EVE General Discussion

I tried to come up with a solution for the bounty-issue. Formulas are below. What do you think?
If you dont care for explanations and formulas i posted a table on 5.1 which shows what would be happening.

1.1 Insurance:
I felt the following was missing:
Calculating in the insurance. Otherwise it will be less worth it or a way to generate free isk or even a way to "sell" insured ships
If a thing A has a bounty on him/them and character B destroys his ship/pod the following formulas could aply:

]2.1 Variables:
bountyPool = "Bounty-pool that has been placed on a character/corp/alliance"
destroyedIsk = "The complete value of the destroyed ISK"
bountyKill = "The amount of isk player B recieves for the kill"
ratio = "some percentage below 100% that is assigned to the killer"
destroyedShip = "Low-End-Market-Worth of the destroyed ship"
payedInsurance = "Insurance payed to A"
destroyedItems = "Low-End-Market-Worth of the destroyed items in that ship"
destroyedImplants = "Low-End-Market-Worth of the destroyed implants"

3.1: This is what the killer gets:
destroyedIsk = destroyedShip-payedInsurance+destroyedItems+destroyedImplants
bountyKill = ratio*(destroyedIsk)
If(bountyKill>bountyPool ){bountyKill=bountyPool}
bountyKill should of course never exceed bountyPool

3.2: This is the remaining Bounty pool:
bountyPool = bountyPool - bountyKill

4.1: Depending payout on Bounty on his/her head
That would be some easy formula.
However, with the above formulas it doesn't matter if u kill the T2-fitted Talos of the most hated player in the universe or just some minor player who happens to have just enough bounty to pay out for the Talos-Kill.
ratio could be calculated instead of beeing a fix value. For example:
ratio = -0.4 *destroyedIsk / bountyPool +0.7
If(ratio<0.3 ){ratio=0.3})
Less than 30% would be weak (:
This formular for example would give a bounty-percentage between 30% and 70%

5. 1: Easy example:
You attacked a player with a bounty on his head. He was flying a Talos worth 110mio. After u destroyed his ship he received an insurance of 20mio. 30mio worth of items dropped. That leaves a total of 60mio destroyed, which is gone for good.
Using my above formulas that means the bounty will be a percentage of those 60mio. A theoretical maximum of 70% (42mio) will be received by the headhunter, depending on the bounty on the targets head.
The following table shows the bounty u get depending on the bounty on the characters head.
BountyPool has 10mio -> 10 mio payed (16% of the destroyed value)
BountyPool has 20mio -> 18 mio payed (30% of the destroyed value)
BountyPool has 30mio -> 18 mio payed (30% of the destroyed value)
BountyPool has 40mio -> 18 mio payed (30% of the destroyed value)
BountyPool has 50mio -> 18 mio payed (30% of the destroyed value)
BountyPool has 60mio -> 18 mio payed (30% of the destroyed value)
BountyPool has 80mio -> 24 mio payed (40% of the destroyed value)
BountyPool has 100mio -> 27,6 mio payed (46% of the destroyed value)
BountyPool has 500mio -> 39,12 mio payed (65% of the destroyed value)
BountyPool has 1000mio -> 40,56 mio payed (67% of the destroyed value)

6.1 Notes
-It is important that the received bounty NEVER exeeds the worth of the destroyed ship/implants. Otherwise people will claim their own bounties.
-Displaying the received bounty on your profile/corp should be possible to show off your skills as a bounty-hunter
- Not allowing to receive bounties for destroyed implants could be usefull to not favor "selling of plugged-in implants" this way

This is not and should be considered a exploit in anyway a person is paying or plexing for that alt account and should be allowed to do anything any other account being payed for can do

you want a working bounty system in this game i only see too ways to do that
1 Remove Jump clones
This would be a really really bad thing for eve, but whould fit probelms in the bounty system since someone who pods them self for bountys isnot going to use a implanted clone,

2 Tie the bounty itself to the pod its put on

Yes this would allow players to have many bountys on many pods But what it would do is forse a players to wait till the bounty is higher than the value of his implants
Or only do nasty things in a unimplanted pod

I agree with Poetic on one point if you put a bounty on someone your pritty much saying here have some free isk =)


I offer a soloution ... Hair a merc to pod the guy your anoyed with it will cost you a bit more but you actual know what your getting for your money =)

What a complete fookover of high-sec industry and weighted toward all the alliances with buttloads of money. You can now target anyone you like and screw up their game permanently.

Way to go CCP. I'll be signing off from this latest stupidity with my multiple accounts as soon as you guys put this piece of sh**T through.

The bounty should be placed with the bounty hunter - not the mark. This has been proposed REPEATEDLY. Avoids general exploits and allows visibility on who your enemy is. This piece of sh**t development is just more lazy coding - and yet another idiotic mechanic update. I'm outta here in December.

Why wait?

How is this a "fookover" of hi-sec industry? Are you the 4th or 5th person in this thread to assume that simply putting a bounty on someone makes them a legal target?

Do you even understand the term "Exploit"?

Misusing game mechanics for personal gain, like podding yourself for your own bounty, is the very definition of "Exploit".......

I love how some of the people in here are afraid of getting caught with their pants down.


When someone is ganked there are certain people who are claiming that they should have realized it was going to happen. I disagree. As someone who often uses a Freighter on his alt let me tell you that it isn't as simple as some people are trying to claim. Yea, I am careful about how much I keep in my cargo and I have never been ganked. However, when you jump into a system with 100s or even 1000s of people in it you can't go "Oh no! There are 50 people on the gate in various ships that may or may not be fitted for high alpha!" Even with a scout, which I have used on occasions when I really had a lot to move, there is no way to see a gank coming 100% for sure. There may or may not be hints but then again if your freighter is getting bumped for 10 minutes while they get the numbers they need chances are there was 0 warning.


If you're a highsec ganker and you're afraid of getting ganked all I have to say to you is "suck it up buttercup." I think that changes to killrights are very interesting. Whether the person knows their killrights have changed hands or not it will add an interesting dynamic to ganking.

Ganking is 0 risk as it is now in most instances. A ganker chooses where, when and how they lose their ship. They control their sec status. They control almost all of the variables in some cases. Yes, maybe the miner tanked but you know that with a scan don't you? Yes, the freighter may have too much in its hold. Then again, sometimes you need to move expensive stuff in a short amount of time. That is a risk a freighter pilot takes. The gankers who got him picked the when, where and how. That isn't risk; that is acceptable losses. Stop claiming concord is part of the risk. Concord goes into the cost-benefit thought process of whether to gank or not.

Just in case you didn't read all that. To gankers I say "suck it up buttercup."

You mean like we've had to do for every major change to high-sec and/or mining, ever? Including the release of the Tier 3's, due to the removal of insurance?

We already were sucking it up, Buttercup.

Let me ask you, how does it feel to be mollycoddled and henpecked at the same time?