (or not).

Piracy with a destruction
While performing piracy a couple of victims put up a fight and you destroy them.

Outcome: The C&P Karam mechanic sees your illegal destructions, but your negative reputation would be at a low level so no penalties would occur (yet).

Destruction of the lolz
You fly to the new Thargoid Base and destroy a couple explorers for the lolz.

Outcome: The C&P Karma mechanic sees your illegal destructions, and your negative reputation now means you start getting some of the lower level penalties. eg: Some high security stations now refuse you docking permission.

Yet more destruction of the lolz
You fly to a barnacle being frequented by CMDRs and destroy a lot more explorers for the lolz.

Outcome: The C&P Karma mechanic sees your illegal destructions, and your negative reputation is now significant meaning you get higher level penalties. eg: More stations now refuse you docking permission. Indeed a couple of system now don't even give you a permit to jump there. You also have a Pilots Federation bounty meaning anyone/everyone can see you're "a psycho" and should either stay clear, or "claim" your bounty.




If anarchy systems are ignored by the C&P (karma) mechanic, it means (illogically) that illegal destruction (indeed habitual toxic ganking) can go on in 99.999% of the galaxy with absolutely no negative outcome to those individuals at all. ie: Any popular location in an anarchy system remains the goto location for toxic ganking.

Now, if you look at the above scenarios, where a C&P (karma) mechanic ramps up punishments as you illegally destroy more CMDRs (& NPCs) no matter what the system type... What's the problem? What doesn't work well or is unfair?

Illegally destroy a few CMDRs, no problem as the C&P (karma) mechanic would ignore it. But act like a psyhco, you'll get noticed, and there will be negative outcomes... Problem?

 

[CMDR MERANGO]

I see no problem here, do your duels in anarchy if you can't trust the other side for respecting your gentlemen's agreement.

I'd rather see Frontier work on stuff that matters, like organic PvP happening because one side has a real goal that can be achieved by the use of violence rather than try and catter specifically to that misguided " consensual PvP " nonsense.

Kudos to you CMDR for even suggesting that E: D has any respect let alone gentlemen. In my experience, while playing in Open, PvPers are mostly cowards and bullies and have zero respect. As for any form of agreement, well ahem..........They only stopped beating up on me when I got gud and now I stroll around in a death machine Vette trying to protect those in need, while watching those same said bullies run awayyyyyyyyyyyy​.

CMIV

 

[CMDR_Elver]

Why?

Can I ask - yet again - what is added to the game by allowing CMDRs to grief away in anarchy systems at absolutely no negative outcome to them.

How does it make sense that some CMDRs arriving at an alien site are blown apart for no reason other than the lolz, only for the ganker(s) in question to log off, come back an hour later, with a fresh batch of CMDRs then arriving who have not a single indication that there's known psychnopaths right next to them?

Indeed, at Thargoid live stream wasn't it obvious why Ed Lewis wasn't even playing in OPEN? And wasn't it entirely predictable groups of gankers would turn up as soon as they could. I watch one group of three gankers working their way around the ships in my instance quite literally blowing up ships in seconds...

What valuable mechanics and gameplay is served by the game ignore habitual illegal destruction anywhere, even in anarchy systems?

I can only think of negative outcomes, and hence why a C&P (karma) system would best serve applying no matter where, if only because then it's simpler! eg: Illegally destroy more than X CMDRs/NPCs in period Y, start incuring negative outcomes (no matter where).


ps: It's not just negative to gameplay, in a game universe it makes no sense to ignore such behaviour either - Yes even in Anarchy systems.

The answer to "why" in a nutshell is because that is the game. I think you've asked the griefing / ganking question many times and it isn't wholly relevant to the conversation about duelling or how to deal with anarchies. I do share your sentiments that the "griefing/ganking" issue is unwanted gameplay but think that players should have free will on these matters. C&P should with strengthen to add more consequences and pvp dynamics to there game which are lacking at the present time. This will I believe lessen the griefing and ganking issue.

I agree with you the the PF should be valid in anarchy systems the same as governed space, if you have read my previous posts. However, the PF only have control over issuing bounties and insurance re-buys. Hopefully down the track and PF reputation system based on ship destructions further nuisance PF interaction would be introduced. Factions/Powers govern station docking, facilities and permits etc. Cmdr's reputation level with a faction and power should govern those aspects, not the PF. The PF are not a particularly moral or ethically driven organisation. For example, drugs, arms dealing, assassination, slaving, piracy, theft, smuggling are all valid. Where they occur is completely relevant to there legality to factions /powers but not to the PF in otherwords. The PF would start caring if there members cost them too much in new ships not why the ship destruction happen.

Anarchy systems are not governed by anybody or group by defination. "Crimes" are not "Crimes" in effect. Factions and powers would not care what happens in them as it's outside their jurisdictions.
In governed space if cmdr griefer went on a killing spree in the empire would the federation care, no they would not. Probably be happy about it. Let alone a faction hundreds of light years away would care if crimes happen against a rival faction. Basically I disagree with you on how you would implement some of your ideas because they are not logical in context of the ED galaxy. Also I think griefing and ganking are products of a poor C&P system as it currently is. Arbitrarily trying to fix a narrow problem of griefing is not's what's needed but more a comprehensive logical approach to C&P. FDev are moving in the right direction but I think the latest ideas are a little bit back to front.

My ideas in this thread should interest you if you would like more details and further the discussion https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...ting-the-(karmic)-wheel?p=5322317#post5322317. This OP is primarily concerned with duelling and the "report crimes" option being used as a tactic. The suggestion of a mechanism for "challanging a cmdr to a duel" that would alter how security would deal with this scenario would solve this issue, without affecting the normal function of the report crimes button. Duelling itself could be classed as a crime or not depending on the government type. So in jurisdictions where duelling is illegal, security would attack both cmdr's/wings etc. with rep loss. In jurisdictions where it is legal security ignores the duelling parties. In anarchy secuity are not relevant but passing NPC (or Cmdrs) could get involved either way or not.

 

[NeilF]

<snip>

I'll go through you points in a second. But I will raise a couple of things immediately:-
1) To suggest the game is what it is, was nigh on perfect on release, and cannot be improved upon by new mechanics seems questionable?
2) The suggestion that we cannot employ a C&P (karma) mechanic in anarchy systems because of "game universe reasons" also seems questionable. Firstly, because gameplay outcome should be the no.1 consideration. And secondly, because the the suggestion itself seems ill-considered. I'll cover this later.
3) As I keep on suggesting. The best way forward is to raise specific game example concerns? Look at the list say above in #656, and/or, comment on your actual gameplay, and give a specific case of what CMDRs can do now, that would be harmed by a C&P (karma) along the lines of what I'm suggesting (even being applied in anarchy systems)? Quite honestly, I've not seen a single logical issue raised yet?

Onto your points

C&P should with strengthen to add more consequences and pvp dynamics to there game which are lacking at the present time. This will I believe lessen the griefing and ganking issue.

As a considerable amount of ganking/griefing goes on in anarchy systems, how do address it if you ignore these areas (99.999% of the galaxy)? If C&P is only employed in non-anarchy systems, this will only "reward" toxic gameplay in anarchy systems (further) and it will be the goto place for it.

I agree with you the the PF should be valid in anarchy systems the same as governed space, if you have read my previous posts. However, the PF only have control over issuing bounties and insurance re-buys. Hopefully down the track and PF reputation system based on ship destructions further nuisance PF interaction would be introduced. Factions/Powers govern station docking, facilities and permits etc. Cmdr's reputation level with a faction and power should govern those aspects, not the PF. The PF are not a particularly moral or ethically driven organisation. For example, drugs, arms dealing, assassination, slaving, piracy, theft, smuggling are all valid. Where they occur is completely relevant to there legality to factions /powers but not to the PF in otherwords. The PF would start caring if there members cost them too much in new ships not why the ship destruction happen.

Again, using "game universe" arguments to counter productive gameplay suggestion isn't great IMHO. I'd rather see arguments against the actual suggested gameplay mechanic?

ie: So a CMDR illegally destroys dozens of CMDRs in an anarchy system. Cleary the PF and insurance companies would not be thrilled about this. So what is unrealistic to suggest they'd use their weight to bring about penalties to the individual? eg: Reduced access to station? A PF bounty on the individual making them a "legal" target anywhere?

And I'd ask once again, what is counter productive or unfair about this proposed gameplay?

Anarchy systems are not governed by anybody or group by defination. "Crimes" are not "Crimes" in effect. Factions and powers would not care what happens in them as it's outside their jurisdictions.
In governed space if cmdr griefer went on a killing spree in the empire would the federation care, no they would not. Probably be happy about it. Let alone a faction hundreds of light years away would care if crimes happen against a rival faction. Basically I disagree with you on how you would implement some of your ideas because they are not logical in context of the ED galaxy. Also I think griefing and ganking are products of a poor C&P system as it currently is. Arbitrarily trying to fix a narrow problem of griefing is not's what's needed but more a comprehensive logical approach to C&P. FDev are moving in the right direction but I think the latest ideas are a little bit back to front.

And we seem to be going back to game universe reasons to not have a possibly productive gameplay mechanic? But let's carry on... An anarchy system has no security. So if you go there, and get attacked/pirated, no security services will come to your rescue.

However, anarchy systems are not in an information black spot. If a CMDRs illegally destroys another CMDR (or NPC) - ie: who does not have a PF bounty - then this information will reach organisation. And psychotic behaviour will be recognised? Why wouldn't organisations act upon it for the benefit of their organisation and/or members?

My ideas in this thread should interest you if you would like more details and further the discussion https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...ting-the-(karmic)-wheel?p=5322317#post5322317. This OP is primarily concerned with duelling and the "report crimes" option being used as a tactic. The suggestion of a mechanism for "challanging a cmdr to a duel" that would alter how security would deal with this scenario would solve this issue, without affecting the normal function of the report crimes button. Duelling itself could be classed as a crime or not depending on the government type. So in jurisdictions where duelling is illegal, security would attack both cmdr's/wings etc. with rep loss. In jurisdictions where it is legal security ignores the duelling parties. In anarchy secuity are not relevant but passing NPC (or Cmdrs) could get involved either way or not.

I'll have a look.

But I would re-iterate, if you think there's issues with the C&P (karma) mechanic I'm promoting (even in anarchy systems), then please suggest what element of gameplay you take part in now, that would be negatively hit by it. Because I've yet to see such a reason raised. Instead I just see CMDRs held fairly accountable for habitual illegal destruction...

 

[CMDR_Elver]

I'll go through you points in a second. But I will raise a couple of things immediately:-
1) To suggest the game is what it is, was nigh on perfect on release, and cannot be improved upon by new mechanics seems questionable?
2) The suggestion that we cannot employ a C&P (karma) mechanic in anarchy systems because of "game universe reasons" also seems questionable. Firstly, because gameplay outcome should be the no.1 consideration. And secondly, because the the suggestion itself seems ill-considered. I'll cover this later.
3) As I keep on suggesting. The best way forward is to raise specific game example concerns? Look at the list say above in #656, and/or, comment on your actual gameplay, and give a specific case of what CMDRs can do now, that would be harmed by a C&P (karma) along the lines of what I'm suggesting (even being applied in anarchy systems)? Quite honestly, I've not seen a single logical issue raised yet?

Onto your points


As a considerable amount of ganking/griefing goes on in anarchy systems, how do address it if you ignore these areas (99.999% of the galaxy)? If C&P is only employed in non-anarchy systems, this will only "reward" toxic gameplay in anarchy systems (further) and it will be the goto place for it.

Again, using "game universe" arguments to counter productive gameplay suggestion isn't great IMHO. I'd rather see arguments against the actual suggested gameplay mechanic?

ie: So a CMDR illegally destroys dozens of CMDRs in an anarchy system. Cleary the PF and insurance companies would not be thrilled about this. So what is unrealistic to suggest they'd use their weight to bring about penalties to the individual? eg: Reduced access to station? A PF bounty on the individual making them a "legal" target anywhere?

And I'd ask once again, what is counter productive or unfair about this proposed gameplay?

And we seem to be going back to game universe reasons to not have a possibly productive gameplay mechanic? But let's carry on... An anarchy system has no security. So if you go there, and get attacked/pirated, no security services will come to your rescue.

However, anarchy systems are not in an information black spot. If a CMDRs illegally destroys another CMDR (or NPC) - ie: who does not have a PF bounty - then this information will reach organisation. And psychotic behaviour will be recognised? Why wouldn't organisations act upon it for the benefit of their organisation and/or members?


I'll have a look.

But I would re-iterate, if you think there's issues with the C&P (karma) mechanic I'm promoting (even in anarchy systems), then please suggest what element of gameplay you take part in now, that would be negatively hit by it. Because I've yet to see such a reason raised. Instead I just see CMDRs held fairly accountable for habitual illegal destruction...

1) I have never suggested the game is perfect quite the opposite. However, I recognise that the game is dystopian sci-fi sim, where combat is a fundamental part. Attacking and destroying other cmdrs anyway at anytime for any reason is part of the game but there should be balance.

2) I have never suggested that anarchy systems are off limits to the PF, quite the opposite, this was clearly stated in the previous post. However, the PF only have a limited but crucial role in the overall C&P mix. PF bounties should be universal, it does not make any sense for anarchies to be off limits for issuing or collecting bounties, we are in agreement here. Where I disagree with you is the PF having influence in stations etc. where it is clearly the domain of factions and powers. This is the fundamental basic logic of the game. I don't see how this narrow point detracts from the gameplay just reinforces the basic set up and logic of the ED galaxy. Gameplay revolves around these basic fundamental premises not the other way round.

3) I am all for examples to highlight a point. The examples I gave in the previous point relating to anarchies & governed space also, with clear logic. You side stepped these, as it does not support your argument. Will continue this at a later date. If you can give me a clear reasoning for the PF trumping factions and powers over docking privileges, when most factions distrust the PF membership. I'd be happy to hear it. Anyhow will get back to this discussion at a later date. enjoy!

 

[NeilF]

<snip

Please PLEASE do raise examples... Suggest something/anything CMDRs can do now, that will be worse off under the proposed C&P (karma) mechanic I'm endorsing

I can currently do this... Bet with that C&P (karma) mechanic I won't be able to!


Your points:-

"The examples I gave in the previous point relating to anarchies & governed space also, with clear logic. You side stepped these, as it does not support your argument." - Sorry, you'll need to clarify this, as I've missed it... Even on a second visit to your post

BUT, if it means, "We cannot employ the suggested mechanic which may well improve gameplay, because of game universe (lore) issues"? Then as I said, that too me seems questionable. But please do re-explain it...


"If you can give me a clear reasoning for the PF trumping factions and powers over docking privileges, when most factions distrust the PF membership." - Another game universe issue with no gameplay issue? *sigh* Let's simply suggest the PF and Insurance companies have a huge ability to manipulate any stations. High Security most of all, low security least of all. Anarchy not at all. Hence if/when they start taking a dislike to a CMDRs psychotic behaviour why they can get the stations on board in that order.

But again, I have very little interest in game universe (lore) explanations when the mechanics are effective and simple and logical (IMHO).

I would suggest once again, "Suggest something/anything CMDRs can do now, that will be worse off under the proposed C&P (karma) mechanic I'm endorsing "

 

[CMDR Seron]

Of course, the Karma system has to be applied everywhere in the galaxy, without exception. The Pilot Federation monitors their members in the whole galaxy, so it does not matter if you are in an anarchy or a civilised system—you kill other people, you become unwelcome in more and more systems (but not in anarchies) since you reputation becomes worse and worse. This is plain obvious.

But the consequences of your actions are least felt in anarchies, because there is nobody there who cares what you do.

 

[Stigbob]

Do we have any info from FDEV about how this stuff is going to work ?.

 

[Riverside]

Do we have any info from FDEV about how this stuff is going to work ?.

No more than was said at Lavecon. It's all pure speculation in this thread

 

[jasonbarron]

Oh, but what sweet speculation it has been!

*not to be confused with "speculumation"*

 

[NeilF]

The element of game play most affected would be random encounters within anarchy systems.

Can you give me an example of such a "random encounter" where player A destroys player B in an anarchy system than is not worthy of exactly the same consideration as non-anarchy?


Are we discussing a random encounter being someone flying through the system (in this case anarchy) to do something, and someone else deciding, I want to blow them up for no other reason than I can? Is that about it? The problem is, how does that differ at all in goal/outcome to?
- There's an explorer coming to a new location: I'll blow them up for no other reason than I can? *repeat - Ideally in a group against one*

Surely we're trying to prevent this extremely toxic activity in OPEN? And if we can via a nice simple logical approach? Why don't we?


So can you give a nice specific case and an example of gamplay you're envisaging being compromised by a C&P (karma) mechanic also measuring illegal destruction in anarchy systems? "Random encounter" is rather vague...

It is not illegal to kill anyone you please in anarchy systems.

The premise/suggestion is, it would be "illegal" (choose a term you prefer?) according to the PF, unless done via a "legal reason" (eg: the victim has a PF bounty).

That said, there's no reason why you couldn't "illegally" destroy CMDRs in anarchy (or non-anarchy) systems for the lolz if you wish. The mechanic would ignore a few illegal kills, and it's only if you started habitually doing it that you'd then start to incur penalties/ramifications for your psychotic behaviour. Again, can you explain how this doesn't result in a more positive outcome in the game than any negatives (ie: gankers can't gank habitually)?

We can engage freely, because nobody has enough influence over these systems to exert control. Without lawful control of a system, consistent monitoring becomes impossible.

We're decending into game universe reasons rather than pro's and con's of the proposed mechanic. But I'll play ball The PF wishes to protect its members from psychotic illegal destruction, as it has "a zero tolerance policy regarding dishonourable behaviour among its members." Likewise insurance companies are not keen on losing money so back the action taken by the PF.

Oh, but what sweet speculation it has been!

*not to be confused with "speculumation*

Very true...

But if Powerplay, the Engineers and Multi-Crew is anything to go by. Sometimes things maybe are best fleshed out before delivering them.

 

[Mohrgan]

In order to allow for some in-game shenanigan I would have the PF determine that they will not monitor activities in Anarchy systems. Their justification not to track what happens in an Anarchy system would be: "If you're silly enough to operate in an anarchy, you get what you deserve". Game play demands that Commanders have a place to let their hair down.

In short, game play out weighs logic every damned time. There is no reason to cripple that type of play.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Oh, but what sweet speculation it has been!

*not to be confused with "speculumation"*

Speculation or not, this is about to change. And most likely in a way PKers won't enjoy ED that much anymore.

 

[jasonbarron]

Speculation or not, this is about to change. And most likely in a way PKers won't enjoy ED that much anymore.

You sir win my very 1st Speculumation Award of the day! Yours will show up in the post between 3-5 business days.

 

[yodajedifishmaster]

how does this show that someone ramming someone else to death is malicious? are all commanders in the instance going to be suspects in the absence of hard video evidence? or do they have some way to detect cmdr X not only rammed and destroyed cmdr Y but did it as a griefer not as a station entry collision, or lag induced incident? i dont see how they can monitor collisions. firing weapons maybe - because the crime reporting function?

 

[Stigbob]

how does this show that someone ramming someone else to death is malicious? are all commanders in the instance going to be suspects in the absence of hard video evidence? or do they have some way to detect cmdr X not only rammed and destroyed cmdr Y but did it as a griefer not as a station entry collision, or lag induced incident? i dont see how they can monitor collisions. firing weapons maybe - because the crime reporting function?

Some git ramming people by the letterbox is going to be in more collisions over a shorter period of time than other players, even it's a wing of gits who all ram the same player in turn deliberately to get his number up they'll be ramming more than one player. He'll be hit 4 times quickly on one day they'll average a lot more over time.