These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Bounty Awards for CONCORD kills? ("Exploit" that subsizides my ganking ops)

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mag's
Azn Empire
#21 - 2013-02-02 14:51:29 UTC
Rengerel en Distel wrote:
As you've already said, the game can't tell the difference between an alt and any other player. Anyone on the KM has to receive part of the bounty, or the whole crimewatch/bounty hunting thing is useless. Yes, you can abuse it with your alt, but they have to allow that to make it work at all.
Indeed and let's face it, it's not a game breaking amount of ISK. It's simply not worth breaking the mechanic for it.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Charlepetit LaJoie
Trust Me Ltd
#22 - 2013-02-02 15:17:00 UTC
If CCP were simply to stop bounty payouts for ships killed with Concord involvement, that would make possible a small exploit.

Suppose you are fighting a war target named Loser Larry, near a high-sec jumpgate. Since Loser Larry is a valid war target, Concord is not involved . Loser Larry is about to go down in flames and you will get rich from his bounty.

A neutral ship pops into view. Loser Larry takes one quick shot at the neutral ship. Loser Larry has now committed a criminal act, and Concord rushes to the scene and kills him.

You collect no bounty. Loser Larry still ends up dead, but he laughs in your face because he managed to cheat you out of the bounty.

NEONOVUS wrote:
Simple fix the distribution of the bounty payout is based on the percentage damage you did.
0 damage 0 payout

That is a good idea, except that it cheats pilots who participate in the fight with warp scramblers, remote repair, ECM, etc., instead of raw damage.

I'm not smart enough to have thought of a solution.
Whitehound
#23 - 2013-02-02 15:19:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
NEONOVUS wrote:
Ildryn wrote:
If the miner gets a bounty payout for a concord assisted kill.
Then by the same token we should get insurance if the miner got a hit in before concord pops the ship.

Sorry but you went criminal first.
Might I interest you in a kill right?

You went criminal. Period. Not first or last or whatever. An order seems rather irrelevant.

If the insurance payout is denied, because it is a part of the punishment for being a criminal then this can be acceptable, but it doesn't have to.

But why should the miner with his Hobgoblin I, not doing enough DPS to fight off the attack, then get the bounty that really should be going to CONCORD? If this is a part of the ganker's punishment, to reward the miner with a payment, then what about those miners who get ganked by players with no bounties on them? Do these miners then get free ISKs out of CONCORD's retirement fund, or are they just unlucky, or why should they get nothing at all?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Whitehound
#24 - 2013-02-02 15:24:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Charlepetit LaJoie wrote:
If CCP were simply to stop bounty payouts for ships killed with Concord involvement, that would make possible a small exploit.

Suppose you are fighting a war target named Loser Larry, near a high-sec jumpgate. Since Loser Larry is a valid war target, Concord is not involved . Loser Larry is about to go down in flames and you will get rich from his bounty.

A neutral ship pops into view. Loser Larry takes one quick shot at the neutral ship. Loser Larry has now committed a criminal act, and Concord rushes to the scene and kills him.

You collect no bounty. Loser Larry still ends up dead, but he laughs in your face because he managed to cheat you out of the bounty.

Right, Loser Larry will have lost his ship and the loot is still yours.

Then replace CONCORD in your example with a third player. If the third player kills Loser Larry before you do then you will also not get a bounty. So what is the difference? Loser Larry could be laughing the whole time, shooting at everybody and everything, because he is simply crazy.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#25 - 2013-02-02 15:54:32 UTC
I don't think the system should be changed. It's sweetly ironic, and can also benefit the gankee if he's not AFK, to leave the system as-is. Additionally, there are way too many edge-case exploits that will pop up with changes to remove payout on CONCORD involvement.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#26 - 2013-02-02 15:56:08 UTC
Charlepetit LaJoie wrote:


NEONOVUS wrote:
Simple fix the distribution of the bounty payout is based on the percentage damage you did.
0 damage 0 payout

That is a good idea, except that it cheats pilots who participate in the fight with warp scramblers, remote repair, ECM, etc., instead of raw damage.

I'm not smart enough to have thought of a solution.

Easy they need to bring DPS or be reliant on the good graces of others.
Or you know, be in the fleet.
Because that is how fleets work right now, though the ISK is divided absolutely instead of on an act basis.
So the code is at least possible.
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#27 - 2013-02-02 16:06:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Herr Wilkus
Mags, we aren't talking about a trivial amount of ISK.
Because Alliance/corp wide bounties are included, not just personal ones.

Something around 400M ISK in bounties had accumulated on the alliance since Retribution hit.
After I realized how to game the system, I managed to claim almost the entire principal over the course of several suicide ganks.
(Which totally subsidized the costs of ganking, BTW.....)

This applies to corporation bounties as well, as you can easily move the -10 ganker into the affect Corp, drain the pool of bounties, then move it back.

Its kind of hilarious actually.
I bet people didn't realize that in Crimewatch, CCP actually just reintroduced "insurance" for suicide gankers. Lol

Except this time, its funded by carebears who think they are getting revenge.
Actually, you know what? Never mind. Forget I said anything at all.

Anyway, just keep those bounties coming. Suicide ganking is fun. Suicide ganking cheaply - even better.
Whitehound
#28 - 2013-02-02 16:10:11 UTC
NEONOVUS wrote:
Charlepetit LaJoie wrote:


NEONOVUS wrote:
Simple fix the distribution of the bounty payout is based on the percentage damage you did.
0 damage 0 payout

That is a good idea, except that it cheats pilots who participate in the fight with warp scramblers, remote repair, ECM, etc., instead of raw damage.

I'm not smart enough to have thought of a solution.

Easy they need to bring DPS or be reliant on the good graces of others.
Or you know, be in the fleet.
Because that is how fleets work right now, though the ISK is divided absolutely instead of on an act basis.
So the code is at least possible.

To add to this, are bounties shared with the entire fleet, which eliminates the problem with logistics and e-war when everyone is in the same fleet.

Warp scrambler then already do not count for the final blow and never will, simply because they don't do damage and don't kill. Further are there hardly any ships that have no weapons at all, making it a minor problem at best.

The truth is, the suggestion improves the mechanics and introduces no new disadvantage when compared with the current mechanics. It is simply better ...

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#29 - 2013-02-02 16:26:06 UTC
Herr Wilkus wrote:
Mags, we aren't talking about a trivial amount of ISK.
Because Alliance/corp wide bounties are included, not just personal ones.

Something around 400M ISK in bounties had accumulated on the alliance since Retribution hit.
After I realized how to game the system, I managed to claim almost the entire principal over the course of several suicide ganks.
(Which totally subsidized the costs of ganking, BTW.....)

This applies to corporation bounties as well, as you can easily move the -10 ganker into the affect Corp, drain the pool of bounties, then move it back.

Its kind of hilarious actually.
I bet people didn't realize that in Crimewatch, CCP actually just reintroduced "insurance" for suicide gankers. Lol

Except this time, its funded by carebears who think they are getting revenge.
Actually, you know what? Never mind. Forget I said anything at all.

Anyway, just keep those bounties coming. Suicide ganking is fun. Suicide ganking cheaply - even better.

Bounties are hard capped at 20% value lost.
So unless you mean reduced cost of ganks then you arent thinking this through enough.
TyeBaak
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2013-02-02 16:26:31 UTC
As explained above, you're simply trading one exploit* for a different exploit with the described change. The only difference is that you (OP) get what you want with the change (higher/extended bounty).

It's just a game of whack-a-mole as, given the time and resources of the players, there will always be such "edge cases" and for now, CCP feels this is the optimal solution. The may change it to give a single player what he wants (it's not unprecedented) but overall seems much ado about nothing.

No change to mechanics effects a single player. There are always winners and losers.

*I wouldn't call this an "exploit" in gaming terms. I'd say "working as intended" and "gaming the system." As evidence, if this were a true "exploit" then I'm sure this thread would vanish.

TB
Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#31 - 2013-02-02 16:38:51 UTC
NEONOVUS wrote:
Bounties are hard capped at 20% value lost.
So unless you mean reduced cost of ganks then you arent thinking this through enough.

I like how you're trying to school a guy in how a game mechanic works when he's already clearly using it to his advantage.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#32 - 2013-02-02 16:42:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Herr Wilkus
NEONOVUS wrote:
Herr Wilkus wrote:
Mags, we aren't talking about a trivial amount of ISK.
Because Alliance/corp wide bounties are included, not just personal ones.

Something around 400M ISK in bounties had accumulated on the alliance since Retribution hit.
After I realized how to game the system, I managed to claim almost the entire principal over the course of several suicide ganks.
(Which totally subsidized the costs of ganking, BTW.....)

This applies to corporation bounties as well, as you can easily move the -10 ganker into the affect Corp, drain the pool of bounties, then move it back.

Its kind of hilarious actually.
I bet people didn't realize that in Crimewatch, CCP actually just reintroduced "insurance" for suicide gankers. Lol

Except this time, its funded by carebears who think they are getting revenge.
Actually, you know what? Never mind. Forget I said anything at all.

Anyway, just keep those bounties coming. Suicide ganking is fun. Suicide ganking cheaply - even better.

Bounties are hard capped at 20% value lost.
So unless you mean reduced cost of ganks then you arent thinking this through enough.


Yes, thats what I meant when I said "Subsidized ganking."
Obviously, if you gank in a Catalyst, we aren't talking about much. (similar to insurance payouts before)
If you gank with T2 Tornados/Brutix or Taloses - it scales up nicely (similar to insurance payouts before)
Remember, under the old system, you had to pay a premium as well....and it didn't include mods (a significant cost)

I'm just saying that the bounty system acts as a form of insurance for the ganker. All that is required: get on the KM with whatever alt you used as a 'warp-in' point. (Hint: Stick a target painter on a Cheetah, collect bacon.)
Whitehound
#33 - 2013-02-02 16:45:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
TyeBaak wrote:
... There are always winners and losers.

*I wouldn't call this an "exploit" in gaming terms. I'd say "working as intended" and "gaming the system." As evidence, if this were a true "exploit" then I'm sure this thread would vanish.

TB

He did not call it an exploit, but only labelled it as one. He used quotation marks. There is a subtle difference here.

We then can call something an exploit, not just CCP can. Only is the final decision entirely theirs and over what they see as an exploit of their game/business. CCP can declare something as an exploit, because it makes them lose money, and we may not, because it is not our business, but we respect CCP and agree with them when we say it is an exploit (of their business). This can end up in many players shouting "Exploit!! Exploit!!" like a bunch of parrots and fanboys.

It still allows us to call something an exploit when we see our fun with the game being exploited. CCP can choose to ignore it, but they do respect us, too, and they want us to have fun with their game and not simply present us with a weird mix of nonsensical mechanics.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#34 - 2013-02-02 16:54:09 UTC
Herr Wilkus wrote:
Mags, we aren't talking about a trivial amount of ISK.
Because Alliance/corp wide bounties are included, not just personal ones.

Something around 400M ISK in bounties had accumulated on the alliance since Retribution hit.
After I realized how to game the system, I managed to claim almost the entire principal over the course of several suicide ganks.
(Which totally subsidized the costs of ganking, BTW.....)

This applies to corporation bounties as well, as you can easily move the -10 ganker into the affect Corp, drain the pool of bounties, then move it back.

Its kind of hilarious actually.
I bet people didn't realize that in Crimewatch, CCP actually just reintroduced "insurance" for suicide gankers. Lol

Except this time, its funded by carebears who think they are getting revenge.
Actually, you know what? Never mind. Forget I said anything at all.

Anyway, just keep those bounties coming. Suicide ganking is fun. Suicide ganking cheaply - even better.
OK, give some figures on what you flew and how much ISK you got from it.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Whitehound
#35 - 2013-02-02 17:08:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Mag's wrote:
OK, give some figures on what you flew and how much ISK you got from it.

I'll give you a figure.

I have placed a 1b ISK bounty on CODE. (the guys of the New Order). Now this bounty has slowly gone down to 961m ISKs and will continue to melt away.

Looking at the kills on eve-kill.net do most of their losses (a catalyst) list a miner with a Hobgoblin I and CONCORD.

The bounty is being paid out to the victims! This was not my intention when I placed the bounty. I wanted it to be fun and so that it pays those players who go after them, but not to compensate the victims for their losses.

In short: WTF?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
ISD LackOfFaith
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#36 - 2013-02-02 17:14:37 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD LackOfFaith
Thread cleaned up according to the following rules:

Quote:

4. Be respectful of others at all times.
The purpose of the forum is to provide a platform for the exchange of ideas. Occasionally, there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Be courteous when disagreeing with others. It is possible to disagree without being insulting.

7. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is the word used to describe a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting the players. Posts of this nature are disruptive and do not contribute to the sense of community we want for our forums.

24. Off-topic posting is not allowed.
Off-topic posts are not prohibited but should be posted within reason. Excessive off-topic posts that derail a thread may result in the thread being locked.


Let's keep things respectful, on topic, and constructive.

ISD LackOfFaith

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to Eve Mail or anything other than the forums.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#37 - 2013-02-02 17:29:40 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Mag's wrote:
OK, give some figures on what you flew and how much ISK you got from it.

I'll give you a figure.

I have placed a 1b ISK bounty on CODE. (the guys of the New Order). Now this bounty has slowly gone down to 961m ISKs and will continue to melt away.

Looking at the kills on eve-kill.net do most of their losses (a catalyst) list a miner with a Hobgoblin I and CONCORD.

The bounty is being paid out to the victims! This was not my intention when I placed the bounty. I wanted it to be fun and so that it pays those players who go after them, but not to compensate the victims for their losses.

In short: WTF?
I don't see a problem with that tbh. Looks like a funny way for the victim, to give the aggressor the bird.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Whitehound
#38 - 2013-02-02 17:40:37 UTC
Mag's wrote:
I don't see a problem with that tbh. Looks like a funny way for the victim, to give the aggressor the bird.

The victim did not place the bounty. I did! Where is my fun?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#39 - 2013-02-02 17:44:56 UTC
I can't imagine that they intend for people to get a bounty payout when CONCORD destroys the ship.

I though tthe person with the final blow was awarded the payout anyways?


It's a little strange to see people say this is ok, the OP demonstrated how to take advantage of the mechanics in ways that can't possibly be intended. That's not emergent gameplay, that's exploting the mechanics for your benefit.
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#40 - 2013-02-02 17:45:47 UTC
Depends on the fit, but generally 8-10M per BC-class gank.

No, its not 'game breaking' amounts of ISK.

The point is simply this, if gankers make a trivial change to their operation, that bounty ISK flows into THEIR wallets, over the course of normal operation. Is that what the gank victims intended? Probably not.

Further, it just doesn't make a lot of sense in the context of a Concord death - when Concord basically does everything.

Like I said, I don't mind free ISK.
But it also makes it nearly impossible to build up a large bounty pool.....