These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: 20% payout of hull; not enough.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#61 - 2012-12-10 16:38:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Inquisitor Kitchner
CCP SoniClover wrote:


I think this is a good idea. We had a similar story, but didn't have time to do anything with it for Retribution. I think there should be leverage to increase the payout up to around 30%, for kills on people with high bounty. Killing someone in the top 10 most wanted should definitely count for more.



I actually think that the guy topping the top 10 list should pay out 50% of the ship value and then scale down to 30% for the guy on the bottom.

I.E.


  1. 50%
  2. 48%
  3. 46%
  4. 44%
  5. 42%
  6. 40%
  7. 38%
  8. 36%
  9. 34%
  10. 32%


I can't be bothered to figure out the numbers to exactly go from 50% to 30%, but it wont be far off that.

You'll definitely see people shift off the top 10 list that way yet most people wont see a difference.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
Ginger Barbarella
#62 - 2012-12-10 16:38:59 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
The % payout is to prevent exploit via self-gank.


Only if you're seriously friggin' bored and afraid of the big glowing ball in the sky outside your front door.

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#63 - 2012-12-10 16:44:49 UTC
Ginger Barbarella wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
The % payout is to prevent exploit via self-gank.


Only if you're seriously friggin' bored and afraid of the big glowing ball in the sky outside your front door.


Or want to remove your bounty so that people don't try to kill you to collect it. Or if you want to profit by some fool having put a bounty on you in a system that is easily exploited for self-gank profit.
Ezra Tair
Doomheim
#64 - 2012-12-10 16:52:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Ezra Tair
My only beef with the current bounty system is that there is no incentive for chasing them down. It would seem a vast majority of the time it pays out on losses the 'bountee' would have lost regardless in the course of normal PvP activities. So in that respect I don't think you will regularly have some scenario where someone is stalked and killed in his rupture for the 3million bounty payout. of the 300million placed on him. Nor would it really frighting someone who expects to lose ships regularly.

I do think it works when people add a bounty to a corp. Then they pay someone else to wardec that corp as their is a incentive to chase them down at that point. If the bounty system were re-branded in that light, it would be pretty swell. You open a page, browse though offers (which include a price point that both pays for the war dec, and payouts on kills, select it and have war declared auto-magically.
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#65 - 2012-12-10 17:31:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Bienator II
i don't think that the dude who put a bounty on someone should be able to withdraw it. Its not a wallet. The victim (with the bounty) however should have a way to bribe the bounty away. Let him pay 5x the amount of the bounty and you have the same effect as a ship explosion... just as 6x isk sink.

edit: since devs are reading this thread.. it would be great if the bounty/killright notification mails would contain a link to the killmail

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
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#66 - 2012-12-10 17:47:17 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
i don't think that the dude who put a bounty on someone should be able to withdraw it. Its not a wallet. The victim (with the bounty) however should have a way to bribe the bounty away. Let him pay 5x the amount of the bounty and you have the same effect as a ship explosion... just as 6x isk sink.

edit: since devs are reading this thread.. it would be great if the bounty/killmail notification mails would contain a link to the killmail

The only person you should ever be able to bribe to remove a bounty, is the person that placed it.

Why would a 3rd party have anything to do with the money I'm willing to pay another individual to kill you?

If I can remove a bounty I place though, I may be willing to do so if you paid the cost of removal, and then some.
CONCORD or some random NPC who will remove MY bounty I placed on you is nonsensicle. What in the world does that guy have to do with ME. Nothing.

The amount you ultimately lose is irrelevant to me. I don't care if it's in the cost of a shuttle or the cost of a battleship, but I expect you to get BLOWN UP, not "lose isk". I want you to be a TARGET.

Paying to remove the bounty doesn't appease the person who put it on you in the hopes that someone else will blow you up for it; it doesn't matter if you pay more then I put on you. I didn't put it there so you can pay to remove it, I put it there so that you're a target while in space.

No tool should allow you to circumvent content that is intended to be entirely player driven. The only peson who should remove the bounty I put on another person a bounty hunter, or myself.
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#67 - 2012-12-10 18:08:39 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=180051&find=unread

I started a thread the other day about the 20% thing making people with large bounties no more worth hunting down than someone will a smaller bounty.

I'm not so worried about the overal payout, as I am the fact that having many billions of isk on your head means only you can be shot a few more times than the guy with a few billion less.

The payout system has no incentive to actually go looking for the most wanted people in New Eden.
The bounty itself should be a modifier that adds small percentages to the total payout based on how high the bounty goes; to a limit.


I think this is a good idea. We had a similar story, but didn't have time to do anything with it for Retribution. I think there should be leverage to increase the payout up to around 30%, for kills on people with high bounty. Killing someone in the top 10 most wanted should definitely count for more.


Start with a flat +x% for the #1 spot then reduce it by y as you drop down the list
this way you can decide whether to make the top 10, 20, 50 or 100 most wanted, more wanted than the lesser commoners.

eg +10% @#1 down to +1% @#10 making bounty payouts 21-30% for the top10 most wanted and 20% for the plebians

shouldnt be too hard to code RollBig smile
Bane Necran
Appono Astos
#68 - 2012-12-10 18:17:45 UTC
Why be timid about it. Make it 75% across the board.

Still waiting for a reason why lower is better.

"In the void is virtue, and no evil. Wisdom has existence, principle has existence, the Way has existence, spirit is nothingness." ~Miyamoto Musashi
Silk daShocka
Greasy Hair Club
#69 - 2012-12-10 18:25:36 UTC
So does anyone know the actual math on how the payout is calculated? Most the payouts I've seen have been much closer to 10% than 20%.

If the bounty payout is dynamic and based on the insurance level of the blown up ship I think it can be increased for ships that are insured at lower levels, or insurance on ships that have a low insurance payout such as tech 2 ships.
Silk daShocka
Greasy Hair Club
#70 - 2012-12-10 18:29:23 UTC
Bane Necran wrote:
Why be timid about it. Make it 75% across the board.

Still waiting for a reason why lower is better.


Here's your reason:

Blowing up your ship with an alt to collect 75% bounty payout calculated with a 100 million bounty

Cost to blow up ships (platinum insurance 30% of hull cost to insure): 40 million

Amount of bounty collected: 100 million

Profit to the person that has a bounty: 60 million

Pretty good way to make money it seems. Increase of 75% across the board isn't a good idea, as I posted above some increase could be worth doing provided the payout system is taking into account the level of insurance on the destroyed assets.
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#71 - 2012-12-10 18:33:44 UTC
The first hing to be remembered is the bounty should always be about lost ISK
The red numbers.
This makes it much easier to prevent exploits.
Next insurance payouts.
If the insurance pays 75% of the ship, you should only get the last 25%+destroyed lootables*bounty modifier.
So its
Bounty payout modifier * ((value of hull*(1-insurance percentage))+rigs+subsystems+destroyed mods and cargo)

Now that formula works as it ensures the target suffers loss.
Now as for the salvage issue, that will be self moderating.
The more you sell the cheaper it becomes and thus the less you can use to make isk back.

Now insurance.
The crux of the problem.
To high self ganking is good, to low and ships cant be rebought easily.
Perhaps modifiers to the policy should be paid.
Lose it to not Concord NPCs, full payout of your insurance.
Lose it in a nonsuspect pvp fight (war decs,limited engagements), 80% payout
Lose it as a suspect 50%
As an outlaw 30%
to Concord 0%

Now this would work well and all until null, but I have little experience there so someone else can come up with a refinement or something new.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#72 - 2012-12-10 18:37:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Natsett Amuinn
Silk daShocka wrote:
So does anyone know the actual math on how the payout is calculated? Most the payouts I've seen have been much closer to 10% than 20%.

If the bounty payout is dynamic and based on the insurance level of the blown up ship I think it can be increased for ships that are insured at lower levels, or insurance on ships that have a low insurance payout such as tech 2 ships.


Are you ding the maths based on what was actually destroyed, or the total value of what the person lost.

It's only what isn't recovered. If it drops it's not included in the payout.

Edit: Someone else will have to varify if it accounts for insurance, so that you only get 20% of whatever the insurance didn't pay out.
I'm hoping that it doesn't do that, it just seems excessive to me.
That doesn't mean that if it does work that way that there isn't a good reason for it that I'm just not able to see.
Sheynan
Lighting the blight
#73 - 2012-12-10 18:44:29 UTC
I don't think a plain increase of the "safe" 20% value is a good idea.

What I'd rather see and It should have the same net result is the possibility for the bounty-placing-person to set higher payout values.

These could be set after the usual corp/alliance/standings, but also for specific players/corps/alliances.

For example I trust my friends not to make shady deals with my target and thus set their payout value to 100% of loss value.
Or I contact a specific bounty-hunter corporation, that I trust to be corruption-free and set their payout value up.








P.S: Something that people should be aware of btw is that insurance return is not a part of 20% loss value, so even with 100% loss value a target would not be able to gain money, if all module/ship prices were 100% accurate. Fluctuations in item prices and manipulation of these are what makes "alt-killing" worthwhile with a higher payout ratio.
Silk daShocka
Greasy Hair Club
#74 - 2012-12-10 18:45:11 UTC
NEONOVUS wrote:

Now insurance.
The crux of the problem.
To high self ganking is good, to low and ships cant be rebought easily.
Perhaps modifiers to the policy should be paid.
Lose it to not Concord NPCs, full payout of your insurance.
Lose it in a nonsuspect pvp fight (war decs,limited engagements), 80% payout
Lose it as a suspect 50%
As an outlaw 30%
to Concord 0%

Now this would work well and all until null, but I have little experience there so someone else can come up with a refinement or something new.


I don't see how these insurance changes will change self ganking to remove bounties. You aren't going to be a suspect, an outlaw, a war dec target to your alt nor lose your ship to concord. I'm not sure aobut limited engagements I dont even remember how that one works.

If insurance would be changed I think CCP should take the route that the cost to insure your ship will increase based on your insured losses, much like they would IRL. Meaning if you keep losing ships that are platinum insured, the cost to insure platinum will increase with every ship you lose in this way. They could make the cost to insure platinum go down as well with every downtime or w/e by a certain amount that is considered fair and balanced.
Bane Necran
Appono Astos
#75 - 2012-12-10 18:45:35 UTC
Silk daShocka wrote:
Pretty good way to make money it seems. Increase of 75% across the board isn't a good idea, as I posted above some increase could be worth doing provided the payout system is taking into account the level of insurance on the destroyed assets.


Yeah, i forgot about insurance.

"In the void is virtue, and no evil. Wisdom has existence, principle has existence, the Way has existence, spirit is nothingness." ~Miyamoto Musashi
Mag's
Azn Empire
#76 - 2012-12-10 18:46:02 UTC
Ronan Connor wrote:
Couple the bounty payout to the standings as well.

Meaning standing of 5 gives you only 5%, standing of 0 = 20%, standing of -5 = 30%, below -5 = 40%.

I dont like placing bounties on positive with a sec status at all, but make a positive sec status at least count for something!
What relevance do NPC standings have, to a player driven standings bounty system?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Silk daShocka
Greasy Hair Club
#77 - 2012-12-10 18:48:11 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
Silk daShocka wrote:
So does anyone know the actual math on how the payout is calculated? Most the payouts I've seen have been much closer to 10% than 20%.

If the bounty payout is dynamic and based on the insurance level of the blown up ship I think it can be increased for ships that are insured at lower levels, or insurance on ships that have a low insurance payout such as tech 2 ships.


Are you ding the maths based on what was actually destroyed, or the total value of what the person lost.

It's only what isn't recovered. If it drops it's not included in the payout.

Edit: Someone else will have to varify if it accounts for insurance, so that you only get 20% of whatever the insurance didn't pay out.
I'm hoping that it doesn't do that, it just seems excessive to me.
That doesn't mean that if it does work that way that there isn't a good reason for it that I'm just not able to see.


Yep it could very well be stuff that dropped. I merely looked at the total payout vs. teh total value and noticed the payouts were closer to 10%.
La Volpe DaFlorence
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#78 - 2012-12-10 18:48:37 UTC
The problem we have is that either we have it too low to make bounty collecting worthwhile, or too high so that self-ganking becomes possible. Is there any kind of middle ground? :>
Silk daShocka
Greasy Hair Club
#79 - 2012-12-10 18:50:42 UTC
Sheynan wrote:
I don't think a plain increase of the "safe" 20% value is a good idea.



P.S: Something that people should be aware of btw is that insurance return is not a part of 20% loss value, so even with 100% loss value a target would not be able to gain money, if all module/ship prices were 100% accurate. Fluctuations in item prices and manipulation of these are what makes "alt-killing" worthwhile with a higher payout ratio.


I don't really understand what you mean here, but I"m assuming that what your saying is that a platinum insured ship will not give a bounty payout at all provided it has nothing fitted?
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#80 - 2012-12-10 18:51:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Natsett Amuinn
Silk daShocka wrote:
NEONOVUS wrote:

Now insurance.
The crux of the problem.
To high self ganking is good, to low and ships cant be rebought easily.
Perhaps modifiers to the policy should be paid.
Lose it to not Concord NPCs, full payout of your insurance.
Lose it in a nonsuspect pvp fight (war decs,limited engagements), 80% payout
Lose it as a suspect 50%
As an outlaw 30%
to Concord 0%

Now this would work well and all until null, but I have little experience there so someone else can come up with a refinement or something new.


I don't see how these insurance changes will change self ganking to remove bounties. You aren't going to be a suspect, an outlaw, a war dec target to your alt nor lose your ship to concord. I'm not sure aobut limited engagements I dont even remember how that one works.

If insurance would be changed I think CCP should take the route that the cost to insure your ship will increase based on your insured losses, much like they would IRL. Meaning if you keep losing ships that are platinum insured, the cost to insure platinum will increase with every ship you lose in this way. They could make the cost to insure platinum go down as well with every downtime or w/e by a certain amount that is considered fair and balanced.

That would make insurance even more pointless for guys in null sec or who actively engage in war with other corps. It just penalizes even further people who get blown up often because they actually take advantage of aspects of the game that other do not.

I think the insurance issues are issues unto themselves, and shouldn't have any real impact on the bounty system and vice versa.