Player Features and Ideas Discussion

For those that think this just creates giant pools of unlimited isk, keep in mind thats not what we have now with insurance. As long as the payout value is less than the true value of the loss, it won't generate profit from thin air.

The problem, as we just recently saw when Goonswarm's thinktank cracked the FW formula, is that any slight error or misjudgement in the math behind this, and we've got a colossal nightmare of a situation on our hands.

For this reason alone, I'm extremely dubious about CCP's ability to create a completely exploit-free system. We (the CSM) warned them last time an exploit was likely, they assured us it wasn't, and it happened anyways. When all was said and done Goon math > my math > CCP's math. Something broke down in the game design process and I'm nervous about taking such a risk again.

All that to say though, there's nothing inherently wrong with Rixx's suggestion. I do think that PvPers deserve more way to earn an income via pew, I'd be fine if a FW-like system was applied elsewhere, we shouldn't have ALL the fun - but I'm just extremely nervous about another formula error at this point. Perhaps it would be better to discuss bounties and killright exchange instead if what we're really looking for is paid pew for independent capsuleers.....

Destruction is NOT A ISK SINK. If a ship is destroyed no ISK actually leaves the game, since the ship was purchased from another player the ISK is only transferred. While destruction stimulates the economy it is not a isk sink.

This idea is a faucet since the isk is not transferred from another player, it is generated by CCP in the form of player concord bounties.

Yeah, I was thinking about things in a loopy way , thanks for the correction.

If the bounty system is limited to hull cost only, it will be as exploitable as insurance is at the moment, except for T2 hulls. The difficult part is making this idea work (give a nice payout to the killer(s)), whilst making exploiting it not profitable.

Insurance is based off the mineral value of a ship, rather than the market value. (granted, the mineral value is based off the market value for the minerals. but that's a /trifle/ harder to manipulate)

It is an interesting idea.

I don't like the idea of a straight isk pay out though, Concorde LP would be more appropriate and prevent it being an Isk faucet.

I believe this LP can be transferred to normal stations if pirates do this and are worried about having to access high sec stations.

It would then work in a similar manner to FW PVP payouts. Would need to be careful FW pilots don't get double rewards for Pirate and Militia kills.

I think this is an interesting idea that is worthy of further investigation. Its certainly better than the current bounty system, and does fit with lore.

What would happen to the number if you restricted it to pilots with a sec status of -5 or lower, and reduce the multiplier appropriately with -5 getting a 1.0 multiplier? This would restrict the 'bounty' system to those pilots that are of interest to CONCORD. This would also fit better with it being a lowsec bounty system.

Revised Concept Outline based on feedback:

The Pay Per Kill Bounty System

Objective: Establish a "Bounty" system in which the destruction of criminal ships is rewarded equally to those that participate in its destruction.

Goal: ( Drop + Insurance + Reward ) must equal less than the in-game market value of the destroyed ship.

Maths: Destroyed Value x Victim Sec Status Multiplier x Adjustable System Tax Rate = LP Reward / Kill Participants

Qualifying Ships: Any ship flown by a pilot with -5 to -10 Sec Status. Excluding Rookie Ships and Pods.

Definitions:
• Destroyed Value - The established in-game value of the ship minus the module drop as shown in the Combat Log.
• Victim Sec Status Multiplier - A value between 2 and 5 that increases the lower the victim sec status. A -5 victim has a value of 2 and a -10 victim has a value of 5.
• Adjustable System Tax Rate - A sliding tax rate based on the sec of the system the loss occurred within. A maximum value of 99% and a minimum value of 95%, the lower the system sec status the lower the tax rate = higher return
• LP Reward - Self explanatory
• Kill Participants - The number of pilot on the kill mail, including NPCs.

Example: A pilot with a -10 sec status losses a ship valued at $100,000,000 ISK in a -4 System to a group of three pilots. Destroyed Value (100m) x 5 x .05 = 25m / 3 = 8.3m ( Converted to LP ).

On average the return on value is around 5-12%, depending on the number of participants. The lower the participants the higher the return. In the above example, a solo pilot would have received 25m in LP value from the kill (25%). Conversely, a blob of 20 pilots would have each received 1.25m each (1.2%).

Exploit Defense: Even a scenario in which the above example involved alts and maximum insurance and loot/salvage would return a value lower than the cost of the ship + cost of insurance. Increasing protection could be achieved by maximizing the percentage return, in other words establishing a CAP of say 15%. So the solo pilot in the example would get a CAP reward of only 15% instead of 25%.

Limitations: I am no expert at LP Rewards, I admit that. So some tweaks can be assumed to be needed in that regard. Once again, this is a CONCEPT of establishing a working Bounty System that rewards pilots for PvP against known criminals in space. And of encouraging combat in a combat based game.


Thoughts and comments appreciated as always.

That is correct. The problem wasn't that they could just blow up stuff and turn it into LP (this happens at a loss because of the formula) Its that the prices they payouts were based on were heavily manipulated by artificially stacking buy and sell orders at absurd costs to drive up the average price of an item, allowing items to be bought incredibly cheap but reimbursed for the manipulated market value. A fix was implemented to prevent this kind of market value manipulation, killing the problem at its source. THEORETICALLY this means that the market values could be used to dictate other payout systems beyond FW, without risk of a similar incident. If CCP were smart they would have hired the dudes that figured this loophole out instead of punishing them for outsmarting the developers. I'm still nervous about market-value based payouts as a result of this, but it appears to be working fine now in Faction Warfare at least.



+1. You want to know what the two things are that everyone in this game has? ISK, and other players that drive them nutso. It's a natural marriage that is long overdue. Good to see I'm not the only player out there who hasn't forgotten how much fun it would be to play Boba. Remember that survey on the EVE website? I still giggle when it tells you to go be a BOUNTY HUNTER and what they're really telling you is to go buy a drake and grind missions. For those of us that have been playing EVE a while, that's not at all what we mean when we think of "bounty hunting".

This isn't an incentive to kill each other, it is a reward for killing each other. And while it won't make anyone rich, it does allow the PvP play style a chance to become a supporting income play style.

The current Pod/Bounty system doesn't work as it is totally in the hands of the players. I believe we do need a streamlined system to encourage "bounty" play between pilots. This is only one suggestion for achieving that goal.