(Yet another) C&P proposal: preventative v. risk-based penalties

[StiTch]

I'm not sure your proposal regarding docking - at least with current implementation - is going far enough Stitch

It's not to be taken as "this is karma punishments, here ya go". It would be part of whatever is drafted and assumedly involve other punishments.

My simple point is that with regards to stations, refusing permission outright is very poor form. At no point does other game risk lock content out; it makes it risky to access, but not lock it out entirely and make it impossible to access. Just because we don't have advanced enough port types yet, it doesn't mean the correct alternative is to handle it as a content ban.

Now while I suspected the most heated aspect of this would be people going "but punish gankers more!" it's already been put forward in almost every suggestion I've seen, from FD included, that punishments wouldn't be about removing bits of the game for offenders. I was mostly interested in adding stations to this sentiment, in a way that might give us something to develop roles with.

A primary reason for the C&P karma mechanic is to rein in unwanted illegal destruction surely?

False.

As I've said before, karma will hit more CLers than it will gankers.

But with regards to murder, it's to do with adding risk to a playstyle that has no risk, and I've seen words of similar structure directly in an FD post somewhere.

I would love to have a reasonable debate on this but given the torrent of "gankors suck and are bad people who we should stop playing the game if we can" in the rest of the post, and is assumedly all I'd ever hear put forward, I'll pass on this debate Neil

If a ship has been involved in bad things, it's pretty reasonable to expect a station, or sys-sec, to spot that ship easily and do whatever the C&P system dictates.
If, OTOH, the player is in a different ship then maybe you could get away with creeping around, perhaps until you're scanned, regardless of any karma?

If this gets put forward, it has my vote. Sys-sec response would have to be nuclear, including station guns at station, but it's a rather intriguing bit of flavour.

 

[Vorxian]

The comments are great, nice suggestions stitch.

I think that it may be ok locking out station access if ones 'karma' gets to a point that it becomes a fair infraction. I like the scanning idea, there has to be an upgrade on the 'awareness' of police & station security at high sec systems.. You could give the policing AI a good buff, and make their awareness that it takes away the ease of "silent running, boost, boost, boost" (as Theodrid points out).... but you have to be pretty darn clever to access a high sec station when you're karma flagged. Should be no mean fete, and brag worthy if you do make it.

I also thought about commodities being carried as well, so if you're not supposed to be in a station due to the above, then you want no paper trail, so perhaps all goods you carry are blackmarket at that point. Will add an interesting 'black market' commodities market that has independent prices from the regular commercial markets. heck even I may be tempted to do some 'black market trading' if that were the case.

Interesting to buy / sell black market goods at a pirate outpost / station.. then dodge security at regular hubs, selling the black market goods...

 

[Theodrid]

It's not to be taken as "this is karma punishments, here ya go". It would be part of whatever is drafted and assumedly involve other punishments.

My simple point is that with regards to stations, refusing permission outright is very poor form. At no point does other game risk lock content out; it makes it risky to access, but not lock it out entirely and make it impossible to access. Just because we don't have advanced enough port types yet, it doesn't mean the correct alternative is to handle it as a content ban.

Now while I suspected the most heated aspect of this would be people going "but punish gankers more!" it's already been put forward in almost every suggestion I've seen, from FD included, that punishments wouldn't be about removing bits of the game for offenders. I was mostly interested in adding stations to this sentiment, in a way that might give us something to develop roles with.

I think 'locking out content' and 'removing bits of the game' are showing a slight flare for the dramatic on your part here Stitch. Any 'docking denied' scenario would only be temporary surely and adds a layer of 'is this worth me doing, my time, the consequences' to the perpetrator - isn't that a good thing? And nobody is 'removing bits of the game' or 'locking content' - both, and I think quite deliberately on your part - have a permanent, more Draconian air to them, we have to consider, that even if that was the case, that the only person 'locking or 'removing' anything would be the perpetrator. Think before you act should apply here just as it should across the board and as I said above I don't think pretending that smuggling ones self into a station is a deterrent is helpful.

 

[Stigbob]

Doesn't that require pirate ports first?

To be fair this is partially what I mean when I say "make me feel like a criminal" - it'd be cool to think the shady have to deal somewhere that shady business is appreciated. Alas, I think we are some time away from this level of role engagement.

The first time I popped out of super-cruise and saw the big rotating red pirate holo-skull as a bounty hunter I started emergency evasion, then realised nothing bad was happening so I landed and realized nothing bad was going to happen. I was disappointed the x-series pirate ports behave in a more piratey way even sometimes stowing a bomb in your ship and extorting the deactivation code after you leave.

One of the most challenging space sandboxes I've played was freelancer using the hostile universe mod, everyone hates you except the smallest weakest pirate faction it was great fun dashing from pirate base to base was always a white knuckle ride.

 

[StiTch]

I think 'locking out content' and 'removing bits of the game' are showing a slight flare for the dramatic on your part here Stitch. Any 'docking denied' scenario would only be temporary surely and adds a layer of 'is this worth me doing, my time, the consequences' to the perpetrator - isn't that a good thing? And nobody is 'removing bits of the game' or 'locking content' - both, and I think quite deliberately on your part - have a permanent, more Draconian air to them, we have to consider, that even if that was the case, that the only person 'locking or 'removing' anything would be the perpetrator. Think before you act should apply here just as it should across the board and as I said above I don't think pretending that smuggling ones self into a station is a deterrent of any kind is realistic.

...again, that's your own words. I explicitly said it shouldn't be easy and later said I'd love to see varied scan patterns, so that to gain stealthy access to a station, you have to actually dodge into the station instead of just quickly flying inwards in a line.

But also how little do you believe karma punishments should be worth then, if they are temporary enough that this isn't classed as locking content? Should all traces of a murder spree on Friday be wiped away by end of the weekend? Such a system is inherently ineffective if it resets quickly. We will be, I suspect, looking at a system that reverts over a period of days to weeks.

I don't think there's any case at all for denying players of a legitimate playstyle - again, whether you like it being legit is irrelevant, as it's been confirmed by FD - the ability to dock at the majority of stations for multiple days to weeks. You are overdramatising if you believe the odd attack in the ED universe measures up to this. It's not about making it easy, or consequence free, to get away with such a playstyle - but preserving the notion of free will and playing your way, while reminding gankers that they too need to face the risk they impose. I can 100% assure you my most vicious death has been to station guns

Again...if you want to read this as "gankers should have no consequence", that's how you personally are choosing to read this. Many top PvP players are at the forefront for advocating C&P. However, it needs to be consistent with Elite being about choice and risk.

Oh, and as a side note...remember that if you want to try get into a war of sheer spite with gankers, they have experience and will win

 

[Theodrid]

...again, that's your own words. I explicitly said it shouldn't be easy and later said I'd love to see varied scan patterns, so that to gain stealthy access to a ship, you have to actually dodge into the station instead of just quickly flying inwards in a line.

But also how little do you believe karma punishments should be worth then, if they are temporary enough that this isn't classed as locking content? Should all traces of a murder spree on Friday be wiped away by end of the weekend? Such a system is inherently ineffective if it resets quickly. We will be, I suspect, looking at a system that reverts over a period of days to weeks.

I don't think there's any case at all for denying players of a legitimate playstyle - again, whether you like it being legit is irrelevant, as it's been confirmed by FD - the ability to dock at the majority of stations for multiple days to weeks. You are overdramatising if you believe the odd attack in the ED universe measures up to this.

Again...if you want to read this as "gankers should have no consequence", that's how you personally are choosing to read this. Many top PvP players are at the forefront for advocating C&P. However, it needs to be consistent with Elite being about choice and risk.

Oh, and as a side note...remember that if you want to try get into a war of sheer spite with gankers, they have experience and will win

Stitch, re-read my posts, I have not claimed once that you propose 'no consequences', neither have I stated that I desire the denial of legitimate playstyles. - I said, in my opinion, your idea doesn't go far enough, nothing more, nothing less. Also, I clearly stated that with current implementation of smuggling - and not even a mention of a reworking from Frontier - that your idea is trivial to avoid for criminals.

In terms of the time/severity of karma hits, that is a tough one to answer, we are way, way up Hypothetical Avenue now but, if I had to speculate, it wouldn't, (in my preference), be a time thing necessarily but a how hard/fast/expensively do you want to work it off thing. Just as folks can grind the hell out of rank and get where they want faster so folks should be able to reset their karma quickly if they have the time, credits and inclination. That balance, of it being punishing enough that it makes you think but not too punishing that it makes you play Goat Simulator instead is one hell of a job that I'm glad Frontier have to deal with and not me. Frontier sure as hell aint gonna please everyone, suffice to say though, Frontier have some metrics, have seen something or have sufficient evidence that they feel this system needs to be implemented, something is happening out there and although they don't want to stop it complaetely Frontier clearly want to curb it to a lesser or greater degree.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'that's your words' Stitch, I quoted and replied to your posts and your statements as you said them.

 

[StiTch]

In terms of the time/severity of karma hits, that is a tough one to answer, we are way, way up Hypothetical Avenue now but, if I had to speculate, it wouldn't, (in my preference), be a time thing necessarily but a how hard/fast/expensively do you want to work it off thing.

This is why IMO discussions about how severe the punishments are overall are pretty moot. FD probably already have some idea and players are either fickle, biased, or inconsistent in a perfectly well-mannered fashion. I personally feel any aspect of karma that can be worked off/paid off will just be irrelevant - so basically, my turn to say "not harsh enough". Murderers are more likely than most to have billions in the bank to throw away, or have two hours in time to work their karma off so they can get a new mod and resume.

And just as you might be alright with murderers having the ability to reset their karma quickly with the right means, I suspect a lot of the other PvE community wouldn't.

Nay, IMO karma should be applied for a reasonable time and provide very reasonable risk depending on your level...but the purpose of this post being I simply ask any punishments don't needlessly apply content blocks, and make it something both engaging and dangerous.

 

[Theodrid]

This is why IMO discussions about how severe the punishments are overall are pretty moot. FD probably already have some idea and players are either fickle, biased, or inconsistent in a perfectly well-mannered fashion. I personally feel any aspect of karma that can be worked off/paid off will just be irrelevant - so basically, my turn to say "not harsh enough". Murderers are more likely than most to have billions in the bank to throw away, or have two hours in time to work their karma off so they can get a new mod and resume.

And just as you might be alright with murderers having the ability to reset their karma quickly with the right means, I suspect a lot of the other PvE community wouldn't.

Nay, IMO karma should be applied for a reasonable time and provide very reasonable risk depending on your level...but the purpose of this post being I simply ask any punishments don't needlessly apply content blocks, and make it something both engaging and dangerous.

We agree on engaging and dangerous Stitch without any shadow of doubt, I didn't mean, (though it did come across that way), to make my time/credits/difficulty sound trivial, they were meant just a a toe dipping speculation. I also didn't mean them in isolation, there is little doubt credits alone are meaningless but a hit on time and difficulty at the same time is an escalation. Either way we are going to need Frontier to implement new gameplay with any Karma system, be it with your idea of smuggling yourself in, or others suggestions regarding pirate stations, new missions/NPC's to 'heal' Karma or, my preference, all of the above and a lot more besides.

 

[Stigbob]

Oh, and as a side note...remember that if you want to try get into a war of sheer spite with gankers, they have experience and will win

Oooh drama. Gankers certainly have the edge in spite, but it's only smart to bet on whoever has the most support from FDEV. Who seem to be approaching this from a deter ganking and murder-hobo's and we don't really care about combat logging position.

This reminds me of Nightshady's declaration FDEV wouldn't dare punish him for cheating at modules.

 

[StiTch]

This reminds me of Nightshady's declaration FDEV wouldn't dare punish him for cheating at modules.

Nightshady was talking crap based on hopeful speculation put forward as righteous law.

...but it's only smart to bet on whoever has the most support from FDEV. Who seem to be approaching this from a deter ganking and murder-hobo's and we don't really care about combat logging position.

...which makes two of you

FD have confirmed that "ungraceful" CLing is a punishable offense, and has been included under the banner of karma on multiple occasions:

Hello Commanders!

Hopefully, we can get some more detailed discussions going on this, but for now:

The initial use of a karma system, which tracks and analyses player activities, will be to provide additional in-game consequences for the following actions:

• Combat logging, where players exit the game ungracefully
• Ramming at starports
• Murder crimes where there is a massive disparity between player stats/skill/ship power

The consequences would scale over time (as a karma system tracks trends over time rather than spot instances).

Notably the statement mentions combat logging in its entirety, but only mentions murder in relation to "a massive disparity between player stats/skill/ship power". Hate to burst bubbles, but even FD don't have this forum mob mentality against PvP in all its forms - you might just have to accept karma isn't gonna be "the anti gankor update"

 

[Vorthax]

With this in mind, a proposal:

There has already been discussion around karma ratings and station entry. To be more precise: a CMDR with a low karma rating should have docking rights rejected at a high security station. This, as we just learned, is preventative measure. So what could be done to make this better?

Relate this to risk-based gameplay. Local authorities control the station, but they don't magically know you are a criminal, in the same way they have to scan you for illegal goods. So - do not outright reject docking requests. Allow them. But if they are scanned, or fall afoul of the law by any other means, the offending CMDR should be subject to immediate security response, including station guns.

That might be good idea for low/medium security stations, but believable high security should scan all vessels BEFORE granting docking permission. Now you can kill system security and then dock in Sol (capital system) or Facece (military system) - that is silly.

Again, this is a "sandbox vs theme park" discussion - if someone wants to roleplay a public enemy, why do you want to limit their experience?

 

[Stigbob]

Nightshady was talking crap based on hopeful speculation put forward as righteous law.

...which makes two of you

FD have confirmed that "ungraceful" CLing is a punishable offense, and has been included under the banner of karma on multiple occasions:

Notably the statement mentions combat logging in its entirety, but only mentions murder in relation to "a massive disparity between player stats/skill/ship power". Hate to burst bubbles, but even FD don't have this forum mob mentality against PvP in all its forms - you might just have to accept karma isn't gonna be "the anti gankor update"

Here's a quote from Sandro himself about clogging and how seriously they view it :

Hello Commander Truesilver!

One step at a time. The current plan is to look at player to player interactions only. It's not going to be easy, or quick. Based on the results, we will look at how/if the karma system should be expanded.

Source so you can confirm it's clogging he's on about : https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/361705-Karma-vs-PvP-Piracy?p=5694374#post5694374

I wouldn't hold your breath for a clogging fix if I were you it seems to be low priority.

 

[StiTch]

Here's a quote from Sandro himself about clogging and how seriously they view it :

Source so you can confirm it's clogging he's on about : https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/361705-Karma-vs-PvP-Piracy?p=5694374#post5694374

I wouldn't hold your breath for a clogging fix if I were you it seems to be low priority.

I am well aware of the discussion, and you have said absolutely nothing that contradicts what I've put forward.

Sandro says in response to TS "the current plan is to look at player to player interactions", because TS expressed strong concerns that karma wouldn't apply to solo/NPC interactions:

Absolutely. Firstly, a task-kill combat log in Solo is precisely the same as hacking the client to achieve invulnerable shields or hull.

Secondly it has many possible direct consequences for other Cmdrs, such as who gets top spot in a CG, or first discovery tags, or whether a PP system is successfully undermined.

Thirdly it is straight out cheating.

Fourthly a part of the problem in Open, I believe, has always been that far from logging to nasty gankers for the very first time in their butter-wouldn't-melt lives, many Cloggers are simply continuing a behaviour they learned in Solo and/or, in many cases, in other games.

And fifthly the distribution of the game's loss mechanic is supposed to be compulsory. Or should rebuy payment and loss of data/cargo be made optional?

If Frontier won't include Solo Clogs in karma they should simply add a 'Ship destruction possible?' toggle in the right panel and let us all decide our personal immortality status in-game.

So again - sorry to burst your bubble, but CLing in this context is still player to player, and still very much a focus for karma - as above in another Sandro quote which has yet to be actually contradicted.

You're welcome to keep arguing the point, but you'd only be trying to convince yourself. Thankyou for your discussion

 

[StiTch]

That might be good idea for low/medium security stations, but believable high security should scan all vessels BEFORE granting docking permission.

A fair point and high secs should be far, far more lethal to a notorious criminal, ensuring it retains its role as antithesis of anarchy systems.

I still don't see absolute locking as correct. The moment you do that, you say "while under the effects of karma, you are restricted from supporting your faction, taking part in CGs, using engineers, trading, taking part in PP, etc. - but only if that place just happens to be in a high sec system"

On the other hand I'd love to think that a criminal can be found in a high sec system with poor enough karma score, and very quickly gets rabidly chased through the system.

Actually getting to the station and docking should be a challenge.

 

[Stigbob]

I am well aware of the discussion, and you have said absolutely nothing that contradicts what I've put forward.

Sandro says in response to TS "the current plan is to look at player to player interactions", because TS expressed strong concerns that karma wouldn't apply to solo/NPC interactions:



So again - sorry to burst your bubble, but CLing in this context is still player to player, and still very much a focus for karma - as above in another Sandro quote which has yet to be actually contradicted.

You're welcome to keep arguing the point, but you'd only be trying to convince yourself. Thankyou for your discussion

Worst case scenario for cloggers means they might actually have to use the FDEV approved menu instead...........that'll sure learn em.

 

[Theodrid]

A fair point and high secs should be far, far more lethal to a notorious criminal, ensuring it retains its role as antithesis of anarchy systems.

I still don't see absolute locking as correct. The moment you do that, you say "while under the effects of karma, you are restricted from supporting your faction, taking part in CGs, using engineers, trading, taking part in PP, etc.

But that is a choice the perpetrators may have to make Stitch, where, when, if and how to destroy someone is entirely in their control, just as shieldless traders make a choice and are in control when they make that decision, they are told, (quite rightly), 'live with your choice when you see a rebuy screen'.

 

[StiTch]

But that is a choice the perpetrators may have to make Stitch, where, when, if and how to destroy someone is entirely in their control, just as shieldless traders make a choice and are in control when they make that decision, they are told, (quite rightly), 'live with your choice when you see a rebuy screen'.

Being destroyed never stopped you engineering your ship, or taking part in a CG.

I don't mind there being consequence. Locking away parts of the game is however in direct contradiction with "playing your way" - it's treating the playstyle as illegitimate, rather than giving it the risk and consequence it needs.

Now if you're also happy to lose access to stations every time you die for a week, that's fine by me, and we can continue to build this game out of spite for different player groups. And as I said, the gankers will win, because they can only get better at sitting in SC destroying things But what I've seen on the topic so far very much implies bringing a sense of risk to a gamestyle that doesn't have any.

You're welcome to argue but I sense a circle argument going on here. No matter how much you say you agree on this being dangerous or risky for the "criminal", you keep returning to the sheer indignation of "but I don't want them to have the right to play". Locking murderers out of stations is far, far, far more dangerous for everyone else around them than for the murderer...

 

[Theodrid]

Being destroyed never stopped you engineering your ship, or taking part in a CG.

I don't mind there being consequence. Locking away parts of the game is however in direct contradiction with "playing your way" - it's treating the playstyle as illegitimate, rather than giving it the risk and consequence it needs.

Now if you're also happy to lose access to stations every time you die for a week, that's fine by me, and we can continue to build this game out of spite for different player groups. And as I said, the gankers will win, because they can only get better at sitting in SC destroying things But what I've seen on the topic so far very much implies bringing a sense of risk to a gamestyle that doesn't have any.

You're welcome to argue but I sense a circle argument going on here. No matter how much you say you agree on this being dangerous or risky for the "criminal", you keep returning to the sheer indignation of "but I don't want them to have the right to play". Locking murderers out of stations is far, far, far more dangerous for everyone else around them than for the murderer...

That is hyperbolic nonsense Stitch, 'I don't want them to have the right to play'? - seriously?. Please explain to me how working off karma hits and/or docking restrictions in low sec or anarchy systems is 'not playing'? I will say again, if someone makes the CHOICE to continually destroy commanders in x,y or z system then they need to live with the CHOICE they made. It is an absolute farce that you can murder with impunity, dock at a station, restock, reload and get right back to it - even with your smuggling proposal - but loiter too long? hello rebuy. It's the equivalent of walking out of Glasgow Central train station, murdering seven people, walking back n past the police officers, having a coffee and a sandwich and doing it all again. Next time you are there you park on double yellow lines for ten minutes and are gunned down for doing so, it's farcical.

 

[StiTch]

It is an absolute farce that you can murder with impunity, dock at a station, restock, reload and get right back to it - even with your smuggling proposal - but loiter too long? hello rebuy.

Ah, but it's fine to slaughter fields of NPCs and then go back to station for a cuppa?

If you want to start on the indignation train, it's farcical that crime and punishment is being handled by a magical space niceness factor than local authorities because your typical PvE player can't handle the prospect of decent NPCs/AI/Cops without having a nervous breakdown.

But here I am playing along and suggesting ways to make it work.

Now you can either give murderers reason to fear death and be cautious, you can ask them to spend far less time in stations so they have more time to do the murdering business, or you can admit that by enforcing on this, they would have to play less - i.e. restricting their right and ability to play.

I don't care how harsh the reasons to fear death are - what you think is an apt consequence is only apt in the confines of your own desire for revenge. You are playing a game of spite with players that have mastered it...I can see it doing nothing to discourage murder unless you are happy to admit you simply want them to play the game less.

Now, we gonna stay on this merry-go-round?

 

[Mohrgan]

Ah, but it's fine to slaughter fields of NPCs and then go back to station for a cuppa?

If you want to start on the indignation train, it's farcical that crime and punishment is being handled by a magical space niceness factor than local authorities because your typical PvE player can't handle the prospect of decent NPCs/AI/Cops without having a nervous breakdown.

But here I am playing along and suggesting ways to make it work.

Now you can either give murderers reason to fear death and be cautious, you can ask them to spend far less time in stations so they have more time to do the murdering business, or you can admit that by enforcing on this, they would have to play less - i.e. restricting their right and ability to play.

I don't care how harsh the reasons to fear death are - what you think is an apt consequence is only apt in the confines of your own desire for revenge. You are playing a game of spite with players that have mastered it...I can see it doing nothing to discourage murder unless you are happy to admit you simply want them to play the game less.

Now, we gonna stay on this merry-go-round?

There is all kinds of craziness in this post. "...restricting their right and ability to play." indeed.