(05-07-2015, 04:16 PM)Captain_Nemo Wrote: Something I would like to see would perhaps be a "RP cargo rule" if I have less than 5 units of a certain item it can be considered "hidden" from scanners
Interesting, would this cover all contraband items or just specific types e.g. Bretonia's 5 unit cardamine law?
(05-07-2015, 05:07 PM)Teerin Wrote: Attitude and Interaction - How should lawful and smuggler players treat each other when they meet and their perspectives.
They shouldn't hold any ooRP grudge, disdain, or want to evade/catch the other (like flying 20k off plane or waiting for them next to an unlawful base). They can want to run and catch, sure, but it should be kept reasonable and inRP. The interaction should be fun for both, as ideally all interactions on this server should be.
To add some greater depth to the idea, what kind of interactions would be considered fun for either side?
E.g. Do lawfuls find it more fun to chase smugglers, to talk with them or simply shoot them? Inversely do smugglers find it fun to be chased, talked with or shot at?
(05-07-2015, 05:07 PM)Teerin Wrote: Laws and Repercussions - Which Laws and punishments may be overly damaging to the smuggler - lawful duality their effects.
For the first several times, the enforcement officer should fine them, make them drop their contraband, and record the legal infraction. If the smuggler successfully flees, use the records to send them a message with a much steeper fine and a warning.
In this case I'd ask everyone to put yourself in the mindset of a smuggler, you've just flown 20 to 30 minutes through empty space all for a reasonable payout at the end. And for the sake of argument, let's assume you were caught at a jumphole and had this above suggestion applied. Would it discourage you from smuggling again or would you find it agreeable?
What about from the perspective of the lawful, how would you see the situation? Would you uphold the suggestion to the letter?
(05-07-2015, 05:07 PM)Teerin Wrote: Factions and Fallout - The "political" aspect and it's effects on factions.
After the smuggling faction has proven consistent disregard for the law by after at least half a dozen (but preferably closer to a dozen) legal infractions, the local government/lawful faction concerned should send the leaders of the smuggling faction a message, asking what's up. You know, a fine, demanding a decrease in unlawful behavior, wanting an increase in lawful-supportive behavior, asking for community service from the smuggling faction's members, etc.. FR5s should be last resort only, in cases where the smuggling faction fails to make amends and/or fires upon the lawful faction.
A solid idea in general, however my opinion is to be slightly more forgiving towards smuggling factions, the overall goal is to find a healthy balance that allows inRP consequences to unfold without the vilification of the smugglers. I would suggest a "punishment threshold" where smuggling factions can be punished inRP but still operate in a fun manner.
(05-07-2015, 05:07 PM)Teerin Wrote: It's important to note that quasilawful factions ought to support "both sides of the coin" - appeasing both their lawful and unlawful friends, because in lore, they like it where they're at. Smuggle some, but also do regular law-abiding things and be sure to schmooze with the authorities and the actual full-blown criminals. A quasilawful faction, piloted correctly, should be able to have tricks up its sleeve to prevent too much trouble. Also, a quasilawful faction that smuggles should spend 33% or less of their time trafficking contraband, in my opinion, because they have plenty of other things to do and that lowers the chance of them being caught, or even suspected.
Ultimately, factions are responsible for their actions. There ought not be any ooRP "Get out of jail free" cards, and the inRP consequences must be handled carefully (and with respect) from all sides.
Speaking as someone who has played as a lawful/military, a quasilawful/smuggler, and an unlawful/pirate. With luck this makes sense, and contributes to the discussion some
The REMOVAL of FR5 on smugglers completely - let's just make such character pushable onto BB as a target for, say, a week or two - with all house authorities allowed to kill on sight - without touching the offender's rep. That would make smugglers to travel with hired goons, giving even more opportunities for both sides.
Giving smugglers FR5 simply kills something that is needed: the activity. For them, FR5 rule is more like an overpowered punishment for bringing some activity to the police force. With such a rephack, player won't smuggle in the area, what brings more harm than good on the longer run. They would simply drop the idea of roleplaying the smuggler as soon as they would learn on how harsh is FR5.
Quote:[19:29:31] Freelancer Soares: we used to smuggle a lot in rheinland some time ago, but then on one of <name here> transmission she said something similar too "next time you will be permanently expelled from rheinland" ... and BOOM, we stopped smuggling cause we were afraid that she meant FR5 <- KILLED INTERACTION
I mean, smuggling isn't even profitable in most cases. It is not much more profitable or shorter (it's longer) than normal trading with 5ker.
As a sidenote, I can bet that Lane Hackers would easily help smugglers with their abilities to put false information or clearing up someone else's reputation.
TL;DR:
Putting FR5 onto smugglers is a harsh punishment for roleplaying and making activity. Thus, such a thing should be removed and replaced with something less impactful for one's roleplay.
Outright removal of FR5's for smugglers I honestly don't see working, people would exploit it to hell and back. I would support an addendum to the FR5 rule that would prevent it being used as a punishment for the act of smuggling but still usable against quickdockers and the like, depending on how the locking system trials.
Quote:but still usable against quickdockers and the like, depending on how the locking system trials.
Spead /nodock command over non-officials. But for quickdockers, I'd see the same rule applied ooRPly for quick-docking traders from pirates - that's also a very anti-RP behaviour. I never went more than 1 million on any of my pirate characters.
In fact, FR5 on smuggling does more harm than good. As I mentioned up, rich player will make another character for smuggling with clean reputation - poorer player will just simply drop the idea of smugging, as FR5 = Rephack. Rephack means inability to smuggle goods. Inability to smuggle means no roleplay for the ones who actually would like to roleplay.
Sometimes, the punishments in CC are too big, like 100 million credits (or be FR5ed) - what is a lot for a new player, what means a third party mean to repay the debt from other character, what is forcing player to roleplay as other character - in the end, discouraging him from further roleplay and/or making his roleplay plain and bland.
I think you have the wrong thread Smithy, this isn't flood.
Back to the discussion at hand, in regards to spreading the /nodock to non faction members I would vote against it due to the potential abuse without any form of accountability.
The whole pirate v trader thing is a totally different situation, mainly due to the fact it's escaping from unlawfuls to a lawful base. Basically a smuggler docking on a pirate/junker base as opposed to docking on Manhattan. As for FR5's being damaging to smuggling, well that really rests on the admin team and the faction leaders and I would hope in the very least that the admins would deny the request if it was undeserving.
Now the actual fines and punishments for attempted smuggling do require some form of regulation, probably in the same way that piracy demands are currently handled e.g. that excessive demands are sanctionable for harming gameplay. Any suggestions on what the upper limits should be in that respect? Remember to take into account the cargo and the ship size.
Quote:(...) Any suggestions on what the upper limits should be in that respect? Remember to take into account the cargo and the ship size.
Here comes, as I mentioned above, problem with diversity of the players. Some of the players have a lot of characters and cash on them, while there are players who log like twice a week with barely two characters on their account. For some people, fine of 100 million credits is just pocket money, while poorer players would rather prefer to not to pay and make another character for 1/5 of that money (if we are talking about freighters up to small transports).
HOWEVER, the problem I pointed out is more about FR5ing players who were caught a lot of time on smuggling, despite the fact they paid their fines all the time. Also, not only this, but also fear about being FR5-ed kills smuggler RP - this make players afraid to roleplaying smuggler.
Aside of the recent new route, I haven't seen any smuggler recently.
You've made the FR5 point very clear and it has been added to the main post topics but I highly doubt the admin team will remove FR5's outright. What we can do however is suggest alternatives to lawfuls players and create a better atmosphere to encourage smugglers and police, starting with an upper limit of fines dependent upon ship size and cargo.
For example should a P-Train loaded with Black Market Munitions be fined for the same amount as one carrying cardamine?
It's not about removal of FR5. It's about making FR5 unusable in case of smugglers.
The shadow of FR5 is something that makes players very unlikely to play smugglers nowadays. FR5 should not be used to prevent smugglers from their roleplay, as it brings activity for both smugglers and lawfuls. It's killing their RP - that's the biggest problem of mine with that.
Hiding behind "but it will lead to the powertrading" argument is null here. If player wants to powertrade, he will find the other commodity, other route and other time to do that and it cannot be helped. Punishing players, willing to RP, for things other players do is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Look at FL-ER for example. It's no secret they moved away from Rheinland, as they were indirectly threatened with FR5.