These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#81 - 2013-02-02 20:55:57 UTC
The no CONCORD on kill mail thing wouldn't work any better because there will be people who make it a point to get CONCORDed if it means making attacking them unprofitable. They could in theory use IP to reduce the number of abuses by gankers as it'd require multiple computers with at least one a proxy server. Don't really see a downside to doing that much.
Whitehound
#82 - 2013-02-02 21:02:06 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
The no CONCORD on kill mail thing wouldn't work any better because there will be people who make it a point to get CONCORDed if it means making attacking them unprofitable. They could in theory use IP to reduce the number of abuses by gankers as it'd require multiple computers with at least one a proxy server. Don't really see a downside to doing that much.

Would you really choose to commit suicide, earn a sec. status hit and keep the bounty on your head only to deny someone the 20% payout? How long do you think you can do this before you give up?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#83 - 2013-02-02 21:07:20 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Aren Madigan wrote:
The no CONCORD on kill mail thing wouldn't work any better because there will be people who make it a point to get CONCORDed if it means making attacking them unprofitable. They could in theory use IP to reduce the number of abuses by gankers as it'd require multiple computers with at least one a proxy server. Don't really see a downside to doing that much.

Would you really choose to commit suicide, earn a sec. status hit and keep the bounty on your head only to deny someone the 20% payout? How long do you think you can do this before you give up?


I don't know, how long are suicide gankers able to keep their sec status? :p I wouldn't choose to do it as its lame, but doing that sort of thing is NOT uncommon in games, at all, even when the benefit that the killer receives is just a number.
Whitehound
#84 - 2013-02-02 21:37:14 UTC
Aren Madigan wrote:
I don't know, how long are suicide gankers able to keep their sec status?

Some can do this for a very long time. Of course, if you are really good at PvP then you could possibly keep your bounty forever! Cool

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Aren Madigan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#85 - 2013-02-02 21:43:47 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Aren Madigan wrote:
I don't know, how long are suicide gankers able to keep their sec status?

Some can do this for a very long time. Of course, if you are really good at PvP then you could possibly keep your bounty forever! Cool


:p I think my point of it not being that hard is made then.
Captain Tardbar
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#86 - 2013-02-02 23:23:32 UTC
NEONOVUS wrote:
Simple fix the distribution of the bounty payout is based on the percentage damage you did.
0 damage 0 payout
Would also act as a lovely ISK sink as the money gets paid to Concord.
Also can we get the km linked when collection notifications are sent?
Would be very nice.


I've seen KM from miners in which they had 50% damage with tech 2 drones on failed gankers.

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server
MatrixSkye Mk2
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#87 - 2013-02-03 14:21:39 UTC
Herr Wilkus wrote:
The new 'bounty received' notifications are terrific.[/b] Their instantaneous nature make it quite easy to pinpoint which butthurt miner/hauler put the bounty on you - and allows the pirate to victimize them with locators for further gank attacks. After all, if they mad enough to put a bounty on you, it means your suicide attack hit home - and further ganks might push them right over the edge and cause them to beat their kids, or better yet, quit EVE.

It's quite pathetic that this is what you use the game for to get your kicks. But I am glad you choose this venue instead of a more destructive one to cause grief.

Successfully doinitwrong™ since 2006.
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#88 - 2013-02-03 14:22:29 UTC
Actually its pretty amusing.

Generally, the suicide alt is 'in the fleet'....

So the entire fleet gets an equal share of the bounty.

So my suicide alt always gets tons of notifications that he's been rewarded a bounty for killing......Himself! P

Awesome system.
Whitehound
#89 - 2013-02-03 14:26:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Herr Wilkus wrote:
Actually its pretty amusing.

No, it isn't. My notifications tell me when the New Order killed another miner and that I paid the miner a few ISKs for losing the fight. That is pathetic.

It is now about 100 notifications, each with a few hundred ISKs and almost all of it has gone to the victims. Some players appear to be sitting in the belts with a frigate or a cruisers, take a desperate shot at the gankers, get on the killmail and catch some ISKs, but the kill is always made by CONCORD in the end. It is now about 40m ISKs and more, leaking out to players who should not be getting it, and all because of a lazy design decision by CCP. It sucks the fun right out of bounties.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#90 - 2013-02-03 15:04:59 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Why should concord involvement, have any relevance to a player led mechanic? Why should the payout not go to the player, also involved?

Because the kill was not done by a player!
But he was involved and it's a player led mechanic. NPC involvement in regards to a bounty payout, is irrelevant.

No. He was present and so was the victim and possibly others, but he did not do the kill. CONCORD did.

Bounties are meant as a reward for players who kill another player.

Your problem is that you have no understanding of bounties, that you do not know why someone puts a bounty on another player and what it is someone else should get the ISKs for.

What you do is to repeatedly state the is-state of the game and based on this do you give us interpretations of what it could mean.

Frankly, we do not care for it. We are discussing what it means for us players and not what it may have meant for the dev who implemented it.

Do you understand this?
He was involved and got the highest player DPS, hence he got the player led bounty. Blink

It's all there in the patch notes. You obviously didn't understand this, when you placed the bounty. Big smile

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Whitehound
#91 - 2013-02-03 15:08:44 UTC
Mag's wrote:
He was involved and got the highest player DPS, hence he got the player led bounty. Blink

It's all there in the patch notes. You obviously didn't understand this, when you placed the bounty. Big smile

No. The devs don't understand us. Stop being such a fanboy. X

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#92 - 2013-02-03 15:08:47 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
So remove concord and flag the guy FFA under the current rules.

If you're ganked your ganked, and now that gankers bounty has a real meaning.
Are you asking to break the whole system, over a few mil?

No sir, you made the comment that this is the only way that some gankers will ever pay out on their bounties. I only pointed out a means of addressing YOUR issue.
Which didn't address it, it only broke the system.

Is it perfect? No.

Is it better than before? Yes.

But this thread is about a none issue and small amounts of ISK.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#93 - 2013-02-03 15:21:13 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Mag's wrote:
He was involved and got the highest player DPS, hence he got the player led bounty. Blink

It's all there in the patch notes. You obviously didn't understand this, when you placed the bounty. Big smile

No. The devs don't understand us. Stop being such a fanboy. X
Oh, I think they understand us pretty well.

Never been called a fanboy before. Thanks. Cool

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Whitehound
#94 - 2013-02-03 15:39:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Mag's wrote:
Oh, I think they understand us pretty well.

Never been called a fanboy before. Thanks. Cool

You are welcome.

Will you now have the courtesy to let us discuss the new feature, what it means to us, how it is working out and respect our opinions on it without further attempts to patronize us like children?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
#95 - 2013-02-03 18:18:18 UTC
On your typical suicide gank km, I agree that awarding bounties to random folks who lock you, activate a module, and let concord kill you is a broken mechanic.

But suppose you've been caught by war targets and you're in a hopeless situation and so you go gcc (on a random neutral on grid) to deny them your bounty.

tl;dr The correct solution is that if you've already been aggressed by another player before you go gcc then a bounty is appropriate, but not if you haven't. Might be tricky to program that, though, who could know.
AkJon Ferguson
JC Ferguson and Son Ltd
Ferguson Alliance
#96 - 2013-02-03 18:23:27 UTC  |  Edited by: AkJon Ferguson
Actually upon further reflection my 'solution' sucks because it doesn't prevent the alt-farming problem. I guess a sensible middle-ground would be to award a bounty if most damage (or perhaps highest damage) is done by players and not if most damage is done by Concord.

Edit: Meh. I just thought of a fairly simple work-around for this too. I agree with Mag's that the bounty system ain't perfect, but a lot better than b4 and that this issue isn't particularly important.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#97 - 2013-02-03 18:42:56 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Oh, I think they understand us pretty well.

Never been called a fanboy before. Thanks. Cool

You are welcome.

Will you now have the courtesy to let us discuss the new feature, what it means to us, how it is working out and respect our opinions on it without further attempts to patronize us like children?
I'll point out when I think you're wrong. Take that as you will. Big smile

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Whitehound
#98 - 2013-02-03 18:52:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Mag's wrote:
I'll point out when I think you're wrong. Take that as you will. Big smile

Thank you, but this is not an argument. It is a discussion. You might make a mental note about it.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#99 - 2013-02-03 18:56:08 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Mag's wrote:
I'll point out when I think you're wrong. Take that as you will. Big smile

Thank you, but this is not an argument. It is a discussion. You might make a mental not about it.
Did not say it was.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Whitehound
#100 - 2013-02-03 18:57:05 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
Mag's wrote:
I'll point out when I think you're wrong. Take that as you will. Big smile

Thank you, but this is not an argument. It is a discussion. You might make a mental not about it.
Did not say it was.

"Note", "not" was a typo, sorry. Please reread.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.