Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Bounties as they were, were too easy to exploit. Now, a portion of the bounty less than the value of the isk the target lost is transferred to the people who made the kill.

A kill contract could be much more specific. It would be to target a player, in a certain ship class.

For example, if there's a dude who I know likes to park a marauder on a lowsec gate, I could create a kill contract on that player for him to be killed in a marauder. Or if I have a hard-on for someone who I know likes to fly in a carrier, again, make a contract for that player to lose a carrier.

The contract system would then advise me of the base cost of the ship based on "stuff" (current eve market valuation stuff) as a good idea of whereabouts the bounty should lie.

Killing the player in a rookie ship, or any other ship, wouldn't complete the contract. In essence, the contract targets the player's ship. Sure if you make the bounty outrageous, they could just buy an empty hull and get popped by a friend, but with advisements on the price of the hull, you'd have to know better.

To stop people from simply taking the contracts on themselves (via alts or friends) it would not be a contract that you could "take". As such I'm not sure "contract" is the right term; it would likely need to be a separate mechanic. It would be there for anyone to see.

Potential uses:
1) I know that someone will be in a system, and I want to hire mercs to engage them. I pay their retainer fee, and then I create a contract with a 1 day expiration for said player in a marauder. They see the contract, and know that my money is good. No fight means no profit, but they still get their retainer. Fight means profit.
2) I get angry with so-and-such about stuff and things. I know he has a special edition ship. I put the contract out, and hope for an awoxer.
3) The usual bounty stuff


I can't see any room for exploitation, can you?

Plat insurance on any non t2 vessel + no fittings. I don't think you realise how little someone loses in that case. Since generally speaking asking people to hunt a specific target is an expensive undertaking. Since not only do they ahve to hunt the target, they have to camp the target till they get in the perfect ship.

Alts of the target taking the contract then deliberately not completing the contract. and if you implement any kind of collateral from the mercs, making juicy scam contracts on yourself with your alt, then never flying the correct vessel for the contracts to force the mercs to default on their collateral. either way it's abusable.

if the contract is open to everyone, again, they see a contract on themselves and just don't fly that single ship for a while, instead they go and fly a different marauder or use a pirate BS, or a T3 etc.

It's not a terrible idea, but the number of loop holes that will make the system highly cumbersome and therefore not see use are pretty high, while a player negotiated agreement might not be as secure it can deal with loop holes like that via common sense.

bounty hunting corps already do this though a proper contract would be nice and I have been suggesting it for years.


best way I see to lay it out is just like a normal contract so you can make it public or private.
on the next page you can set up the target(s) of the bounty
third page you set up the total bounty pool minimum km value for payout % of km for the pay out and max pay out per kill.

this would be an extremely flexible tool for setting up bounties and would truly give life to the profession outside of the handful of groups currently dedicated to this.

i see nothing wrong with this at all

-1

You can set up a contract now so we do not need another idiotic game mechanic that can be abused in more ways than there is space here to enumerate.
If you do not trust other players then go do the dirty deed yourself.
If you do make a contract and the other party does not honor that contract then go kill them.

Tell me... if you collect a bounty on someone in highsec, will concord intervene?

Truth be told I'd love to see highsec become far less highsec. But no. You do not get this right. The mechanics behind attacking someone remain the same, gate guns in low and concord in high.


1) Since the ways to exploit are so plentiful, please, do share
2) Eve is a multiplayer game. Single person content is discouraged. "Do it yourself" isn't even remotely relevant here
3) I fail to see how you can use a courier contract to kill someone. Or an item exchange. Or an auction. Please... share some of your wisdom?

All told, the only thing you've managed to do is display remarkable ignorance.

Really this should just be a player solution, players paying merc corps based on kill mails.

Good. And what is the point of your suggestion in this case? You put a bounty on someone's head and issue a kill contract but whoever takes the contract cannot kill this person legally. Your suggestion is not a kill contract but just another way to say "bounty". And since you need to either war dec that person or gank them in order to kill them, your bounty idea makes bounties even more useless than they where when you could just collect them with an alt. Did I understand you correctly this time?

If you want High sec to be less high security, go to low sec space. That's what Low sec stands for and it needs more people like you to populate it more.

Oh, this is gold. Here, let me show you something: Kill: Charon See what that Charon carried? That's how you use a Courier Contract to kill someone. This is being done on a quite large scale. By this group on the kill mail in the Eitu area, it used to be done a lot by Hard Knocks Inc. with similar contracts between Jita and Amarr or to the Mastakomon area in The Forge. CFC and CODE third party on courier contracts regularly with ganks in Niarja and Uedama areas by cargo scanning freighters on the way there.

It is quite comical that you accuse that other guy of being remarkably ignorant when you don't seem to have an idea what people can do, do, and will do to do nefarious things. Remarkably comical.

You don't get it, do you? If your kill contract does not create a kill right, no one can legally or easily kill the target in high sec. Either the ganking is too expensive or the target does not undock during a war or just leaves corp to an NPC corp. If you go for ganking, the bounty needs to be higher than the ships that you need to gank the target. If we take freighters as example, that is at least 6-7 Taloses, or 500-600M just for the ships, profit not included. If your kill contract does not pay at least this price, who would be going to gank a target? However, if this kill contract creates a kill right even though the target has not done anything to legally earn a kill right from you (ie. has attacked your ship in high sec or attacked your pod in low sec), why should you be able to have that person killed legally? Furthermore, people could and would just blanked issue such contracts on anything that moves and is juicy or defenseless in order to get easy kills and not lose their ships in the process, effectively making ganking pointless and freighter piloting a death sentence.

So, what is it now?


If I remember correctly, the forum does for me ("I fail to see how you can use a courier contract to kill someone.), you were not talking about Marauders in particular in this post. I suggest you should get your context in order first.

Your lack of knowledge about emergent gameplay mechanics is troubling, to say the least. Just because you are "favoring" Marauders does not mean that they are the only ships that you can kill with your contracts. And destroying a Marauder with 6 Taloses is a very easy task, PVP fitted or not. And even if it was a difficult task, the points above are still not answered: Who would gank a target if the bounty is not high enough to pay for the gank ships. Why should you be able to issue a kill right even though you weren't attacked in a way that gives you the justification to do that?

I'm impressed. As they say in tropic thunder, "don't go full ******".

Donnachadh:
1) You've completely bypassed the content of this thread, otherwise you would have seen that this idea was specifically declared to follow the existing engagement rules.

2) You are right, you don't NEED contracts to kill in low, null, and wormholes. But you might WANT one. You don't NEED a courier contract to move goods, you don't NEED an item exchange contract. You WANT them. Why? It reduces the likelihood of a player or group of players reneging on their agreement. "Just kill them if they renege" is only valid if you have that capacity in the first place.

3) They are different from the bounty system. If I put 100 billion isk on a player who exclusively flies T1 frigates in FW, will that bounty ever get fully collected within our lifetimes? Yes 100 billion is a big and outrageous number. But it illustrates the differences (and drawbacks) between bounties and this.

4) My kill contract could be as simple as knowing that Joe Shmoe's corp has decced mine, and I want to run a freighter through a system that I've scouted and know they're camping. I want to push their camp off, so I make a contract out to kill specific ships from their camp to cut its balls off so that I can get through. There's nothing "personal" about that.

5) As I have said literally in my very last post, a courier contract will only kill someone who choses to take a courier contract, and only in the ship they choose to take it in. I wish I could change the font to something nice and big, to help you understand it better. I'll settle for capslock. Ready?

CONTEXT IS RELEVANT TO WHAT YOU SAY. WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THIS THREAD, A COURIER CONTRACT WILL NOT ACCOMPLISH THIS GOAL. YES YOU CAN SCAM A FREIGHTER PILOT. NO YOU CANNOT KILL A PLAYER IN A DESIRED SHIP UNLESS THAT DESIRED SHIP IS A FREIGHTER.

6) I provided an example of highsec deccers to show how, even without altering the rules of engagement, it can absolutely be useful. Try reading, as ignoring the content of this thread and spouting your mindless drivel is the prototypical definition of ignorant.



Rivr:
1) No, you don't get it. I'm not looking to alter the rules of engagement. I am looking to incentivize players to kill other players on the desires of another. You and the other tool I am replying to both seem to hinge this on changing the ROE to allow for ganking in highsec. THAT. IS. NOT. THE. GOAL. Hopefully caps will help your reading comprehension as well. I doubt it.

2) Yes, congratulations, you can take 14 words out of context (in a post where I specifically commend your ability to remove things from context) to justify your completely irrelevant answer. Comical, almost, but like they say never go full ******.

It is almost an unsaid expectation that the context of a conversation within a forum thread hinges on the post it is replying to. I made an OP, you replied to the OP, I replied to you, etc. Ultimately the context is the OP. I very clearly mentioned a marauder there.




~~~

To reiterate to both of you, since you'll probably TLDR to the bottom, pick out a few words, and say something almost nonsensical again:

This is not to change the Rules of Engagement. This is to incentivize kills. Maybe within the context of a highsec gate camp where you've contract merc assistance. Maybe in lowsec where you know a player is camping and you want to get through with something that will otherwise get caught.