My two cents.

The starting point: I think everyone agrees that law enforcement "drop all cardamine or die" is fine. I mean, what's the alternative, fine the transport and let it go on its merry way? I'm sure if I smuggled something from Mexico to the US, I wouldn't just be fined.

As noted by OP, this then creates the imbalance. I'm more afraid of KSP catching me and my cardamine than some unlawful FA or BD. But why does FA or BD care about my cardamine? Sure, BD wants to restore the shogunate which they presumably want to keep cardamine-free, but it's not the current government.

At the same time, BD and FA can pirate whatever lawful corporations they come across, with access to their nice, large 5kers. What's KNF and KSP going to do in the same situation? Wave hi and say "safe flight"? Good for RP but not much else. Sure, unlawful catching a cardamine smuggler is also RP but I think the smuggler would have a difficult time swallowing the fact that they have to drop their cargo for an unlawfuls AND lawfuls. Taking this into consideration, is it really fair then to give these unlawfuls "quasi-law enforcement' powers?

Assuming unlawfuls have their engagement rights liberalized, what's the result? Lawful -> RP, pew. Lawful corporation -> RP, pirate maybe, pew maybe. A hostile unlawful -> RP, pew. A friendly unlawful -> RP. Wow, I'd rather play unlawful over lawful everyday at this point. I could do everything.

One option is to develop the 'microstates' that I've heard some people loathe, for larger terrorist organizations with battlecruisers and drydocks. Alpha and Gamma can be "can attack" systems for Outcasts and Corsairs respectively. Ships stopped in these systems would have to explain why they're there. If this is to be implemented, I would like to see a reduction in ZOI because maintaining such an empire require a lot of resources right? "Common pirate" factions such as Gallic Brigands and Lane Hackers wouldn't get such a thing of course, and their bases are spread out in asteroid fields in different systems.

I think another option is to limit the transport ships that an unlawful could attack, based on commodity or faction... but we already have that. See Gaian (Gaian wildlife) and Synth foods vs. FA. I think a good addition would be Outcasts on ships carrying Nox and UC on ships carrying cardamine. If corporations could have competitors, so could drug dealers, and more violently too.

Anyway, just food for thought. I don't think I have a strong position either way.

Piracy focused IDs have had problems for a while, and in my opinion its less a lack of engagement lines but a lack of incentives to actually pirate.
Theres no tangible benefit to using a dedicated pirate ID over one that has other things + piracy in one form or another, beyond the fun of rping the faction.
Right now the best pirating IDs probably are law enforcement IDs (can demand full cargo + fine). Why log a Corsair ship to pirate or even worse a pirate ID one that can't expect any backup. Best you can realistically hope for is a share of the cargo to sell at further away sellpoints for mostly worse money compared to lawful sellpoints.
Being mainly a Bretonia focused player I obviously see the situation with Gold Ore, which is afaik a uniquely good situation for lawful "piracy". But its just the extreme case.
I think a possible solution could be a bonus system for credits pirated.
Without having put much thought into the numbers, x2 every credit pirated by a piracy focused unlawful faction and up that to x2.5 for indie pirates.
That would not only reward piracy but also lower incentives to cargo pirate, making piracy more palatable to traders.
I know it would probably be a challenge to implement without a bounty claim like system but maybe its worth a thought.

I pirate for sport - why do you want to pirate for profit in the first place, or to kill someone for that matter.

My main IDs I play can kill transports straight up - and really the only time I did it is the rare few times of silent runner.

Traders trade to make money - if you hurt their Primary objective, they gonna avoid you, simple as

(06-19-2024, 04:56 PM)Max Morse Wrote: I think the simplest solution to this issue right now that is practical would be allowing unlawfuls to destroy hostile non-combat ships, but not ones that are neutral to them. They would also need to have lines about destroying certain cargo, like Hogosha/FA or UC being able to demand destruction of Cardamine, or Outcasts being able to demand the destruction of Nox or Artifacts. Of course the effectiveness of this is going to depend entirely on what ID you're flying, and would need to be more restrictive than simply being withing ZoI for the more expansive unlawful IDs. While it would certainly make sense for the FA/Hogosha/UC to do so in the Taus, having a Corsair show up in Kyushu where they have ZoI wouldn't really fit, and unless we finally go and have a conclusion to that long debate about the Outcasts and Corsairs having way too much of a ZoI I don't see such an ID line going through without some restrictions on where it can be done.

The destruction of hostile transports would certainly help some, although I do believe it would still be a partial solution. What if I meet a neutral carrying Cardamine on an ID whose factions hates Cardamine but does not have Cardamine in its lines?

The second suggestion again runs into the issue of bloating the ID lines. Unlawfuls have beef with more than just one or two corps and one or two types of cargo. Just adding one more commodity and calling it a day does nothing to address the issue, but if you're thorough with it, we again end up with lists of a dozen commodities and factions someone has issues with.

(06-20-2024, 01:57 AM)Devil's Weapon Wrote: My two cents.

I'm going to split this up for the sake of clarity.

(06-20-2024, 01:57 AM)Devil's Weapon Wrote: The starting point: I think everyone agrees that law enforcement "drop all cardamine or die" is fine. I mean, what's the alternative, fine the transport and let it go on its merry way? I'm sure if I smuggled something from Mexico to the US, I wouldn't just be fined.

As noted by OP, this then creates the imbalance. I'm more afraid of KSP catching me and my cardamine than some unlawful FA or BD. But why does FA or BD care about my cardamine? Sure, BD wants to restore the shogunate which they presumably want to keep cardamine-free, but it's not the current government.

At the same time, BD and FA can pirate whatever lawful corporations they come across, with access to their nice, large 5kers. What's KNF and KSP going to do in the same situation? Wave hi and say "safe flight"? Good for RP but not much else. Sure, unlawful catching a cardamine smuggler is also RP but I think the smuggler would have a difficult time swallowing the fact that they have to drop their cargo for an unlawfuls AND lawfuls. Taking this into consideration, is it really fair then to give these unlawfuls "quasi-law enforcement' powers?

Yes. If a smuggler does not want to get shaken down by other unlawfuls, they should not be running cargo they don't like through their turf. And, of course, there should be a bias towards Unlawful IDs when it comes to aggressive play. They're criminals, pirates, terrorists and revolutionaires. I don't think there should be parity between them and government agencies bogged down in red tape and politics.That said government agencies are currently more liberal in application of force is the entire problem this thread is about.

(06-20-2024, 01:57 AM)Devil's Weapon Wrote: But why does FA or BD care about my cardamine?

For this specifically, because it's poison that destroys House societies. Many unlawful factions are in it for the good of their people, even if they've gone down less than noble paths to accomplish it. FA, BD, Gaians, Maquis, Bundschuh. They all know what cardamine does to people and they don't want any of it in their backyard.

(06-20-2024, 01:57 AM)Devil's Weapon Wrote: Assuming unlawfuls have their engagement rights liberalized, what's the result? Lawful -> RP, pew. Lawful corporation -> RP, pirate maybe, pew maybe. A hostile unlawful -> RP, pew. A friendly unlawful -> RP. Wow, I'd rather play unlawful over lawful everyday at this point. I could do everything.

Which is exactly why I want this change to be made. The more liberal ID lines are, the more flexibility for both roleplay and combat you have, which suddenly makes the game a whole load more fun. Who'd have thought?

(06-20-2024, 01:57 AM)Devil's Weapon Wrote: One option is to develop the 'microstates' that I've heard some people loathe, for larger terrorist organizations with battlecruisers and drydocks. Alpha and Gamma can be "can attack" systems for Outcasts and Corsairs respectively. Ships stopped in these systems would have to explain why they're there. If this is to be implemented, I would like to see a reduction in ZOI because maintaining such an empire require a lot of resources right? "Common pirate" factions such as Gallic Brigands and Lane Hackers wouldn't get such a thing of course, and their bases are spread out in asteroid fields in different systems.

I do not believe fixing the problem for four whole IDs in one system each can even be considered a solution. I am also not looking to advocate for this to be an exchange for a nerf somewhere else. I think Unlawful IDs as a whole are behind the curve, and they need to be buffed to match Lawful and Corporate ones.

(06-20-2024, 01:57 AM)Devil's Weapon Wrote: I think another option is to limit the transport ships that an unlawful could attack, based on commodity or faction... but we already have that. See Gaian (Gaian wildlife) and Synth foods vs. FA. I think a good addition would be Outcasts on ships carrying Nox and UC on ships carrying cardamine. If corporations could have competitors, so could drug dealers, and more violently too.

This will either be wholly inadequate, as it is now, or lead to ID bloat if you make it comprehensive enough.

(06-20-2024, 01:57 AM)Devil's Weapon Wrote: Anyway, just food for thought. I don't think I have a strong position either way.

I appreciate the thorough post.

(06-20-2024, 07:44 AM)Gagadug. Wrote: Piracy focused IDs have had problems for a while, and in my opinion its less a lack of engagement lines but a lack of incentives to actually pirate.
Theres no tangible benefit to using a dedicated pirate ID over one that has other things + piracy in one form or another, beyond the fun of rping the faction.
Right now the best pirating IDs probably are law enforcement IDs (can demand full cargo + fine). Why log a Corsair ship to pirate or even worse a pirate ID one that can't expect any backup. Best you can realistically hope for is a share of the cargo to sell at further away sellpoints for mostly worse money compared to lawful sellpoints.
Being mainly a Bretonia focused player I obviously see the situation with Gold Ore, which is afaik a uniquely good situation for lawful "piracy". But its just the extreme case.
I think a possible solution could be a bonus system for credits pirated.
Without having put much thought into the numbers, x2 every credit pirated by a piracy focused unlawful faction and up that to x2.5 for indie pirates.
That would not only reward piracy but also lower incentives to cargo pirate, making piracy more palatable to traders.
I know it would probably be a challenge to implement without a bounty claim like system but maybe its worth a thought.

I kind of have to repeat what I said to Lemon's first post. There are, of course, many imbalances between the different Unlawful IDs, as well as problems inherent to Unlawful gameplay as a whole, but that is not the point of this thread. I am focusing on how throttled interactions with non-combat ships are as Unlawful compared to Lawful and Corporate IDs.

(06-20-2024, 07:54 AM)Czechmate Wrote: I pirate for sport - why do you want to pirate for profit in the first place, or to kill someone for that matter.

My main IDs I play can kill transports straight up - and really the only time I did it is the rare few times of silent runner.

Traders trade to make money - if you hurt their Primary objective, they gonna avoid you, simple as

I'm sure miscontruing my post makes it mighty easier to argue it, but I'll bite anyway. I don't want to kill transports. I want to be able to play my character naturally. There are certain situations, a combination of IDs involved, location and cargo in question where reasonable demands are just not feasible. Not without severely violating the character's and the faction's roleplay. I don't want to brutalize my character's roleplay to satisfy an artificial limitation that doesn't even accomplish anything.

---

Considering transports are heading towards a world where they are more than capable of defending themselves, such as the recently reworked Frigates and the Amaterasu, I see no reason why they should keep their protection status. Frigates for example are a pvp ship like any other, and can duel or get away from almost all classes.

Is it too early? Possibly. Long term it will make no difference once other transports start getting reworked. I’d implement this proposal and test it for a month or two.

---