Topic: Economic Sanctions idea

I've been thinking a lot about what to do about loot stealing, griefing, and other various annoyances that occur in games like this.  How about economic sanctions?  If someone kills you it goes on a report that you can access (I believe this is already a planned feature) and form there you can impose sanctions on them.  What this means is that anything they try to buy from you is 3x (or more?) more expensive.

Example: Player A blows up Player B while B is mining.  This naturally ticks B off, and they apply sanctions against A.  A is looking to buy some commodities.  B has some listed for 50 per unit, but A sees it as 150 per unit because of the sanctions.  If A buys it anyways, then B gets a message stating that a sanctioned good was bought.  To continue the example, A has a buy order out on a commodity for 60 per unit.  Because of the sanction, B will see the buy order as 20 per unit, and won't be very inclined to sell.

This can also be used for loot stealing.  First person to shoot the bot gets flagged as owner.  If someone besides the owner opens the can before the owner opens and closes the can, they get placed on a theft list for the owner.  It is now the owner's choice as to whether or not to apply sanctions against the thief.

This could also be expanded to include corps.  A corp could sanction another corp, so that all goods sold would have the sanction applied.

Example: Corporation Y (a pirate corp) has been harassing Corporation Z (an industrial corp).  Z has had enough, and puts out a call to all industrial corps to sanction Y.  Now Y has ticked off a lot of people, so most corps join in on the sanctions.  Suddenly the members of Y find that almost everything on the market has jumped in price.

So...comments?

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

Sounds interesting, even if economical sanctions aren't everyone's playstyle (tbh, I'll probably sell to everyone), it would be a cool option. A nice-to-have feature.

But someone could just use an uncorped alt to buy and sell the stuff for him. Because of that, an option like "put up for sale only for alliance members" might be sweet.

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

How do you enforce this in an anonymous market?

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

Worthless because many will just get other characters/alts to buy their stuff.

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

Sinister wrote:

Worthless because many will just get other characters/alts to buy their stuff.

Well, you went there. I wasn't. I agree, though, as there's too many ways around it. Interesting concept if it can be made to work (which I don't think it can).

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

Fumen wrote:

How do you enforce this in an anonymous market?

There are indeed too many ways around embargos, but selling only to corp or alliance members could easily be implemented by market orders only showing up for them, and not for uncorped chars.

The market interface allows anonymity at the moment, but the transactions most likely happen between players, not player < market > player.

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

@Fumen:
It works because the system does this auto-magically.  I go into the 'sanction menu' and right click on player A and sanction him.  The system will now automatically apply all appropriate sanctions because while the system doesn't show us who the seller/buyer is, it knows.

@Sinister:
Sanctions can be applied to the account instead of the character.  This of course does not stop someone from getting a second account, but I suppose if being jerk is worth an extra $10-$15 to you (or whatever payment scheme is used)...*shrugs* ah well. 

Would this system stop griefing?  Hell no.  Probably wouldn't even slow down a dedicated griefer.  But it would stop/slow down casual griefing I think.  I also think the possibilities of economic warfare this opens up to the corps would be interesting as well.

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

Lanny wrote:

@Sinister:
Sanctions can be applied to the account instead of the character.  This of course does not stop someone from getting a second account, but I suppose if being jerk is worth an extra $10-$15 to you (or whatever payment scheme is used)...*shrugs* ah well.

That solution is RP-wise questionable, tbh. hmm

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

Lanny wrote:

@Fumen:
It works because the system does this auto-magically.  I go into the 'sanction menu' and right click on player A and sanction him.  The system will now automatically apply all appropriate sanctions because while the system doesn't show us who the seller/buyer is, it knows.

@Sinister:
Sanctions can be applied to the account instead of the character.  This of course does not stop someone from getting a second account, but I suppose if being jerk is worth an extra $10-$15 to you (or whatever payment scheme is used)...*shrugs* ah well. 

Would this system stop griefing?  Hell no.  Probably wouldn't even slow down a dedicated griefer.  But it would stop/slow down casual griefing I think.  I also think the possibilities of economic warfare this opens up to the corps would be interesting as well.

So why would someone buy from another player that has put a sanction out if they can avoid it? Automagically isn't very good reasoning for anything. If you can't come up with a good reason why a person would buy from someone that has sanctioned them vs buying from some other schmoe on the market, then let's keep the 'automagically' crap out of it. It'd be one thing if it was tax imposed by the Syndicate. You could then say that you couldn't avoid it with that one character. However, it'd still be too easy to avoid without resorting to an alt of some sort. How many corps will have their own in-house production?

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

Being able to sanction a PC would be interesting or even a whole Corp but then you will have some one who will always break the sanction and sell. Also just one person should not be able to cause the economic sanction of another player.
I do believe though that there will be avenues to PvP econmically in this game, the underlying need for resources to keep the economy going is going to be what drives the mass PvP. IMHO. -V

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

Vintnor DiEisen wrote:

Also just one person should not be able to cause the economic sanction of another player.

..why not? :S

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

Influence on the whole. Does he have it? -V wink

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

RiceIord wrote:

That solution is RP-wise questionable, tbh. hmm

As much as having multiply chracters per account...

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

Maynard Benaui wrote:
RiceIord wrote:

That solution is RP-wise questionable, tbh. hmm

As much as having multiply chracters per account...


I'm talking about the personal level of roleplay, not the character roleplay with their shiny knights stuff and hours long blahblah of honour.

There it's quite dangerous to find out that the person you're boycotting economically turns out to be an alt of your own corp mate simply because he can't see your stuff on the market anymore.

Magic and mechs don't fit. :X

Re: Economic Sanctions idea

RiceIord wrote:
Maynard Benaui wrote:
RiceIord wrote:

That solution is RP-wise questionable, tbh. hmm

As much as having multiply chracters per account...


I'm talking about the personal level of roleplay, not the character roleplay with their shiny knights stuff and hours long blahblah of honour.

There it's quite dangerous to find out that the person you're boycotting economically turns out to be an alt of your own corp mate simply because he can't see your stuff on the market anymore.

Magic and mechs don't fit. :X

/agree