Jump to content
Hotwingz

Death and all its consequences, food for thought? (Continued with latest info)

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone, over the past few weeks the topic of death has come up several times in different threads. Leading me to ponder on the subject.

 

What we know today: when you die you loose your inventory and you respawn at the arkship or the closest resurrection node where you are allowed to respawn. That ship you had, its most likely stolen or scrap metal by now.

 

Some people have argued that death should also include the loss of skillpoints/train time. Sounds scary I know.

 

But that lead me to thinking about death and its consequences and as such I formulated a question in my head.

 

Why is it always the victim who gets punished?

Isnt it a fair idea that the killer should also receive some form of punishment?

 

 

 

Edit: I am not talking about placing a bounty as revenge. Because most likely the bounty will come out of the victims pocket. As a victim your loss does not add up compared to the potential loss of the killer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In what way? What did you have in mind?

 

The whole bounty system is part of the punishment for the killers to make it harder for them to move around after they have committed murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what I have in mind.

Its an open question to find out how people feel about the question.

 

If I had a real idea I would have posted it in the idea forum. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest some system where the killer gets some kind of internal bounty. Only if he kills in territory he doesn't own ofc. That internal bounty increases with every kill. Upon his death he loses more items (or they drop), and he loses skillpoints according to that bounty.

 

Player given bounty is just abusable and getting punished in neutral territory only favors multiaccs or kills piracy as a whole

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bounty-Wrapper-Small.jpg

 

 

Most natural or emergent response or reaction to an action in my book, if player issued.

 

Can't really think of other things as most would be too artificial to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skillspoints loss. Make death have a meaning, so people don't go and suicide all the time.


Make skillspoints loss have a chance, depending on a person's distance from the RN they elected to resurrect at.


Let's see how many REAL pirates exist out there :V 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest some system where the killer gets some kind of internal bounty. Only if he kills in territory he doesn't own ofc. That internal bounty increases with every kill. Upon his death he loses more items (or they drop), and he loses skillpoints according to that bounty.

 

Player given bounty is just abusable and getting punished in neutral territory only favors multiaccs or kills piracy as a whole

I didn't think Bobba Fett was an upstanding guy for a bounty hunter :P

 

Bounty Hunters are hired killers, no matter how one may look at it.

 

Let the hitman market flourish :P

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe 1/3rd of the bounty comes from the victim's bank and 2/3rds from the attacker's bank.

 

With a negative balance capable of being held.

 

This will allow for contracts being placed upon people, and keep the attacker's buddy from claiming the bounty and sharing it with the attacker. (To some extent)

 

The negative balance (lein in financial terms) would need to be fulfilled before the attackers could purchase anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To elaborate on my idea...

 

A contract is placed on someone.

 

A player places 100,000 credits down on the contract. The actual contract is a 300,000 credit bounty. The remainder is pulled from the "contracted players" account.

 

If they have a zero balance when killed, it goes to -200,000. They would have to pay it off before they can buy anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There would need to be some cap associated with the players level, so high level players can't grief a low level character, by placing an unobtainable "lein" on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To elaborate on my idea...

 

A contract is placed on someone.

 

A player places 100,000 credits down on the contract. The actual contract is a 300,000 credit bounty. The remainder is pulled from the "contracted players" account.

 

If they have a zero balance when killed, it goes to -200,000. They would have to pay it off before they can buy anything.

The EVE system is pretty solid on the bounty hunting.

 

Person A places bounty on person B. The Bounty is : 10,000,000 SpaceBucks.

 

Person C kills person B, person B drops item (dev confirmed in the Kickstarter AMA part one). You return those items and "sell" them to Person A for a part of the Bounty pool of money. The items you brought back, may be worth 1,000,000 SpaceBucks. The Bounty pool is now 9,000,000 SpaceBucks.

 

Just for the killing blow, the Bounty will pay 100,000 SpaceBucks.

 

Really simple, really concise. Add a requirement the bounty hunter has to deal the killing blow on the prey, and add skillspoints loss on death for everyone in the game, so the Bounty System becomes valid.

 

EVEN better, it creates possibilities. You pay the bounty hunter to tell you who sent him, then hire the same bounty hunter to kill the one who contracted them.

 

Emergent Coercion Gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As i said in another thread: skill loss but you can't just generally kill whole branches of the game only because you can't understand them.

 

I AM a pirate and I gladly take skill loss -because I'm not a carebear and I don't think only one way like some others here who just want to favor THEIR playstyle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As i said in another thread: skill loss but you can't just generally kill whole branches of the game only because you can't understand them.

 

I AM a pirate and I gladly take skill loss -because I'm not a carebear and I don't think only one way like some others here who just want to favor THEIR playstyle

I did say the skill loss system should be tied to how far the RN is from your location of death.

 

 

You die far far away? You'll lose skill points probably. Like, in the middle of deep space. 

 

 

Space-truckers will probably sell on THAT for their prices on hauling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting concept although by the sounds of things some skills will take days to train not minutes. I suggest the concept is extended to include progress on skills. I propose a system like this.

 

The percentages are just random and pulled out the air and are purely for comparison. Higher level players will take a larger punishment as a skill taking a week to train would be set back a few days based on respawn distance. As your skills will likely train while you are offline but you would need to log in to change what is training this doesnt matter so much (idle verse anyone)

 

Short distrance - Chance of upto 10% Progress loss

Low Level - Minutes to a couple of hours

Mid Level - Hours to a day

High Level - Hours to a week

 

Medium Distance - Chance ofupto 25% Progress Loss + Chance of skill point loss

Low Level - Minutes to a Day

Mid Level - Hours to Week

High Level - Day to Weeks

 

High Distance - Chance of upto 50% Progress Loss + Higher Chance of skill point loss

Low Level - Hours to a day

Mid Level - Day to Weeks

High Level -  Days to a Month

 

Problems with this system is clear everyone starts near each other on the same planet some restrictions would carefully need to be put in place to limit skill loss to much. But death and consequences should have some involvement with the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting concept although by the sounds of things some skills will take days to train not minutes. I suggest the concept is extended to include progress on skills. I propose a system like this.

 

The percentages are just random and pulled out the air and are purely for comparison. Higher level players will take a larger punishment as a skill taking a week to train would be set back a few days based on respawn distance. As your skills will likely train while you are offline but you would need to log in to change what is training this doesnt matter so much (idle verse anyone)

 

Short distrance - Chance of upto 10% Progress loss

Low Level - Minutes to a couple of hours

Mid Level - Hours to a day

High Level - Hours to a week

 

Medium Distance - Chance ofupto 25% Progress Loss + Chance of skill point loss

Low Level - Minutes to a Day

Mid Level - Hours to Week

High Level - Day to Weeks

 

High Distance - Chance of upto 50% Progress Loss + Higher Chance of skill point loss

Low Level - Hours to a day

Mid Level - Day to Weeks

High Level -  Days to a Month

 

Problems with this system is clear everyone starts near each other on the same planet some restrictions would carefully need to be put in place to limit skill loss to much. But death and consequences should have some involvement with the game.

I think the Devs will go with some translation of EVE's gameplay mechanics on death. Plus, it's skillpoints loss, there's no real "level".

 

You won't suddenly become incapable of using a gun, you will only become less effective on using that gun.

 

In EVE, some skills took months to train up to >.>

 

Rank 4 to Rank 5 in some cases, took as much as Rank 1 to Rank 4 took in its entirety.

 

It's the prime reason why bounty hunters will be hired for top gun pilots on one faction, to make them less effective in combat.

 

 

The only real adjustment the system needs, is to reduce the latest skill a person upgraded and each one of those skills, having a gradual, "HP loss" system of their own in regards to distance back home to homebase, in order to balance the home advantage sme defenders may have in a siege. Who knows, in some cases, being taken prisoner in an Ark Prison near your death site that belongs to the Enemy, may be better than having to wait 5 months to retrain a skill to maximum, no? It adds risk to anyone who is interesti go into combat and adds a very heavy penalty to those who do so far from civilisation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Death is already bad:

1) loss of ship

2) loss of some maybe all items and equipment

3) locational disadvantage: it will take time to return to the location the death occurred at which may be many systems away. To get back a player would need to first get a replacement ship, and equipment and then spend the time traveling. Time is money. So this alone is a large setback.

 

Why the above are a good design is that they can be mitigated in some way e.g. Insurance on a ship, or a large org that sponsors your ships. Same for equipment. Or your good equipment is stowed while entering dangerous territory.

The location setback is potentially the largest penalty. If you need to go from A to B, getting killed before reaching B means the journey needs to start all over again. A large org could have closer rez nodes but they will be expensive so not everyone can afford it. But this is also not always a setback since if you are returning from B to A, being killed teleports you to were you want to be.

 

There is nothing situational or interesting about skill loss. Since everything is only slightly less efficient with lower skills, large orgs will recruit hordes of new players that have nothing to lose, equip them and ship them to war zones. Pirates will have to do the same. Gone are the ace pilots. There is no incentive to be an ace since the horde can get the job done better. Any that try will find their skills resetting to that of the horde.

 

Let there be ace pilots, say no to skill loss on death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Death is already bad:

1) loss of ship

2) loss of some maybe all items and equipment

3) locational disadvantage: it will take time to return to the location the death occurred at which may be many systems away. To get back a player would need to first get a replacement ship, and equipment and then spend the time traveling. Time is money. So this alone is a large setback.

 

Why the above are a good design is that they can be mitigated in some way e.g. Insurance on a ship, or a large org that sponsors your ships. Same for equipment. Or your good equipment is stowed while entering dangerous territory.

The location setback is potentially the largest penalty. If you need to go from A to B, getting killed before reaching B means the journey needs to start all over again. A large org could have closer rez nodes but they will be expensive so not everyone can afford it. But this is also not always a setback since if you are returning from B to A, being killed teleports you to were you want to be.

 

There is nothing situational or interesting about skill loss. Since everything is only slightly less efficient with lower skills, large orgs will recruit hordes of new players that have nothing to lose, equip them and ship them to war zones. Pirates will have to do the same. Gone are the ace pilots. There is no incentive to be an ace since the horde can get the job done better. Any that try will find their skills resetting to that of the horde.

 

Let there be ace pilots, say no to skill loss on death.

You can steal ships. Your arguement is invalid. :V

 

Items will be partially destroyed, partially dropped where you are. You can steal items from a guy's house he left unattended. OR, you can stockpile on extra guns, ammo (confirmed) and armors.

 

It's a rifle, not a l3g0nd4ry ep1c sw0rd dropped by Cthulu's third nose.

 

What you need to punish players who try to STEAL ships, is skillpoints loss.

 

Except if you want me to suffer no real penalty for boarding and killing every other ship I choose to. 

 

I would also suggest that people who go PK-Red status, should even suffer more of a skillpoints loss when it occurs, but their chance of skillpoints loss to be kept tied to distance from RN.

 

Why? Because I want risk on my PK-sprees and would make a people who put Bounties on PKers to actually edeliver punishment proportional to the "crimes", instead of me who will put bounties to many people just to make their lives miserable. ^_^

 

Except if you don't want OTHER Player-Killers to suffer punishment but not YOU suffering punishments. I mean, THAT would make you a hypocrite, wouldn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Death is already bad:

1) loss of ship

2) loss of some maybe all items and equipment

3) locational disadvantage: it will take time to return to the location the death occurred at which may be many systems away. To get back a player would need to first get a replacement ship, and equipment and then spend the time traveling. Time is money. So this alone is a large setback.

 

Why the above are a good design is that they can be mitigated in some way e.g. Insurance on a ship, or a large org that sponsors your ships. Same for equipment. Or your good equipment is stowed while entering dangerous territory.

The location setback is potentially the largest penalty. If you need to go from A to B, getting killed before reaching B means the journey needs to start all over again. A large org could have closer rez nodes but they will be expensive so not everyone can afford it. But this is also not always a setback since if you are returning from B to A, being killed teleports you to were you want to be.

 

There is nothing situational or interesting about skill loss. Since everything is only slightly less efficient with lower skills, large orgs will recruit hordes of new players that have nothing to lose, equip them and ship them to war zones. Pirates will have to do the same. Gone are the ace pilots. There is no incentive to be an ace since the horde can get the job done better. Any that try will find their skills resetting to that of the horde.

 

Let there be ace pilots, say no to skill loss on death.

 

 

I agree with this. Skill point loss is uninteresting and just plain frustrating. There is no way to earn that time back or prevent that loss, other than not dying in the first place. EVE used to have that system and they removed it for a reason. It doesn't make for good gameplay. It just discourages everyone from ever risking dying ever; pirate or carebear. As it stands now, you lose your ship, whatever you were carrying, and get sent to respawn somewhere else. That's already a big penalty. Plus, like Kurock said, they are things you can control. You control what type of ship you are flying (and if it's insured). You control what's in your ship. And you control where you are. If you want to risk it all with a super blinged out ship carrying valuable cargo through dangerous space, then you have a large risk. If you just want to fly around in cheap ships with your buddies and have fun, knowing you'll probably explode, you can, safe in the knowledge that your level of risk it low.

 

As to punishments for the killer, those should be player driven (with bounties or word of mouth reputation). There is no reason for intrinsic punishments for the killer. The game world is not watched over by some omniscient entity which punishes people who violate it's code of ethics (that would be religion and a whole other can of worms). It's up to the player's to provide consequences for people's actions in game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very interesting, I agree in the need of trying ways for players to put their lifes in value.

And I also agree about not to favor one style over another.

Some equilibrium on this sense would be fine.

By the rest, I can imagine the assasin running away for ever from the security forces of the organization(s) victim. And the chase would never stop unless the killer gave himself, just paying a heavy compensation for such an expensive killing.

In this case, for instance, they (both the killer and the victim) would be more careful in the future.

But, of course, I'm still open about this theme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...