Oolite Bulletins

Just to change the subject, but still about fugitives. My mouse has made me a fugitive several times now. You know, right to orient, left to fire. And since I switched keyboard to mouse, it has taken me forever to remember to dismount weapons. One errant shot at a station while docking and that is it. Seems a bit out of balance. Probably nothing can be done. Just saying.

fluxxx wrote:

Just to change the subject, but still about fugitives. My mouse has made me a fugitive several times now. You know, right to orient, left to fire. And since I switched keyboard to mouse, it has taken me forever to remember to dismount weapons. One errant shot at a station while docking and that is it. Seems a bit out of balance. Probably nothing can be done. Just saying.

I think I've mentioned this - suggested it should be changed - before. The result was that the 'weapons on safety' feature got introduced - which is at least something, and indeed a good feature in its own right.

On a slight tangent: Could the Weapons Off toggle be used as a means to surrender? As it is, it isn't really possible to tell anyone – be they police, pirates or whatnot – that you are non-hostile.

In trouble with the law? Weapons Off (and perhaps speed below a certain threshold) will allow you to dock and pay your fines without getting shot to pieces in the process.
Pirates demanding cargo? Weapons Off will give you more time to comply before they start the laser "encouragement".
Fleeing a furball? Weapons Off increases the chance that whoever is on your tail decides to shift their focus to someone threatening instead.

Handwavium: Active weapons emit a steady vibration detectable by the scanners. Not strong enough to differentiate between types, just enough to detect on/off status.

It would require that the AI had some sort of memory: If you power down they may let you go once, but if it was a trick to get some breathing space, they won't fall for it twice.

Further along the same path of thought: The default setting for a Jameson could be set to always launch with Weapons Off. You could change that setting at any time, something which would effectively change your default stance from "flee" to "fight".

CheeseRedux wrote:

On a slight tangent: Could the Weapons Off toggle be used as a means to surrender? As it is, it isn't really possible to tell anyone – be they police, pirates or whatnot – that you are non-hostile.

It's a definite idea, but currently open to exploitation: "I surrender! And now you're not shooting me, and my shields are back up, and I'm behind you - Unsurrender!". However, if it took an appreciable length of time - 20 or 30 seconds, say - for your weapons to power up, and this was visible to NPC ships (and was somehow made visible to players, too, when NPC ships did it ... maybe there would need to be a different scanner lollipop for "unarmed powered craft"? Pale green?), then this might prevent the player from faking a surrender. If it was accompanied by an on-screen message/countdown, and an appropriate "hmmmMMMWHOOO..." sound effect, and even a slight drain on the energy banks as the weapons go live ... worth thinking about, definitely! Being able to publicly display non-hostile intent to NPCs has some real potential benefit.

Yep, as mentioned, there would have to be some sort of Fool Me Once mechanism involved. I think a 20-30s power-up is far too long – you (or a NPC) could be dead long before you were ready to fire. If there's a Ship Powering Up message accompanied with a flashing lollipop or something, there should be time for evasive – or aggressive! – action with far less lead-up time.

Besides, personally I think fake surrender should be a valid tactic. Once.

ETA: Double-besides: Surrendering should not be a 100% success thing either. So if you've tried to surrender but they're still shooting, you need your weapons back for that last, desperate fightback pdq.

For the most part, actual surrender should be more useful in dealing with the Law. Versus outlaws (and neutrals) the advantage should be the signalling of non-hostile intent: Neutrals don't get jittery if you get close, Pirates give you more time to give in to demands. I'd even go so far as to say that unless you change vector away from them and/or increase speed, they should generally repeat the cargo demand at least twice before deciding you're not gonna give them what they're after without some laser-tickling.
I say generally, because something like this opens up the possibility of a trigger-happiness variable to introduce a bit of randomness into the proceedings. A sliding scale from As Long As You Give Up The Cargo You Live, even after both shooting and fleeing first, to Slightest Provocation And We Go For The Kill.

CheeseRedux wrote:

I think a 20-30s power-up is far too long – you (or a NPC) could be dead long before you were ready to fire. If there's a Ship Powering Up message accompanied with a flashing lollipop or something, there should be time for evasive – or aggressive! – action with far less lead-up time.

Besides, personally I think fake surrender should be a valid tactic. Once.

Yes, but the ship powering its weapons up would be able to make defensive manoeuvres, too. This would add a bit of drama: can you dodge long enough for your weapons to power up? This sort of thing is already in the game, of course - dodging until your shields recharge/lasers cool. Maybe 30 seconds is overdoing it, but "click-I surrender: click-fooled you!" seems too easy. There would have to be some delay.

If it's too easy to flip between "I surrender" and "No I don't!", then nobody would accept powering down the weapons as a sign of surrender. It would be like accepting someone's surrender in a gunfight, because they've flipped on their safety catch. By all means, take a calculated risk: power down the weapons, let them cool and let your shields recharge, while the bad guys leave you alone and go off after your dropped cargo, before taking up a position on their six and cranking up your guns again, and hope to get the drop on them before they've had a chance to get a bead on you again.

CheeseRedux wrote:

ETA: Double-besides: Surrendering should not be a 100% success thing either. So if you've tried to surrender but they're still shooting, you need your weapons back for that last, desperate fightback pdq.

Maybe not 100%, but if the NPCs have demanded that you surrender, then - generally speaking - they should probably want you to surrender, and the last, desperate fightback should only happen very rarely (and be memorable/notable because of that). Most of these sorts of signals need to be (almost) universally understood, and respected by (almost) everybody, especially in a game. One of the annoying things about Frontier was the fact that, while you could communicate with NPCs after a fashion, it didn't have any effect:

ME (in Imperial Courier, bristling with shields and weaponry): Surrender or die!
NPC (in tiny ship held together with toothpaste and bogies): Ha ha! (continues to make attack runs despite having no weapons)
ME: ... (rams tiny ship, experiencing momentary 4% drop in shields; turns on wipers and blips the screenwash)

I think any kind of mismatch between what an NPC says (i.e. "surrender or die!") and what an NPC does (i.e. continues to attack you, after demanding your surrender and after you've signalled surrender by powering down your weapons) runs the risk of being at best very irritating, and at worst, being mistaken for a bug. If it does happen, it needs to be made clear to the player (i.e. "No mercy for the enemies of the revolution!", or "Dead pilots tell no tales!", or similar, broadcast after the player has shut down their weapons, to signal the fact that this is a deliberate action).

CheeseRedux wrote:

For the most part, actual surrender should be more useful in dealing with the Law. Versus outlaws (and neutrals) the advantage should be the signalling of non-hostile intent: Neutrals don't get jittery if you get close, Pirates give you more time to give in to demands. I'd even go so far as to say that unless you change vector away from them and/or increase speed, they should generally repeat the cargo demand at least twice before deciding you're not gonna give them what they're after without some laser-tickling.
I say generally, because something like this opens up the possibility of a trigger-happiness variable to introduce a bit of randomness into the proceedings. A sliding scale from As Long As You Give Up The Cargo You Live, even after both shooting and fleeing first, to Slightest Provocation And We Go For The Kill.

If surrendering is to be a valid in-game option, it can't be too random: players have to be able to rely on it working in all but the most extraordinary circumstances. Otherwise they might as well fight to the death every time, reload from saved, and try again.

The great advantage of "weapons offline = surrender" is that it's very easy for the game to read. Making judgements about the player's possible intent based on their speed and vector, especially with multiple NPCs to consider, could get very complicated very quickly.

Weapons power-up from safed should take fifteen seconds!

Disembodied wrote:

[…]

All good points. This was something that just occurred to me, so I'm obviously still in the brainstorming phase. It would need a lot of discussion by more knowledgeable heads if it were to be made into something workable.

Disembodied wrote:

The great advantage of "weapons offline = surrender" is that it's very easy for the game to read. Making judgements about the player's possible intent based on their speed and vector, especially with multiple NPCs to consider, could get very complicated very quickly.

What I'm getting at is that a crafty player (or NPC, if someone is enough of a wizard to code the AI for it) could use the surrender as a ruse, not for attack but to get away. While the basic premise would be that if you go WeapOff you are complying with the demands made, there has to be some limit to the aggressor's leniency. Otherwise you could just power down and continue on your merry way without ever dumping the cargo…

A simple time limit is easy to code, but it allows the player to put the helm over and gain some distance without the AI getting suspicious. Hence the suggestion of something along the lines of "Maintain course and speed, prepare to dump cargo."

CheeseRedux wrote:

What I'm getting at is that a crafty player (or NPC, if someone is enough of a wizard to code the AI for it) could use the surrender as a ruse, not for attack but to get away. While the basic premise would be that if you go WeapOff you are complying with the demands made, there has to be some limit to the aggressor's leniency. Otherwise you could just power down and continue on your merry way without ever dumping the cargo…

A simple time limit is easy to code, but it allows the player to put the helm over and gain some distance without the AI getting suspicious. Hence the suggestion of something along the lines of "Maintain course and speed, prepare to dump cargo."

Yes, that's very true! The dumping of cargo would be crucial to the operation, if the attackers are pirates ... Similarly, turning off the weapons as a signal of surrender to a Viper or similar would have to be followed by some sort of follow-up action: maybe an immediate fine, or maybe the player gets awarded a kind of mini-mission: present themselves to the main system station within the next x minutes and pay a fine; lateness will result in progressive increases of the fine and a worsening of the criminal record. This should probably only be open to Offender players, though, not Fugitives.

I've not tried going Offernder/Fugivte under 1.80 yet, so I don't know if there has been any changes. I have noticed Police vessels instructing Offender NPCs to dock and pay their fines (or words to that effect); a similar thing could be available to the player, and the safing of weapong being a condition for being allowed to do so.

Which sort of brings us back to the original topic: A Fugitive wanting to get back to Clean would have an easier time doing so if getting down to Offender meant there was now a no-risk way of approaching the Main Station to repay their debt to society.

CheeseRedux wrote:

Which sort of brings us back to the original topic: A Fugitive wanting to get back to Clean would have an easier time doing so if getting down to Offender meant there was now a no-risk way of approaching the Main Station to repay their debt to society.

That's true. Is it worth adding any slight complexity to the legal system? Any sort of penalty for persistent lawbreakers, perhaps - where the second time you become an Offender, there's a bit extra added to the criminal rating; the third time, more again, and so on?

Also, is it worth linking the criminal rating to the local reputation? At the moment, as far as I know, your criminal rating just declines with each jump you make: so you could theoretically commit some heinous offence in one system, and then just hop back and forth between it and a neighbouring system a few times and bingo, all is forgiven. If there's a very close neighbour it might not even take very long in elapsed time, or cost much in fuel. If there was a way to ink it to the player reputation, though, you'd have to hightail it off to some other part of the galaxy before your criminal rating declined.

So, this is already in 1.80, sort of:
- In a fight against multiple targets, NPCs will prioritise targets which are attacking over ones which are fleeing
- Dumping cargo counts as an explicit surrender to pirates (provided you dump enough, haven't killed so many of them the rest no longer care about the cargo, etc.). Running away, not firing, counts as an implicit surrender and will sometimes get an NPC off your back if there's something more interesting for them to shoot at.
- A few NPCs (mainly traders and their escorts) have "defensive fighting" AI setups, which means that once you count as fleeing they'll let you go.
- Firing on an NPC after it had thought you were fleeing will make it much less likely to read your future actions as fleeing, even if they are.
- "Weapons offline" is not directly checked but obviously makes it easier for you not to accidentally fire your weapons for the necessary time.

CheeseRedux wrote:

a similar thing could be available to the player

Police ships will impose fines on the player and NPCs alike.

CheeseRedux wrote:

A Fugitive wanting to get back to Clean would have an easier time doing so if getting down to Offender meant there was now a no-risk way of approaching the Main Station to repay their debt to society.

It should generally be safe for most Offender players to approach a main station in a low-government system without being shot at.

cim wrote:

So, this is already in 1.80, sort of:

Splendiferous! Still, I cannot help but think that a way to explicitly signal what the AI now can only implicitly interpret would aid the AI in making a more accurate reading of the situation.

It's also an immersion thing: You would expect anyone except for psychopathic killers and Thargoids to be less trigger-happy around someone they know cannot shoot at them (at the moment). Especially if combined with a warm-up time, meaning that they would also know that they'd get an advance warning if this someone started preparations to shoot at something.

Disembodied wrote:

Is it worth adding any slight complexity to the legal system? Any sort of penalty for persistent lawbreakers, perhaps - where the second time you become an Offender, there's a bit extra added to the criminal rating; the third time, more again, and so on?

Also, is it worth linking the criminal rating to the local reputation? At the moment, as far as I know, your criminal rating just declines with each jump you make: so you could theoretically commit some heinous offence in one system, and then just hop back and forth between it and a neighbouring system a few times and bingo, all is forgiven. If there's a very close neighbour it might not even take very long in elapsed time, or cost much in fuel. If there was a way to ink it to the player reputation, though, you'd have to hightail it off to some other part of the galaxy before your criminal rating declined.

I did similar things in my (now lost) Criminal Record OXP. It maintained a record of which systems fines were incurred in.
- The player bounty decayed on each jump away from the system where it was incurred, but if you ever returned to the scene of the crime the full bounty was restored. So to get completely clean you had to pay two fines: a reduced one to GalCop, payable anywhere (or stay out of trouble for several jumps), and the full amount only payable in the system that wanted you.
- Pinging a viper was a crime against GalCop, treated differently to attacking civilians, and gave you a chartwide bounty that never decayed until you paid the fine.
- The decay rate of the player bounty was different for each chart.
- There was a little script similar to Thargoid's Bounty Status OXP (player bounty on manifest screen), except rather than expose a game mechanic, it presented the credit value of "Unpaid Fines".
Once I got it working, I played with it for one evening and judged you guys weren't ready for the culture shock, so it was never shared.

CheeseRedux wrote:

You would expect anyone except for psychopathic killers and Thargoids to be less trigger-happy around someone they know cannot shoot at them (at the moment).

I think the only pirates who demand cargo should be those who are unsure of victory. Realistically pirates who are sure of victory won't stop for a few pods of worthless goods. They are cold, ruthless, professionals hardened by the endless emptiness of space. They are looking for gold, platinum, gems and luxuries. They would rather you eject so they can scoop your pod and sell you into slavery and tow your ship back to the local salvage gang than kill you. The ones who ask for cargo are playground bullies, one should be able to scatter them with a few well placed shots or a missile. I think this kind of behavior would be a lot more positive for the player. What if the player turning and firing on pirates demanding cargo gave a random chance that some of the pirates might flee?