These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 Awards for CONCORD kills? ("Exploit" that subsizides my ganking ops)

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
AyayaPanda
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#41 - 2013-02-02 17:48:32 UTC
You can collect 20% of your loss via bounty right?
Not a big issue then

To collect 100m bounty from your own suicide ganker (let's assume there's anyone even bother putting a bounty on that toon, other than yourself), you need to loss 500m worth of loss.

Let's say you can recover 250m worth of loot from ganker's wreck, you still lose the "isk war"
Mag's
Azn Empire
#42 - 2013-02-02 17:49:21 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Mag's wrote:
I don't see a problem with that tbh. Looks like a funny way for the victim, to give the aggressor the bird.

The victim did not place the bounty. I did! Where is my fun?
Not sure what you getting at here. Whenever anyone but you collects the bounty you paid, they will not have paid it. Whether they be victims or not.
As far as where you fun is, well that's your concern tbh.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2013-02-02 17:51:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Freighdee Katt
This was pointed out by many people as soon as the new bounty system came out. CCP does not seem to care. Enjoy your ganking subsidy.

The only sensible solution is, if CONCORD does 1 point of damage on you before you die, then NOBODY gets any bounty from your death. This means gankers can't collect their own bounties by km whoring beside CONCORD with alts, but they can still collect the legit bounty that they got from the gank target itself (since CONCORD doesn't shoot the victims, only the aggressors).

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2013-02-02 17:52:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Freighdee Katt
AyayaPanda wrote:
You can collect 20% of your loss via bounty right? Not a big issue then

The point is the ganker gets a 20% discount on his loss, due to the bounty that someone else placed on him, in an attempt to cause LOSS to him, not to give him free money.

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
Mag's
Azn Empire
#45 - 2013-02-02 17:54:34 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
I can't imagine that they intend for people to get a bounty payout when CONCORD destroys the ship.

I though tthe person with the final blow was awarded the payout anyways?


It's a little strange to see people say this is ok, the OP demonstrated how to take advantage of the mechanics in ways that can't possibly be intended. That's not emergent gameplay, that's exploting the mechanics for your benefit.
The bounty is a separate mechanic from concord punishment. As has been shown by the OP, the payout is small and not worth worrying about. Remember, whomever is suicide ganking, isn't going to be winning any ISK wars with this and it will not entice them to fly expensive suicide ganking ships. It simply wouldn't make any financial sense.

It really is a none issue.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
ISD LackOfFaith
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#46 - 2013-02-02 17:55:48 UTC
Did a small bit more editing to complement my cleanup of earlier. Carry on. Remember to keep calm and stay respectful.

ISD LackOfFaith

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to Eve Mail or anything other than the forums.
Whitehound
#47 - 2013-02-02 17:56:31 UTC
Mag's wrote:
As far as where you fun is, well that's your concern tbh.

Yes. So why should I ever place another bounty in the future when it goes to the victims and the gankers (through leeching on their own kills), but does not stay until someone actually kills the gankers?

If this is what these new bounties is about then I'll just ignore them and use my ISKs for things that are more fun.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2013-02-02 17:57:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Freighdee Katt
Mag's wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
I can't imagine that they intend for people to get a bounty payout when CONCORD destroys the ship.

I though tthe person with the final blow was awarded the payout anyways?


It's a little strange to see people say this is ok, the OP demonstrated how to take advantage of the mechanics in ways that can't possibly be intended. That's not emergent gameplay, that's exploting the mechanics for your benefit.
The bounty is a separate mechanic from concord punishment. As has been shown by the OP, the payout is small and not worth worrying about. Remember, whomever is suicide ganking, isn't going to be winning any ISK wars with this and it will not entice them to fly expensive suicide ganking ships. It simply wouldn't make any financial sense.

It really is a none issue.

They're ganking anyway, bounty or no bounty. It's plain stupid that the bounty someone placed on them winds up being paid to them as a subsidy that lets them gank more and spend less. It's also a trivial fix to make, if they would bother to address it.

EvE is supposed to suck.  Wait . . . what was the question?
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#49 - 2013-02-02 18:01:52 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
I can't imagine that they intend for people to get a bounty payout when CONCORD destroys the ship.

I though tthe person with the final blow was awarded the payout anyways?


It's a little strange to see people say this is ok, the OP demonstrated how to take advantage of the mechanics in ways that can't possibly be intended. That's not emergent gameplay, that's exploting the mechanics for your benefit.
The bounty is a separate mechanic from concord punishment. As has been shown by the OP, the payout is small and not worth worrying about. Remember, whomever is suicide ganking, isn't going to be winning any ISK wars with this and it will not entice them to fly expensive suicide ganking ships. It simply wouldn't make any financial sense.

It really is a none issue.

A miner isn't a bounty hunter.

AFK and bot miners make enough isk for no effort, they don't need further rewarding.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#50 - 2013-02-02 18:03:16 UTC
Freighdee Katt wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
I can't imagine that they intend for people to get a bounty payout when CONCORD destroys the ship.

I though tthe person with the final blow was awarded the payout anyways?


It's a little strange to see people say this is ok, the OP demonstrated how to take advantage of the mechanics in ways that can't possibly be intended. That's not emergent gameplay, that's exploting the mechanics for your benefit.
The bounty is a separate mechanic from concord punishment. As has been shown by the OP, the payout is small and not worth worrying about. Remember, whomever is suicide ganking, isn't going to be winning any ISK wars with this and it will not entice them to fly expensive suicide ganking ships. It simply wouldn't make any financial sense.

It really is a none issue.

They're ganking anyway, bounty or no bounty. It's plain stupid that the bounty someone placed on them winds up being paid to them as a subsidy that lets them gank more and spend less. It's also a trivial fix to make, if they would bother to address it.
It's not actually trivial. Some players with bounties, will only ever be able to be shot and have some of their bounty collected, with Concord intervention. You're basically asking for bounties to be pointless, in this regard.

As bounties are what other players deem to be worth shooting them for, Concord is irrelevant in that regard. Whether they were involved or not.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Natsett Amuinn
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#51 - 2013-02-02 18:05:47 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Freighdee Katt wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
I can't imagine that they intend for people to get a bounty payout when CONCORD destroys the ship.

I though tthe person with the final blow was awarded the payout anyways?


It's a little strange to see people say this is ok, the OP demonstrated how to take advantage of the mechanics in ways that can't possibly be intended. That's not emergent gameplay, that's exploting the mechanics for your benefit.
The bounty is a separate mechanic from concord punishment. As has been shown by the OP, the payout is small and not worth worrying about. Remember, whomever is suicide ganking, isn't going to be winning any ISK wars with this and it will not entice them to fly expensive suicide ganking ships. It simply wouldn't make any financial sense.

It really is a none issue.

They're ganking anyway, bounty or no bounty. It's plain stupid that the bounty someone placed on them winds up being paid to them as a subsidy that lets them gank more and spend less. It's also a trivial fix to make, if they would bother to address it.
It's not actually trivial. Some players with bounties, will only ever be able to be shot and have some of their bounty collected, with Concord intervention. You're basically asking for bounties to be pointless, in this regard.

As bounties are what other players deem to be worth shooting them for, Concord is irrelevant in that regard. Whether they were involved or not.

So remove concord and flag the guy FFA under the current rules.

If you're ganked your ganked, and now that gankers bounty has a real meaning.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#52 - 2013-02-02 18:09:22 UTC
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
So remove concord and flag the guy FFA under the current rules.

If you're ganked your ganked, and now that gankers bounty has a real meaning.
Are you asking to break the whole system, over a few mil?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Ildryn
IDLE INTENTIONS
#53 - 2013-02-02 18:09:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Ildryn
Gank fleet just needs to shoot each other after entering the system.
When they land on the victim and kill him he will get minimal payout.
The gankers will get 20% of all of their gank ships reimbursed.
In the case of using bcs that could be over 100m bounty paid back to the gankers if they need many for a high value target.

In this way the gankers will always get paid back whether or not the victim has drones out.
Tamiya Sarossa
Resistance is Character Forming
#54 - 2013-02-02 18:09:47 UTC
If you remove the payout on bounties when CONCORD is involved, all anyone with a hefty bounty has to do is go GCC when they know their death is inevitable, and the deprive whoever killed them of their (perhaps) rightfully earned bounty payment. Dec someone with a high bounty, stalk them for a couple weeks, catch them in their missioning CNR, only to see them shoot the gate just before they die and lose out on your eagerly awaited cash bounty? No thanks.

Subsidizing gankers may not make the most sense, but it's better than some of the possible alternatives.
Whitehound
#55 - 2013-02-02 18:16:22 UTC
Mag's wrote:
It's not actually trivial. Some players with bounties, will only ever be able to be shot and have some of their bounty collected, with Concord intervention. You're basically asking for bounties to be pointless, in this regard.

As bounties are what other players deem to be worth shooting them for, Concord is irrelevant in that regard. Whether they were involved or not.

Trading alts can sit docked forever at a station, with a bounty on them, where no CONCORD will ever get them. This is not our concern but CCP's and it should not be yours either.

The fix is then trivial. Bounties are being paid out for every kill, which means it is directly connected to the creation of killmails. At least this is the understanding that I got from the devblog. So they only need to check the kill for a participation of CONCORD, faction navy, corp police, customs police and whatever else is there and simply hold the payment.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#56 - 2013-02-02 18:20:16 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Mag's wrote:
It's not actually trivial. Some players with bounties, will only ever be able to be shot and have some of their bounty collected, with Concord intervention. You're basically asking for bounties to be pointless, in this regard.

As bounties are what other players deem to be worth shooting them for, Concord is irrelevant in that regard. Whether they were involved or not.

Trading alts can sit docked forever at a station, with a bounty on them, where no CONCORD will ever get them. This is not our concern but CCP's and it should not be yours either.

The fix is then trivial. Bounties are being paid out for every kill, which means it is directly connected to the creation of killmails. At least this is the understanding that I got from the devblog. So they only need to check the kill for a participation of CONCORD, faction navy, corp police, customs police and whatever else is there and simply hold the payment.
Concord involvement is irrelevant, as it's a player led mechanic. We may get the chance to shoot people in stations at some point, who knows? Doesn't mean it needs changing.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Herr Wilkus
Aggressive Salvage Services LLC
#57 - 2013-02-02 18:21:28 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Freighdee Katt wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Natsett Amuinn wrote:
I can't imagine that they intend for people to get a bounty payout when CONCORD destroys the ship.

I though tthe person with the final blow was awarded the payout anyways?


It's a little strange to see people say this is ok, the OP demonstrated how to take advantage of the mechanics in ways that can't possibly be intended. That's not emergent gameplay, that's exploting the mechanics for your benefit.
The bounty is a separate mechanic from concord punishment. As has been shown by the OP, the payout is small and not worth worrying about. Remember, whomever is suicide ganking, isn't going to be winning any ISK wars with this and it will not entice them to fly expensive suicide ganking ships. It simply wouldn't make any financial sense.

It really is a none issue.

They're ganking anyway, bounty or no bounty. It's plain stupid that the bounty someone placed on them winds up being paid to them as a subsidy that lets them gank more and spend less. It's also a trivial fix to make, if they would bother to address it.
It's not actually trivial. Some players with bounties, will only ever be able to be shot and have some of their bounty collected, with Concord intervention. You're basically asking for bounties to be pointless, in this regard.

As bounties are what other players deem to be worth shooting them for, Concord is irrelevant in that regard. Whether they were involved or not.



I guess the thing is, is if you are 'shot - with Concord intervention' - did you really 'do' anything? The ganker's ship was doomed, and you really didn't have any affect on the proceedings at all. By the time Concord gets itself on the KM, the gankship is immobilized and completely incapable of doing anything else.

What eludes me, is why would -10 pirates in lowsec even care? Concord doesn't kill people in low sec.
There is a precedent: Removal of insurance in the case of a Concord death. Would stand to reason that bounty payouts could be easily nullified in the same way. After all, the recipient, be it miner, ganker or 3rd party didn't REALLY do anything at all, thats why its called KM whoring. Its just especially ridiculous in the context of omnipotent Concord.

I'm actually arguing against my own self interest here, simply for vanities sake - being able to maintain a 'high score' bounty.
But we aren't talking about an insignificant amount of money, in the aggregate.

-10 Gank alts do not have to rat between sorties. They are ridden quite hard, only limited by the 15 min GCC timer and finding targets.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#58 - 2013-02-02 18:30:27 UTC
Herr Wilkus wrote:



I guess the thing is, is if you are 'shot - with Concord intervention' - did you really 'do' anything? The ganker's ship was doomed, and you really didn't have any affect on the proceedings at all. By the time Concord gets itself on the KM, the gankship is immobilized and completely incapable of doing anything else.

What eludes me, is why would -10 pirates in lowsec even care? Concord doesn't kill people in low sec.
There is a precedent: Removal of insurance in the case of a Concord death. Would stand to reason that bounty payouts could be easily nullified in the same way. After all, the recipient, be it miner, ganker or 3rd party didn't REALLY do anything at all, thats why its called KM whoring. Its just especially ridiculous in the context of omnipotent Concord.

I'm actually arguing against my own self interest here, simply for vanities sake - being able to maintain a 'high score' bounty.
But we aren't talking about an insignificant amount of money, in the aggregate.

-10 Gank alts do not have to rat between sorties. They are ridden quite hard, only limited by the 15 min GCC timer and finding targets.
That precedent you gave, isn't one. Insurance is a NPC led mechanic, bounties are a player led mechanic.

Why shouldn't I care? Is there some sort of moratorium, on low sec residence caring about things now?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Whitehound
#59 - 2013-02-02 18:34:25 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Insurance is a NPC led mechanic, bounties are a player led mechanic.

So why are bounties paid out when NPCs did the kill?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#60 - 2013-02-02 18:43:22 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
I've removed some off topic comments. Please remember to keep it on topic and civil, or I will close the thread and appropriate actions will be taken. Thank you.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department