These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Issues, Workarounds & Localization

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Bounty System

Author
Virtus Anhur
Galactic Imperium
#1 - 2013-01-09 02:02:45 UTC
Hey,

To me the bounty system is an issue. I don't mind people placing bounties on others for a reason, but with the current system it seems like every corporation and every player (even new players) have bounties on them for the sole purpose of it can be done. I just have the strange feeling that like pokes were to Facebook, bounties are to EVE and eventually everyone in the EVE galaxy is going to have a WANTED sign under their corp or pilot name.

I know it's a bad topic and who ever brings it up or discusses it tends to get additional bounties on their head, which in itself is annoyingly funny, but something has to be done, its ridiculous and as far as I can tell provides nothing to the game in most circumstances.
Senjiu Kanuba
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#2 - 2013-01-09 02:15:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Senjiu Kanuba
That "Wanted" sign under player's portraits is kinda bothering because it loses it's meaning if everyone has it.

How about changing the Wanted sign to make it more transparent the less bounty someone has?

Like with a function similar to this one:
(Visibility = 0 means invisible, Visibility = 1 means not transparent and visible, everything in between is how transparent it is)

if ( Bounty < 500.000 ISK)
Visibility = 0;
else
Visibility = ( Bounty - 500.000 ISK ) / Bounty

That means the Wanted sign is invisible on portraits with less than 500k bounty, is 50% transparent on players with 1m bounty, 25% transparent (=75% visible) on players with 2m bounty and so on.

Another alternative would be using a different color depending on the bounty, like green = low bounty, red = high bounty and everything between depending on the bounty (moving from green to yellow, orange and finally red with increasing bounty).

Or any other function that increases visibility the more bounty is on someone's head.

I don't see much of a problem with the bounty system other than that because having a bounty on your head doesn't grant anyone killrights and isn't that much an incentive to kill a new player, because the ISK used in a gank in highsec are usually much higher than any bounty that might be received. New players in lowsec get killed fast enough anyway, without bounty playing much of a role too.

Senjiu
Virtus Anhur
Galactic Imperium
#3 - 2013-01-09 02:27:28 UTC
Senjiu Kanuba wrote:
That "Wanted" sign under player's portraits is kinda bothering because it loses it's meaning if everyone has it.


Exactly. Almost everyone I talk to or corps I look up have little 100k bounties on them and it's high-sec, who in the world is going to attack let alone go to war with someone for a 100k bounty.

Senjiu Kanuba wrote:

I don't see much of a problem with the bounty system other than that because having a bounty on your head doesn't grant anyone killrights


Another great point, first everyone is getting these bounties because they can just place a bounty on you for the heck of it, but once you have it you can't get rid of it unless you die and for most of these people they're not going to be in situations where they may die because they're not going to low sec and no one can kill someone with a bounty without being concorded.

Of course with this setup where you can place measly 100k bounties on people I'm not saying people should suddenly get kill rights, but perhaps start bounties at 100 million and then grant kill rights to the first bounty hunter to accept the mission. Least this way, there usually will be a reason to place the bounty due to the high cost, and their will be an incentive to take the bounty and kill the target due to the reward.

Just my 2 cents.
Senjiu Kanuba
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#4 - 2013-01-09 02:47:17 UTC
I disagree about the bounty -> killright idea. Bounty shouldn't grant anyone killrights. If you want to be able to kill someone without concord interfering declare war on him. But making it so, that 100m bounty automaticall grants killrights would suck because it would mean that the player with the bounty would have to lose ships worth a billion or so (at least 500m) to get rid of everyone being able to kill him.

If you want a player hunted down hire a mercenary corp to declare war on him or do it yourself. Linking bounty and killright system in any way doesn't seem desirable to me.

Senjiu
Virtus Anhur
Galactic Imperium
#5 - 2013-01-09 03:17:49 UTC
Senjiu Kanuba wrote:
I disagree about the bounty -> killright idea. Bounty shouldn't grant anyone killrights.


Then whats the point of the bounty system if a bounty hunter can't track down the bounty?

Without the ability to hunt down a bounty, then all you have is a war system, unless you're in low or null sec in which case it doesn't matter if you're at war or whether there is a bounty system.

If there has to be a bounty system, which appears that there does, then the bounty should have to start high enough for someone to actually want to place the bounty on that individual not just because you can, part of that can go to concord to look the other way say 50 million (the same as declaring war on a corp, but in this case its it's just the individual), the rest goes towards the bounty hunter that accepts the target. Only one bounty hunter can accept the target and get kill rights. The bounty should also either expire after x amount of time has passed, or slowly dwindle until it expires over x amount of time.

Senjiu Kanuba
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#6 - 2013-01-09 04:04:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Senjiu Kanuba
I fail to see the difference to a wardec.

Bounty isn't a means to have someone hunted down. Wardecs are. So what you suggest is temporarily granting an entity killrights on the target at a price (= a Wardec). You can use the bounty system as an incentive for them though. For example, you could tell the Merc corp "Please Wardec those, here are 50m for the war, an additional 250m as payment and I placed 200m bounty on the target corporation as an incentive for you to get additional rewards for killing them." (Numbers are made up, I never used a Merc corp so I don't know the numbers on the money involved).

If you place bounty on another player, you just reward whoever happens to kill them anyway. That's what the system is for. You might trigger a gank (for example if someone in a hulk has 40m bounty on his head that's a relatively good incentive to gank this target out of a number of targets, if you wanted to gank a miner anyway) but you don't pay someone to hunt the enemy.

I hope I made my point clear. :-)

Senjiu
Virtus Anhur
Galactic Imperium
#7 - 2013-01-09 04:25:18 UTC
Okay, I'm following your logic when dealing with war decs using mercenaries, you pay them 50 million to go to war then place a bounty on the corp which they slowly receive ISK for as they do damage to the corp, that makes perfect sense.

So perhaps the solution should have been, I don't know what you would have called it, a mercenary system. Where a corp can pay the 50 million for the war dec + a "bounty" which other corps could then browse and decide whether they want to accept the bounty. This creates a system where everyone does not have a WARNING sign attached to them, it gives the mercenary corps a way to easily obtain bounties and it keeps the bounty system in a form that makes sense.
Senjiu Kanuba
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#8 - 2013-01-09 05:33:27 UTC
Okay, so what you actually want is for people to attack other people in highsec without warning and concord interfering?

I just want to get that clarified because to most players in highsec that is a somewhat scary concept. And I don't think this'll get implemented or even looked at sharply. Wardecs have a 24 hour preparation time for a reason.

That "anyone can attack the target" system got implemented already. Just not for everyone. If someone podded you in lowsec or attacked you in highsec you get killrights and you can share them. Combine that with a bounty and you have what you wanted.

But you can't just place a bounty and make him a free victim for whoever has the means to attack him if he didn't attack you first.
Virtus Anhur
Galactic Imperium
#9 - 2013-01-09 06:07:12 UTC
No, but the way the bounty system is now has no point apart from adding a warning label on everyone. If the system is used only by merc corps, fine, but then CCP should develop a bounty system for them such as the one above which is doing the same thing they are doing now just in a more organized fashion.

Right now the bounty system serves few and is just an annoyance where everyone is getting a 100k bounty which makes the current system not only broken but meaningless.
Senjiu Kanuba
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#10 - 2013-01-09 16:03:58 UTC
If you think that then you don't have to use it.

The bounty system works great as what it's supposed to be: An additional reward for killing someone (additional to the loot and the glory that killing already provides).

I agree that the "Wanted" sign should look different depending on how much bounty is on someone's head. But I totally disagree that there should be any way to enable someone to attack someone else in highsec without Concord interfering, without the target agressing someone in the last month before that and without a 24 hour warning like you get in a wardec.

If the attacked agressed someone in the last 30 days you can get killrights on him (if the one who got agressed is you or is sharing them with you).
If the attacked got wardec'ed he got a 24 hour warning and can then openly be attacked by his enemy corp.

But if the target didn't agress someone AND didn't get wardec'ed (and received a 24h warning and all that) there should be no way for him to get attacked by anyone without concord interfering.

If you want to remove Concord altogether just say it.
Virtus Anhur
Galactic Imperium
#11 - 2013-01-09 16:16:25 UTC
It doesn't work great the way it is. We have thousands of pilots running around with 100k bounties on them for no reason what so ever apart from that you can do that to other pilots. That kind of a system doesn't provide any substance to the game, it makes the bounty system worthless. What good is a bounty system if everyone has a bounty on them, you might as well just remove the bounty system and give anyone who kills anyone 100k for kill them, bam, bounty system without the warning tags.

I guess updating the WARNING tags to various levels of severity based on bounty size would be okay, but it still doesn't fix the problem of pointless bounties on everyone.

Creating the merc bounty system. Where corp A can create a bounty on corp B for X amount upfront and Y amount based on damage to the corp + the 50 million for the war dec bill and either post it to a merc board or assigned it to a specific corp to accept. Once the bounty is accepted, you have your 24 hours of wait time and notification of the war like normal. After which the merc corp can attack and gets its up front payment + bounties based on damage to the corp like the current system, however once the war is terminated what is left of the bounty returns to the hiring corp. Perhaps there is a wait time before the hiring corp can place another bounty on the same corp, say a week or two.

I don't know, just thinking out loud, but that continues to help the merc corps with their endeavors and prevents all the pointless bounties which will continue to propagate with the current system.
Senjiu Kanuba
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#12 - 2013-01-09 19:39:24 UTC
Apart from the payback of the bounty after the war, this is exactly like it already is. It's not up to the developers to make up ideas how to use the system, it's a sandbox where we are provided different systems and utilize them to reach whatever goal we have.

So, why do you want the bounty paid back? Wasn't the point to encourage people to harm the opponent corp? So the bounty might as well stay after the war. And voilá, we're back to the system we currently have as the system that we want.

Of course having 100k bounty on everyone seems pointless. But what is 100k? That's 1/5 of a single cheap battleship kill in a Sansha mission. It doesn't really matter. Bounty is still relevant as soon as you kill a ship that's actually worth something belonging to someone who has a decent amount of bounty on his head, like killing a Drake belonging to someone with 50m bounty on his head awards the participants in the kill a total of 20 million or so.

And as a system that rewards killing someone's ships it serves its purpose and works great.
Virtus Anhur
Galactic Imperium
#13 - 2013-01-09 19:49:45 UTC
Senjiu Kanuba wrote:
Apart from the payback of the bounty after the war, this is exactly like it already is. It's not up to the developers to make up ideas how to use the system, it's a sandbox where we are provided different systems and utilize them to reach whatever goal we have.


No it's up to the developers to create meaningful features for the game, and I'm sorry, but everyone running around with 100k bounties on them is not meaningful. When someone does something bad to someone and then receives a bounty, that is meaningful, what we have is annoying and pointless.

Senjiu Kanuba wrote:

So, why do you want the bounty paid back? Wasn't the point to encourage people to harm the opponent corp? So the bounty might as well stay after the war. And voilá, we're back to the system we currently have as the system that we want.


Because they hired a merc corp to do a job, they didn't complete the entire job, so the bounty is returned and the original corp can choose to create a new bounty if they want. The bounty couldn't remain unless technically it covered the cost of another war dec then I guess it could populate back into the merc board where the remaining bounty minus another 50 million would present itself.

Senjiu Kanuba wrote:

Of course having 100k bounty on everyone seems pointless. But what is 100k? That's 1/5 of a single cheap battleship kill in a Sansha mission. It doesn't really matter. Bounty is still relevant as soon as you kill a ship that's actually worth something belonging to someone who has a decent amount of bounty on his head, like killing a Drake belonging to someone with 50m bounty on his head awards the participants in the kill a total of 20 million or so.


Seems pointless, it is pointless. I doesn't matter how cheap or expensive it may seem, it's absolutely pointless and especially since it was most likely placed on a pilot for no reason what so ever apart from oh I can place bounties on people, woo hoo! What value does that add to this game? None, zilch, zero.

And as you've mentioned even with the bounty you're not going to go to kill someone in high-sec unless A the bounty is high enough (so why not make the starting bounty high enough to make it worth the kill) or B the corps go to war with each other in which case create a merc bounty system and remove the current system which is only use for a small percentage of people for the purpose of what a merc specific bounty system would be utilized for.

Senjiu Kanuba wrote:

And as a system that rewards killing someone's ships it serves its purpose and works great.


To the degree that if the bounty is high enough yes, else no it does not work great, it just provides another layer of non-sense to the games atmosphere and flood the world with meaningless bounties to the point where it's laughable to veterans and annoying to new pilots.
Senjiu Kanuba
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#14 - 2013-01-09 20:08:21 UTC
Wait, would increasing the minimal bounty to 10 million and keep all the rest the same solve your problem?
Virtus Anhur
Galactic Imperium
#15 - 2013-01-09 20:16:15 UTC
I think its the games problem, not just my problem, but yes I think that would definitely help the situation if nothing else was to change.
Senjiu Kanuba
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#16 - 2013-01-09 20:29:19 UTC
And what if bounties below 10m could be put on players but the "Wanted" sign would only show at 10m or above? Or even better, if you could decide for yourself, at which level a "Wanted" sign appears?

Because this way small bounties on a player could pile up. The way I see it, the only problem is that there's nothing visible to destinguish between small bounties and large bounties.

And by the way, you can still get what you want with the current system. You tell the Merc corp "I hire you to fight those, here's some money upfront, for every million ISK the opponent loses you get a 200k bonus to a maximum of 400m". Of course the mercenaries would have to trust you on that. But it doesn't really matter that much because you have to trust them in the first place, it's only fair if they have to trust you too. And if you don't keep your promise they might just want to get their reward from you by declaring war on your corp and looting it from your wrecks.
Virtus Anhur
Galactic Imperium
#17 - 2013-01-09 20:37:53 UTC
Senjiu Kanuba wrote:
And what if bounties below 10m could be put on players but the "Wanted" sign would only show at 10m or above? Or even better, if you could decide for yourself, at which level a "Wanted" sign appears?

Because this way small bounties on a player could pile up. The way I see it, the only problem is that there's nothing visible to destinguish between small bounties and large bounties.


This adds a bit more complexity beyond just setting the minimum to a higher amount. But I suppose it would be okay for bounties to pile up then for the WANTED sign to appear once the bounty reaches 10 million and that players could if they wanted opt to show the wanted sign prior to 10 million, but once 10 million was reached it would show.

See the problem for me isn't that there is a way to distinguish between small and large bounties, its that the minimum bounty is so low people are placing bounties on others just because they can, not because they have a reason.

Ideally I think it would be great if after X amount of time the bounties remove themselves, because lets face if you put a bounty on some random bloak in January you're not going to remember them come March, now there is a bounty on someone for something that is no longer remembered. This may also cause people to put large bounties on people so that they'll be hunted down within the time frame.

Senjiu Kanuba wrote:

And by the way, you can still get what you want with the current system. You tell the Merc corp "I hire you to fight those, here's some money upfront, for every million ISK the opponent loses you get a 200k bonus to a maximum of 400m". Of course the mercenaries would have to trust you on that. But it doesn't really matter that much because you have to trust them in the first place, it's only fair if they have to trust you too. And if you don't keep your promise they might just want to get their reward from you by declaring war on your corp and looting it from your wrecks.

[/quote]

Ya, you did a good explanation on how mercs use the system, I just started down the whole merc only bounty system as a possible alternative to what we have.