Damned Vigilantes

[NaffNaffBobFace]

I think there’s a fundamental difference of opinion presented in this thread.

On one hand there are people looking for game systems to protect them from “bad people” - those looking for a single player experience. In my opinion CIg has little reason to make this approach 100% reliable.

This approach ignores the reason to join Test, or to engage with other players, or to play Star Citizen - flying with friends for fun and fury.

Which brings me back to my flippant question - why did you not get in Discord and request TEST RESC?

"Which brings me back to my flippant question - why did you not get in Discord and request TEST RESC"

How would you get someone from TEST on to your server while it's crashing? Or legit question how would you get someone from TEST on to the server when it's NOT crashing?

"I think there’s a fundamental difference of opinion presented in this thread.
On one hand there are people looking for game systems to protect them from “bad people” - those looking for a single player experience. In my opinion CIg has little reason to make this approach 100% reliable."

I don't recall saying PvP or people making uncivil choices in their actions won't/shouldn't happen. At no point did I say "This guy killed me and he shouldn't be allowed to" or that the game should not be freeplay considering it's a sandbox.

I'm saying in UEE jurisdiction space where there is what must be accepted as being an overbearing government (Citizenship Must Be Earned - No Vote For You And No Democracy For You Until You Kill Or Die For Us https://starcitizen.fandom.com/wiki/Citizenship), even in Stanton where they don't officially patrol trusting to the resources of four mega-corporations, they will still have that controlling overview of their populous and there will be consequences to your actions no matter how they were originally motivated. You smuggle drugs and someone detects them on your ship hell yeah you should fight and potentially get blown up, but if the dude you were fighting off dies prepare to be in a hell of a lot more trouble than if you'd simply been moving some skunk for a mate, you're a murderer now. But also I'm saying that should that vigilante get trigger happy and kill an innocent they too are not exempt from the consequences of that just because they were doing a good job of stopping criminals ten minutes earlier.

A cops stray bullet hits a kid, it's pretty much the end of his/her career. A criminal kills a cop when running from the law they are looking at Death Row. Actions and consequences. If you're a bounty hunter and kill the guy stood next to your bounty head? Well there goes your pick of the jobs and probably your license to operate and you may be looking at jail time. You're a vigilante and blow up a Connie full of nuns? You're on the run, until your next life where I'm sure you'll make sure to comm them before you bomb them. You deliver your cargo of Rum to the center of a sun rather than the pub? Back to hauling Human Waste for you until you can make it back to the pub owner.

The UEE doesn't give you freedoms until you have provided servitude and earned them. You act in a brash manner, especially to other UEE citizens, and you're not going to be able to use "but i'm playing PvP!" as a defense when you have your citizenship revoked and are exiled and have to go live on Spider where you can have all the PvP you can eat.

Death of a Space Man will be a thing. Without consequences of an Bad Choice being a thing as well, DOASM will mean a lot less to a certain but active core of the player base to whom it will become merely an inconvenience rather than something you wish to avoid and Ganking or the SC equivilent of it will become the norm because no consequences.

So my original question - how will the UEE views Vigilantism, and if they endorce it how can they stop that endorcement from begin corrupted for a players own agendas, as with my evidence planting example or for instance if they kill enough criminal NCP's and build enough rep will they then be able to go on a PK rampage through Area 18 with only that rep earned lost, while all the players they shot have to deal with DOASM... or will it be like real life and once you make a stupid decision because you are "bored" you have to then live with the consequences of it for the rest of your life.

 

[Bruttle]

What we theory-craft here today although seemingly not closely related to the final mechanic might just be seen and contemplated before the final article emerges - although our ideas here may be nothing like the finished product they have the potential to inform and influence what eventually arrives even if it's just "Mmmm, we definitely 100% don't want to do it that way".

Sometimes I wonder if they actually do read these forums. I definitely feel some of our conversations here are worth reading. We really do have some good discussions.

My biggest concern about Star Citizen is not about the funding to get to launch - it is that I don't see any game mechanics to incentivize PVP. Quite the opposite; the large ratio of NPCs to live players makes it impossible for player Orgs to corner any part of the market. There will be no scarce goods to fight over with the economy as CR envisions it. What is going to drive conflict? How does TEST conquer? How does TESTwin?

This is a huge consideration. Unfortunately, most games completely fail at this. They either cater completely to PVP'rs and allow the game to be essentially lawless, or cater to the PVE crowd and make conflict completely avoidable. Most of the time though, the decisions are made from a position of laziness. It's like developers using the term "sandbox" to avoid creating end game content, or like using RNG to generate scarcity. Fortunately, I just don't see CIG falling into this category. I am very hopeful that they will create well balanced reasons for conflict. After all, conflict is what keeps people coming back and opening their wallets. It just needs to be balanced.

That's the other common pitfall. Most games are completely devoid of balance. Some games allow super alliances to rule unchallenged. Some dance the P2W line. Some create systems that ensure PVP is always the most profitable and efficient. Regardless of their decisions though, most games completely underestimate the need for the farmville PVE crowd. As a result, they implement mechanics allowing days/weeks/months of hard work to be wiped completely away in just a few seconds of imbalanced game play.

I've seen it happen in dozens (literally) of MMOs over the years. The "farmvillers" complain about the imbalance, nothing is done, so they leave. Nobody wants to grind for weeks only to lose it all in minutes and hear "lol get gud scrub" from some asshat with god level gear. Soon, nobody is tending the electronic fields, so no product is generated. The source of the conflict and the reason for PVP leaves the game. As a result, the PVP'rs leave the game because there isn't anything to do. Soon the game is populated entirely of griefers and gankers that do nothing but wander around for hours, searching for anyone to pick on. We've all seen it.

So I have high hopes that CIG will actually take the time to figure out this formula. It needs to balanced. It needs to generate conflict without driving away the reasons for that conflict. It needs to be frustrating, but not pointless. It needs to be the reason for people to pull together, and not be driven apart (or driven out of the game). There needs to be risks and rewards for both sides of a fight. Most of all though, it needs to be well thought out and DESIGNED. It can't just be another afterthought like all the other developers treat it.. ".. blah, blah, blah... player driven economy. Blah, blah, blah... risk vs. reward".

 

[Raither]

Some great arguments/rants/points of view in this thread.

What we have here is the wild, wild west when it comes to anything outside of the safe space areas with armistice and even more wild wild west in areas with no UEE satellite stations nearby that can scan and record illegal activity and award crime-stat automatically to the offender.

In short, yeah it's going to be a bit of a grief playground in many ways for awhile as CiG tunes and adjusts the Star Citizen game play to minimize the negative player experience factor, but lawless space and areas outside of armistice zones are supposed to be dangerous and potentially life threatening.

CiG has also stated that they will not be going the way of games like Everquest and have employee "Game Masters" that will pop in as gods and magically solve whatever problem or dispute is taking place. CiG is going with as much of a "hands-off" approach as possible in Star Citizen. Once the 'verse is up and running, we are on our own if we make the choice to venture outside of safe space areas.

There are going to be assholes in the 'verse, and no shortage of them. We can expect the worst out of them when it comes to using exploits, game bugs, lawyer-questing, semantics etc. for sure.

As TESTies we do have one very large advantage that many in the 'verse do not have... with as many members and affiliates as we have, we are never "alone" in the 'verse and we have the numbers to make sure we can cover our asses whenever we choose to venture into lawless space for whatever reason, as a small group or as a large Org expedition.

There is likely to always be enough TEST members online and in Discord to group up with and get things done. Hell, the way things are shaping up we would have no problem owning, operating and 24/7 guarding a large primary TEST installation/outpost deep in the lawless regions of space with this many members... and be our own version of the UEE, in lawless space.