These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Large bounties, pointless.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#61 - 2012-12-08 15:47:07 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
CFC tears nonshocker. Delicious!

Yes, anyone without the ability to express a thought in a clear, concise, and constructive manner would indeed think it's tears.

And the butthurt.
Jonathan Malcom
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2012-12-08 16:28:13 UTC
The only real shortcoming of the current system is the kill rights implementation.

Kill rights should have a centralized marketplace, tied to the bounty board, where they can be browsed and purchased.

Kill rights should not flag the target as a suspect for 15 minutes as they do now. They should create a limited engagement between the purchaser and the offender for 24 hours.

Kill right sales should be intractable.

Kill rights should be a tool specifically designed to facilitate high security bounty hunting.

I don't understand how CCP didn't understand this during the initial implementation.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#63 - 2012-12-08 16:38:10 UTC
Jonathan Malcom wrote:
The only real shortcoming of the current system is the kill rights implementation.

Kill rights should have a centralized marketplace, tied to the bounty board, where they can be browsed and purchased.

Kill rights should not flag the target as a suspect for 15 minutes as they do now. They should create a limited engagement between the purchaser and the offender for 24 hours.

Kill right sales should be intractable.

Kill rights should be a tool specifically designed to facilitate high security bounty hunting.

I don't understand how CCP didn't understand this during the initial implementation.


I won't disagree, but it doesn't really address -at least what I percieve- is a need to be able to have a real impact on those who do not generate killrights.

To me the data made it evident that more mining ships in high sec need to be destroyed. Suicide ganking isn't cutting because it's almost always a loss, and the bounty sytem doesn't make it possible to at least allow a break even state to happen.

Blowing up miners in high sec is as important, if not MORE than it is in null.
Understandable some people don't like that idea, but it is how it is.

The dev blog on the effects of the mining changes clearly show what happens when you make high sec mining safer, and remove the profitability of ganking miners. And it's not good.

The bounty system could be a very good tool to shift things back towards better. Banning doesn't stop botting, it only slows it temporarily. A safer high sec isn't always the best idea in a game like EVE.
Jonathan Malcom
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2012-12-08 16:58:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonathan Malcom
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Jonathan Malcom wrote:
The only real shortcoming of the current system is the kill rights implementation.

Kill rights should have a centralized marketplace, tied to the bounty board, where they can be browsed and purchased.

Kill rights should not flag the target as a suspect for 15 minutes as they do now. They should create a limited engagement between the purchaser and the offender for 24 hours.

Kill right sales should be intractable.

Kill rights should be a tool specifically designed to facilitate high security bounty hunting.

I don't understand how CCP didn't understand this during the initial implementation.


I won't disagree, but it doesn't really address -at least what I percieve- is a need to be able to have a real impact on those who do not generate killrights.

To me the data made it evident that more mining ships in high sec need to be destroyed. Suicide ganking isn't cutting because it's almost always a loss, and the bounty sytem doesn't make it possible to at least allow a break even state to happen.

Blowing up miners in high sec is as important, if not MORE than it is in null.
Understandable some people don't like that idea, but it is how it is.

The dev blog on the effects of the mining changes clearly show what happens when you make high sec mining safer, and remove the profitability of ganking miners. And it's not good.

The bounty system could be a very good tool to shift things back towards better. Banning doesn't stop botting, it only slows it temporarily. A safer high sec isn't always the best idea in a game like EVE.


I would argue that the bounty system does actually make high security less safe than it was previously. Just not as unsafe as you would prefer, perhaps.

Bounties still offset the cost of suicide ganking. Just not enough to make it a profitable affair.

I would argue that making suicide ganking profitable was never the intention.

Nor should it be, in my opinion.

Curbing the proliferation of AFK miners is a worthy goal. But I think this is the wrong tool for that job.
Tao Shaile
Grollwerk
#65 - 2012-12-08 21:23:55 UTC
Corp Member today helped a guy in HELP Channel and the noob gave him a "WANTED" tag.

The whole criminal tag **** and also changes to the war system let me rethink about subscription renewals.

All the patches and new updates make no sense, if they make no sense.

Are CCP developers payed buy doing useless stuff?

Thanks god it is not my company. In the US they would fire you for such crap.

We Step On Puppies
Jonathan Malcom
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#66 - 2012-12-08 21:37:56 UTC
Tao Shaile wrote:
Corp Member today helped a guy in HELP Channel and the noob gave him a "WANTED" tag.

The whole criminal tag **** and also changes to the war system let me rethink about subscription renewals.

All the patches and new updates make no sense, if they make no sense.

Are CCP developers payed buy doing useless stuff?

Thanks god it is not my company. In the US they would fire you for such crap.


If you're from the US, English is your native language and you should be ashamed of this terrible, rambling, frothing post.

I read It through twice (I hate myself) and still have no idea what you're on about.
Tao Shaile
Grollwerk
#67 - 2012-12-08 21:57:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Tao Shaile
Jonathan Malcom wrote:
Tao Shaile wrote:
Corp Member today helped a guy in HELP Channel and the noob gave him a "WANTED" tag.

The whole criminal tag **** and also changes to the war system let me rethink about subscription renewals.

All the patches and new updates make no sense, if they make no sense.

Are CCP developers payed buy doing useless stuff?

Thanks god it is not my company. In the US they would fire you for such crap.


If you're from the US, English is your native language and you should be ashamed of this terrible, rambling, frothing post.

I read It through twice (I hate myself) and still have no idea what you're on about.


You must not be very intelligent to undertand the post. But I can give you another example:


I buy two plex, visit recru channel and help channel and add randomly to every player a bounty, no matter what security status this guy has or not. How´s about that?

He can wonder then why he got the wanted tag on his character and he can wonder how he could eventually get rid of it again if he does not want the criminal tag Shocked


In other words: The whole new criminal tagging system is USELESS!

It should (like with the old system)
A: only be possible to slap a bounty on a char if he already has negative standings, or
B: only be possible to slap a bounty on someone with killrights or an agression countrer active.

The possibility to slap a bounty on random characters is absolut BS

We Step On Puppies
Asunya
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#68 - 2012-12-08 22:10:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Asunya
Put a large bounty on a Freighter or JF-Pilot and with a good chance, his vessel will sit in a station like a beached whale, until his bounty is gone ;-)

Edit: put a small bounty on the same pilot and he will probably buy it off, by letting himself killed with a couple of cheap overrated and highly insured ships.
Tao Shaile
Grollwerk
#69 - 2012-12-08 22:11:49 UTC
Asunya wrote:
Put a large bounty on a Freighter or JF-Pilot and with a good chance, his vessel will sit in a station like a beached whale, until his bounty is gone ;-)



You are right :) And until I decide not to extend my eve subscription anymore because I want to play and not sit in station :)

We Step On Puppies
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#70 - 2012-12-08 22:32:16 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Gotch Urarse wrote:
I have little combat PvP xp (unless you count refitting and clone updating), so take what I have w/ a grain of salt.

Just a thought, maybe 20% is to low? If it was higher, closer to 50% value, would that change application? How did CCP come up with 20%? If this was covered in prior threads, I must have missed it.


How about if the higher your bounty got the further up it pushed the payout percentage.


This is actually a pretty good idea. It makes sense and adds incentive to push a players bounty up higher if he really is someone that you want to make sure gets his.

So, for example, assume 20% is the minimum payout on any player with a bounty, then add a compounding 1% increase to that for incremental increases of 25 million in bounty placed on him/her. That would give you >24% payout at ~500 million.

20*(1.01)^n where n is the number of increments.

10 Million ISK increments is too little as you'd end up with ~24.4% payout on a 200 million ISK Bounty, and 20*(1.01)^(1000/10) = ~54.1% payout at 1 billion ISK, where 25 will put it at 20*(1.01)^(1000/25) = ~29.8%

Seems a good way to go.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Jonathan Malcom
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2012-12-08 22:33:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonathan Malcom
Tao Shaile wrote:
Jonathan Malcom wrote:
Tao Shaile wrote:
Corp Member today helped a guy in HELP Channel and the noob gave him a "WANTED" tag.

The whole criminal tag **** and also changes to the war system let me rethink about subscription renewals.

All the patches and new updates make no sense, if they make no sense.

Are CCP developers payed buy doing useless stuff?

Thanks god it is not my company. In the US they would fire you for such crap.


If you're from the US, English is your native language and you should be ashamed of this terrible, rambling, frothing post.

I read It through twice (I hate myself) and still have no idea what you're on about.


You must not be very intelligent to undertand the post. But I can give you another example:


I buy two plex, visit recru channel and help channel and add randomly to every player a bounty, no matter what security status this guy has or not. How´s about that?

He can wonder then why he got the wanted tag on his character and he can wonder how he could eventually get rid of it again if he does not want the criminal tag Shocked


In other words: The whole new criminal tagging system is USELESS!

It should (like with the old system)
A: only be possible to slap a bounty on a char if he already has negative standings, or
B: only be possible to slap a bounty on someone with killrights or an agression countrer active.

The possibility to slap a bounty on random characters is absolut BS


I'm sure my inability to understand what you're trying to communicate is due to my lack of reading comprehension, rather than your rampant misspelling, sentence fragments and generally incomprehensible statements.

Also, consider understanding a feature before rage posting about it.

Having a bounty doesn't make you a criminal. Bounties are a civil matter, not a criminal matter.
Jonathan Malcom
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#72 - 2012-12-08 22:41:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonathan Malcom
Mars Theran wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Gotch Urarse wrote:
I have little combat PvP xp (unless you count refitting and clone updating), so take what I have w/ a grain of salt.

Just a thought, maybe 20% is to low? If it was higher, closer to 50% value, would that change application? How did CCP come up with 20%? If this was covered in prior threads, I must have missed it.


How about if the higher your bounty got the further up it pushed the payout percentage.


This is actually a pretty good idea. It makes sense and adds incentive to push a players bounty up higher if he really is someone that you want to make sure gets his.

So, for example, assume 20% is the minimum payout on any player with a bounty, then add a compounding 1% increase to that for incremental increases of 25 million in bounty placed on him/her. That would give you >24% payout at ~500 million.

20*(1.01)^n where n is the number of increments.

10 Million ISK increments is too little as you'd end up with ~24.4% payout on a 200 million ISK Bounty, and 20*(1.01)^(1000/10) = ~54.1% payout at 1 billion ISK, where 25 will put it at 20*(1.01)^(1000/25) = ~29.8%

Seems a good way to go.


The only issue with this method is that you have to cap the increase before it becomes profitable for the person with the bounty to kill themselves or have a friend do it.

It's generally accepted that 20% of the value of the ship and mods, less the insurance payout, is close to this limit.
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#73 - 2012-12-08 23:39:10 UTC
Jonathan Malcom wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Gotch Urarse wrote:
I have little combat PvP xp (unless you count refitting and clone updating), so take what I have w/ a grain of salt.

Just a thought, maybe 20% is to low? If it was higher, closer to 50% value, would that change application? How did CCP come up with 20%? If this was covered in prior threads, I must have missed it.


How about if the higher your bounty got the further up it pushed the payout percentage.


This is actually a pretty good idea. It makes sense and adds incentive to push a players bounty up higher if he really is someone that you want to make sure gets his.

So, for example, assume 20% is the minimum payout on any player with a bounty, then add a compounding 1% increase to that for incremental increases of 25 million in bounty placed on him/her. That would give you >24% payout at ~500 million.

20*(1.01)^n where n is the number of increments.

10 Million ISK increments is too little as you'd end up with ~24.4% payout on a 200 million ISK Bounty, and 20*(1.01)^(1000/10) = ~54.1% payout at 1 billion ISK, where 25 will put it at 20*(1.01)^(1000/25) = ~29.8%

Seems a good way to go.


The only issue with this method is that you have to cap the increase before it becomes profitable for the person with the bounty to kill themselves or have a friend do it.

It's generally accepted that 20% of the value of the ship and mods, less the insurance payout, is close to this limit.



Less the Insurance payout would mean that no bounty was paid.Insurance is well over 20% of the value of the ship in some cases, which would mean that more expensive ships would pay less or nothing at all.

Either way, you take the maximum, Platinum Insurance on the ship, which covers just the ship, and only Tech 1 value of the Hull.

A Catalyst atm pays out very near the selling price of the hull, but at a cost of roughly 1/3rd of that for the insurance. That's about 30% of the hull value.

Now, add modules, fittings, etc... you've got a ship potentially valued at 1.6 to 20 million ISK depending on your fit. Bounty afaik pays out roughly 20% of that, which puts you in at a payout of 320K to 4 million ISK. Subtract from that the Insurance cost of 350K ISK, and you have -30K to 3.65 million ISK. That is a long way from 1.6 to 4 million ISK investment.

The larger the ship; generally the less difference between hull cost and fitted cost, but a Battleship can still cost you 100 million more to fit with tech 2 than you paid for it. That tends to be where the percentages are balanced though, with much less margin for error. ..particularly if it's fit with Tech 1 meta 0.

I'm not really interested in buying a Battleship atm, and actually couldn't afford it or the insurance anyway. Your Meowbet site still hasn't returned my 88 million ISK, and I suspect they won't. Not that I'm particularly surprised, but I do wonder if scamming through a website is really within the rules. Maybe you're just slow processing it, with nearly a week gone by. Roll
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#74 - 2012-12-09 01:15:55 UTC
Stitcher wrote:

Don't let the 20% fool you. The advantage to a big bounty is that by the time it becomes small enough to not attract attention again, the mark will have lost upwards of four times the value of the bounty on their head.


Retribution .. the Stealth ISK sink expansion ... who'd have thought What?
Zoctrine
Doomheim
#75 - 2012-12-09 01:41:34 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
If you have a big bounty on you, you'll be hunted for a long time.


You mean Griefed and/or Harassaded for a long time?
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#76 - 2012-12-09 01:47:52 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:

The guys at the top of the list dont' care.

krixtal, one of the most bountied people in eve, has already declared he is quitting in a huff


He always says crap like that though, never once seen him follow through on it.

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#77 - 2012-12-09 07:11:46 UTC

People don't like me because I have a bounty :(

Where I am.
Merouk Baas
#78 - 2012-12-09 07:33:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Merouk Baas
Kitty Bear wrote:
Retribution .. the Stealth ISK sink expansion ... who'd have thought What?


Anybody looking at the increased mineral and PLEX prices? I reactivated about 2 weeks before the expansion and my first thought upon looking at the market was "they must be itching to get rid of all the ISK."

It's not a sink because of the ship destructions, though, it's a sink because of all the silly people bountying everyone. 100 mil ISK ea. sitting forever on the heads of Jita trading alts or other high-sec denizens, never to be collected, cause they never undock or fly anything bigger than a shuttle.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#79 - 2012-12-09 07:54:14 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:

Who knew buffing the barges would lead to more AFK and bot mining in high sec.

The bounty system could have been an excellent tool.
If only...


No, buffing AFK mining reduced botting, because it made it unneeded to achieve the task.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#80 - 2012-12-09 07:59:36 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:

Now call me nutty, but all that is directly related to only one area of the game, high sec.

I'm saying, I disagree with that. It should be able to be used to make a profit, explicitly so that it can encourage a gank.


You don't show being nutty, your posting history shows a record of someone complaining much more often than an hi seccer.


Natsett Amuinn wrote:

The mining buff impacted the game, and not a little bit.


Pick one: rampant botting vs less botting and less ices worth. CCP chose the latter. Sue them.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials