These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Proposal] Bounty system reform

First post
Author
Cyprus Black
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#81 - 2011-12-18 12:20:44 UTC
+1

An elegant solution to the broken bounty system.

If I may add, kill rights that can be pulled and turned into an item (just like bookmarks) tradable via contracts. Drag and drop into your kill rights folder and voila! Bounty hunter becomes a viable profession.

Can you imagine if almost everyone in a corp or alliance has hefty bounties placed on their heads? Every man, woman, child, grandparent, and squirrel that lives in their front yard will come for them with any weapon they can strap on to their ship. It would be glorious.

Summary of EvEs last four expansions: http://imgur.com/ZL5SM33

Max Moonshadow
UnNerve
#82 - 2011-12-20 07:57:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Moonshadow
Here is my idea for Bounty


1. Pilot 1 wants to put a bounty on the mark.

2. Pilot 1 enters the reward amount and pays a fee for keeping the bounty open for x period of time, which would be calculated relative to the bounty reward amount.(this should get exponentially higher according to bounty value)

3. The mark is notified of the bounty and then is told “in the event you are pod-killed by a pilot REGISTERED to collect your bounty – a fee equivalent to the bounty reward will be charged to use your clones regardless of who provides the service, including your own services. If you are pod-killed by a pilot NOT registered with the bounty office. A fee will NOT be charged for using you clones and the bounty will still stand.

4. Pilots wishing to collect a bounty must register with the bounty office BEFORE killing the mark.

5. The mark can approach the bounty office and pay a fee equal to 80% of the bounty placed on them to have the bounty nullified.


These changes create a large risk in being pod killed, for if you do not have the isk equivalent to the amount it would cost to use a clone – you would have all your isk taken from you. (Unless you are killed by someone NOT registered with the bounty office.)

Also if the mark gets someone they know to pod-kill them to collect the bounty. this would only serve to remove the bounty only, because there would still be a cost incurred to the mark when activating their clone.

The mark could never be sure if the person they have asked to pod-kill them, will hand over the money to pay for the clone fee.


As for concord placing a bounty fees DO NOT apply for using clones when killed.

Also Provide away for players to tag ships and follow them through gates... but limit it to detectable within 3 jumps or so, also provide a time limit on the tag, so eg. if its been 30minutes the tag no longer broadcasts. This should also show where a tagged ship is docked This ability should only be given to pilots currently registered with the bounty office.

Have skills/equipment associated. (greater the skill level higher the chance of detection)

Have skills/equipment associated to stop the detection of tags.

That is Twisted
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#83 - 2011-12-20 08:21:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Bienator II
@OP ah cool. we basically had the same idea ( https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359105 )

fully support this proposal

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#84 - 2011-12-20 08:24:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Bienator II
Ogopogo Mu wrote:
EDIT: Lowered ship explosion value to 25% due to insurance shenanigans; see post 14. Changed values are in bold.

you can simply substract it (see https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359105#post359105 )

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Ogopogo Mu
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#85 - 2012-01-18 09:12:33 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
Ogopogo Mu wrote:
EDIT: Lowered ship explosion value to 25% due to insurance shenanigans; see post 14. Changed values are in bold.

you can simply substract it (see https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359105#post359105 )


Late reply sorry. Subtracting an insurance reward from a bounty payout only works if it's the hunted man's own alt doing the killing. If it's a legitimate bounty hunter it's effectively an exploit where the hunted man denies payout to the hunter for minimal investment.

Reducing the ship explosion payout to 25% means that full plat insurance cannot benefit a self-killer, and in any case the payout to a legitimate hunter is unaffected by insurance or lack thereof.
Jish Ness
Invictus Industries
#86 - 2012-01-19 09:18:16 UTC
Beautiful. Thats the only way I can think to describe this. Why isn't this already so?
Gris X
Scions of Karishal
Chao3 Alliance
#87 - 2012-01-20 02:10:57 UTC
+1

Bounty Hunting fix is long overdue, and should have been done before learning to walk in stations.

Vaurion Infara
Doomheim
#88 - 2012-01-20 02:53:38 UTC
+1, although I'll probably be on the wrong end of this more often then not. Ugh

this is it

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#89 - 2012-01-20 03:04:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Bienator II
Ogopogo Mu wrote:
Bienator II wrote:
Ogopogo Mu wrote:
EDIT: Lowered ship explosion value to 25% due to insurance shenanigans; see post 14. Changed values are in bold.

you can simply substract it (see https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359105#post359105 )


Late reply sorry. Subtracting an insurance reward from a bounty payout only works if it's the hunted man's own alt doing the killing. If it's a legitimate bounty hunter it's effectively an exploit where the hunted man denies payout to the hunter for minimal investment.

Reducing the ship explosion payout to 25% means that full plat insurance cannot benefit a self-killer, and in any case the payout to a legitimate hunter is unaffected by insurance or lack thereof.


you see it to extreme. Nobody is able to deny payout, it is a insignificant reduction - it would be an exploit if it would remove more ISK from the bounty on the bad guy's head than the payout which was given to the hunter, this is not the case.

Secondly, uninsurable ship modules are in the ship formula included.

Thirdly, its only one part of the bill, the second part is the pod everyone is aiming for anyway.

Additionally this is only an optional implementation detail which can be solved in multiple ways, this was only an example for a possible implementation. A much simpler tuning option would be to reduce the safety multiplier for the payout as you already mentioned (e.g to 50%), or interpolate between both - substract 50% of the insurance but use a 70% multiplier.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Erik Finnegan
Polytechnique Gallenteenne
#90 - 2012-02-16 12:50:20 UTC
I support this idea.

It should be pushed by the CSM. All of them. I heard that a formal writeup is underway. Not a single one can get credit for a good implementation since the ideas have been around since...like...forever. I always like to remind everyone of Dierdra Vaal's good write-up of 2008 "Nil mortifi sine lucre".

One particular idea by Malcanis merrits addition : being able but not required to limit who collects that bounty based on standings. That not only is an additional measure effective against exploitation, but is also an important RP factor imho. In other proposals, the bounty issuer is designed to being able to approve of any aspiring hunter. Also good, but more cumbersome and might delay the action due to TZ and response time.
Kimbeau Surveryor
Stapeley House
#91 - 2012-02-16 16:07:47 UTC
Cordo Draken wrote:
I like this payout system! My question to the new system is who can hunt? Of course we don't have a specific class, "Bounty Hunter," but shouldn't there be a qualification, i.e. Faction Standing or Sec Status to be able to freely engage a bounty that is in high sec? I've been partial to the idea of establishing a "Kill" contract, like a mini war if you will for a limited time. You fail to eliminate the target within a specific time it goes back up to a bounty pool that only qualified Bounty hunters can obtain. Of course this is all theory crafting but something along these lines would help establish a much wanted proffession.

Dil'e Mahn wrote:
I'm a pirate. I might be on the receiving end of bounties, and I still approve. As it stands now, the guys that most often collect bounties from pirates are other pirates (or alts if it's a nice & juicy bounty). That's just not how it should work. It'd be awesome if there were groups of players who specialised in bounty hunting; that could result in plenty of gudfites.
+1

Agreed. I have always dreamed of an Eve where some of Concord's function is taken over by the players, just as production has been moved away from NPCs. The bounty system is key to this. Therefore I propose an extension to this bounty fix:

*** allow the bounty setter to specify which alliances are allowed to collect his bounty.***

This makes it more complicated (but not impossible) for people to collect their own bounties, but more importantly encourages the creation of a quasi-police alliance to whom bounties could popularly be allocated.

[If anyone cares, I have thought out how to calculate what happens when there are multiple bounties with different alliance allocations, and when some of the killmail toons are in different alliances. A bit of a pain, but trivial compared to some of the stuff that gets computed every time a ship flies round New Eden.]
K1RTH G3RS3N
Doomheim
#92 - 2012-02-16 17:16:23 UTC
not sure if i understand your proposal completely, if someone could fill me in here.

so if bob has 1bil bounty on his head and lets say he only has 900k skillpoints and he has no implants of value, i basically get nothing for podding him?
Ogopogo Mu
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#93 - 2012-02-16 20:21:21 UTC
K1RTH G3RS3N wrote:
not sure if i understand your proposal completely, if someone could fill me in here.

so if bob has 1bil bounty on his head and lets say he only has 900k skillpoints and he has no implants of value, i basically get nothing for podding him?


For podding him right... you would still collect on his ship value for blowing up his ship. If Bob somehow managed to get a 1B bounty while being under 900K SP with no implants, he could just pod himself over and over for free and collect money.

It is a loophole, but a minor one, as a <900K SP character who manages to get himself to low sec status and bountied would pretty much be a super low SP suicide ganking alt who made people spacemad. Such a character is doing it for the lulz anyway; it's probably better not to pay him extra on top of it.
Kimbeau Surveryor
Stapeley House
#94 - 2012-02-16 20:46:55 UTC
Erik Finnegan wrote:
In other proposals, the bounty issuer is designed to being able to approve of any aspiring hunter. Also good, but more cumbersome and might delay the action due to TZ and response time.

My version of this is to allow you (at the time when you post the bounty) to select which Alliances can collect. Similar control, less interaction.
Mechael
Matari Obolos
#95 - 2012-02-20 09:09:48 UTC
Just allow the person setting the bounty to select what type of ship it applies to. Then allow the person to set by standing who can collect the bounty. While you're at it, allow people to place bounties on entire corporations/alliances. Easy enough.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.

Maeste Madeveda
The Spawning Pool
#96 - 2012-02-22 15:13:35 UTC
Excellent game design here.