These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Retribution's New Bounty System

First post First post First post
Author
Pipa Porto
#321 - 2012-10-08 06:33:38 UTC
EglantinFinfleur wrote:
People, for now, don't stop playing with their gankers characters because killrights aren't transferable. When they are, expect griefbears to dock and wait for those to expire, if they witness said killrights being often transferred.

This is why they shouldn't be aware of those transfers.


Why in the world would people quit for a month over the possibility of being killed?


Quote:
What's your other point? I want to be able to shoot at leisure griefbears and gatecampers that arent -5.0, and unwholesome characters with a sheen of respectability, who have a bounty on their head due to their bad behavior.
This is not possible as of now.

It's like you're really dense. Are you high?


So you're saying you want to be able to attack people without any risk or consequence. And you're implying that the gankers are cowardly?

Name for me a game mechanic that currently allows you to legally shoot someone without them knowing that you are legally allowed to do so?

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#322 - 2012-10-08 06:34:10 UTC
Gogela wrote:
Myrkala wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
Gogela wrote:
I'm going to put bounties on empire mining corps. For mining ships. Just cuz.

Good call. Can we put bounties on NPC Corps, too?

How about bounties on Mackinaws?

I'd buy that for a dollar.


AFAIK: You can put bounties on anyone, this will make things interesting. Anyone with ISK can turn another player or groups of players into juicier targets to be attacked by wardec, suicide gank or maybe even RETRIBUTION (transferable killrights.) Lol

EDIT:
Though I think you would have to be more selective with who you put bounties on than just generalizing Mackinaws. (I'm guessing you would gain from them being exploded in some way. Big pile of minerals to inflate the price of? Large collection of Mackinaw bpcs or even a bpo? Blink)

Killrights could become very lucrative too. I would pay a lot for certain killrights Twisted

Me three.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#323 - 2012-10-08 06:34:51 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
Gogela wrote:
I'm going to put bounties on empire mining corps. For mining ships. Just cuz.

Good call. Can we put bounties on NPC Corps, too?

How about bounties on Mackinaws?

I'd buy that for a dollar.


The idea is that you'll be able to put a bounty on anyone you like. But merely putting a bounty on someone won't mean that you can freely attack them; they still have to have -5 sec status, a GCC, a wardec, or an active killright which you have acquired for you to attack them without CONCORD interference.

Still waiting for whatsisname on the last page to explain how this "fooks over" hi-sec industrialists.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Zheketri
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#324 - 2012-10-08 06:40:58 UTC
So... when does CONCORD start deputizing its own "militia?"
Big smile

"Once you have taken his place, have you then defeated your enemy?"

Pipa Porto
#325 - 2012-10-08 06:41:34 UTC
Myrkala wrote:
I've read this whole discussion between Malcanis and Pipa and I have come to the conclusion that Mrs. Pipa is a big fat scaredycat.

I've tried suicide ganking with Sard Caid once a while back, before the mining barge EHP buff.

I fail to see how the calculated risk of loosing a ship costing 2-3m to kill a ship that costs 100 times more is somehow an equivalent exchange (loosing a ship) that should reward the gankers the ability to know who will bring the Retribution let alone the ability to potentially having the first shot again.


So you're claiming that ships tanks should be balanced based on their cost without regards to fitting? You could not profitably gank a tanked Hulk pre-buff.

Quote:
The only thing you are entitled to in this game is the Undock Button and the risk that comes with it.


So what significant risk do Miner's face?

Quote:
All of the arguments that Pipa has made regarding the viewpoints of ganker vs gankee(bounty hunter) are moot. The funniest thing is that in reality Pipa is afraid of being put in (essentially) the same situation as the harmless highsec miner waiting to be ganked. HTFU.

I think transferable/sellable killrights would make the game much more interesting and fun for all parties involved in a suicide gank. Bear


So what significant risk does the blind transferrable killright hunter face? The Suicide Ganker buys his element of surprise with his ship and the surprise can be foiled if the miner bothers to press a button. The killright hunter gets it for free and has it mechanically enforced.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

Pipa Porto
#326 - 2012-10-08 06:42:48 UTC
Zheketri wrote:
So... when does CONCORD start deputizing its own "militia?"
Big smile


They already do. You're free to shoot anyone who's an Outlaw or has gone GCC.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#327 - 2012-10-08 06:44:48 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
Gogela wrote:
I'm going to put bounties on empire mining corps. For mining ships. Just cuz.

Good call. Can we put bounties on NPC Corps, too?

How about bounties on Mackinaws?

I'd buy that for a dollar.


The idea is that you'll be able to put a bounty on anyone you like. But merely putting a bounty on someone won't mean that you can freely attack them; they still have to have -5 sec status, a GCC, a wardec, or an active killright which you have acquired for you to attack them without CONCORD interference.

Still waiting for whatsisname on the last page to explain how this "fooks over" hi-sec industrialists.

But bounties on Mackinaws could make them profitable to gank again.

Just saying.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

Pipa Porto
#328 - 2012-10-08 06:53:40 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
But bounties on Mackinaws could make them profitable to gank again.

Just saying.


No it couldn't. It just changes who's paying for the shortfall.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#329 - 2012-10-08 06:55:32 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
But bounties on Mackinaws could make them profitable to gank again.

Just saying.


No it couldn't. It just changes who's paying for the shortfall.

Fair enough. Maybe if I rephrase it to "mitigate sufficient costs as to allow individuals to profit from exhumer ganks."

Which is admittedly different.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#330 - 2012-10-08 06:57:28 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
Gogela wrote:
I'm going to put bounties on empire mining corps. For mining ships. Just cuz.

Good call. Can we put bounties on NPC Corps, too?

How about bounties on Mackinaws?

I'd buy that for a dollar.


The idea is that you'll be able to put a bounty on anyone you like. But merely putting a bounty on someone won't mean that you can freely attack them; they still have to have -5 sec status, a GCC, a wardec, or an active killright which you have acquired for you to attack them without CONCORD interference.

Still waiting for whatsisname on the last page to explain how this "fooks over" hi-sec industrialists.

But bounties on Mackinaws could make them profitable to gank again.

Just saying.



As Pipa said, no, not exactly. But it would make for a more efficient & immersive way of subsidising it than using 3rd party killboards.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Pipa Porto
#331 - 2012-10-08 07:51:00 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
But bounties on Mackinaws could make them profitable to gank again.

Just saying.


No it couldn't. It just changes who's paying for the shortfall.

Fair enough. Maybe if I rephrase it to "mitigate sufficient costs as to allow individuals to profit from exhumer ganks."

Which is admittedly different.


Sure. But why would anyone piss away the ISK required for that?

Like I've said several times. Gankers are not randomly vindictive or irrational and aren't interested in pissing money away for no reason. Alliances are the same way. Now that Tech's been nerfed, who has the motive to put a bounty on Exhumers?

More importantly, for that to matter would imply that the possibility of Players paying other Players to attack a certain ship should influence game mechanics. In which case, I call bounty on Vagabonds, where's my Vaga buff?

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#332 - 2012-10-08 07:54:48 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:
But bounties on Mackinaws could make them profitable to gank again.

Just saying.


No it couldn't. It just changes who's paying for the shortfall.

Fair enough. Maybe if I rephrase it to "mitigate sufficient costs as to allow individuals to profit from exhumer ganks."

Which is admittedly different.


Sure. But why would anyone piss away the ISK required for that?

Like I've said several times. Gankers are not randomly vindictive or irrational and aren't interested in pissing money away for no reason. Alliances are the same way. Now that Tech's been nerfed, who has the motive to put a bounty on Exhumers?

More importantly, for that to matter would imply that the possibility of Players paying other Players to attack a certain ship should influence game mechanics. In which case, I call bounty on Vagabonds, where's my Vaga buff?

The last paragraph seems to invert cause and effect, at least for my part.

"Vaga overpowered already and got buffed? Screw that, bounties up on Vagas." That would be my take, to be frank.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

Pipa Porto
#333 - 2012-10-08 08:00:15 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:

The last paragraph seems to invert cause and effect, at least for my part.

"Vaga overpowered already and got buffed? Screw that, bounties up on Vagas." That would be my take, to be frank.


No, that's the cause and effect line for Exhumers.

Bounty on Exhumers (which tank better than a standard Vaga anyway) -> Whining -> Exhumer Buff.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#334 - 2012-10-08 08:04:34 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Darth Gustav wrote:

The last paragraph seems to invert cause and effect, at least for my part.

"Vaga overpowered already and got buffed? Screw that, bounties up on Vagas." That would be my take, to be frank.


No, that's the cause and effect line for Exhumers.

Bounty on Exhumers (which tank better than a standard Vaga anyway) -> Whining -> Exhumer Buff.

Your point is taken, but the discrepancy between starting value and ending value does present a rather unique opportunity for arbitage. Evil

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#335 - 2012-10-08 12:35:51 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Now that Tech's been nerfed, who has the motive to put a bounty on Exhumers?


IIRC, GSF made out like bandits on several aspects of the Ice Interdiction. The halving of tech prices will surely only increase their incentive to shake the hi-sec money tree?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Pipa Porto
#336 - 2012-10-08 14:10:44 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Now that Tech's been nerfed, who has the motive to put a bounty on Exhumers?


IIRC, GSF made out like bandits on several aspects of the Ice Interdiction. The halving of tech prices will surely only increase their incentive to shake the hi-sec money tree?


Market manip writ large works, but given the amount of ships they had to kill to do it and the losses they would have to incur in ships, I'm not sure how profitable it would be.

But I don't have the stats on how much it would have cost them, so I dunno. Besides, those weren't bounty ops. That's why they were able to focus so intensely on the Ice belts.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

Myrkala
Royal Robot Ponies
#337 - 2012-10-08 14:38:35 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:

So what significant risk does the blind transferrable killright hunter face? The Suicide Ganker buys his element of surprise with his ship and the surprise can be foiled if the miner bothers to press a button. The killright hunter gets it for free and has it mechanically enforced.



The miner can stay relatively safe by not getting to close to the roids, being ready to align and spamming d-scan every 5 seconds with a short range scan setting (e.g. 500.000km-5million km) aligning and warping out if he sees a number of commonly used ganking ships pop up on scan. Of course to do this you have to be pretty much on the ball 100% of the time, its not like you have to bother to remember to press that button once every hour or something... a lot of work for not that much of a reward, and they might warp out just because a fleet passes by the radius of the scan.

This is kind of mitigated by the barge EHP buff I guess, meaning that suicide ganking barges has become something that is less about profitability and more about griefing in the context of ganking mining barges. I think that transferable killrights in this sense could drive more emergent gameplay out of such events, for example disgruntled ganker being RETRIBUTIONED in his own blingy ship after ganking a miner as a result of some personal fallout... Roll

I mean can't you imagine the story of a freighter pilot being ganked and getting very angry, transferring each of the killrights to some other vicious gankers and paying them extra with bounties to exact economical harm on his new enemies? Sounds like the plot of a movie. The more you increase the ability of players to drive each other mad the better the game becomes. Twisted



Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#338 - 2012-10-08 14:53:32 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Now that Tech's been nerfed, who has the motive to put a bounty on Exhumers?


IIRC, GSF made out like bandits on several aspects of the Ice Interdiction. The halving of tech prices will surely only increase their incentive to shake the hi-sec money tree?


Market manip writ large works, but given the amount of ships they had to kill to do it and the losses they would have to incur in ships, I'm not sure how profitable it would be.

But I don't have the stats on how much it would have cost them, so I dunno. Besides, those weren't bounty ops. That's why they were able to focus so intensely on the Ice belts.


They weren't bounty ops per se, but they were offering full reimburse to their own members who in addition had the opportunity to loot and salvage. So it more or less equates to the same deal.

I guess we'd need corestwo or someone to comment on whether it could be profitable at the current "low" price of Tech. Of course, his making a reply would in turn affect the potential for profit, so I'm not sure his reply could be relied upon to be objective.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Pipa Porto
#339 - 2012-10-08 14:53:45 UTC
Myrkala wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:

So what significant risk does the blind transferrable killright hunter face? The Suicide Ganker buys his element of surprise with his ship and the surprise can be foiled if the miner bothers to press a button. The killright hunter gets it for free and has it mechanically enforced.



The miner can stay relatively safe by not getting to close to the roids, being ready to align and spamming d-scan every 5 seconds with a short range scan setting (e.g. 500.000km-5million km) aligning and warping out if he sees a number of commonly used ganking ships pop up on scan. Of course to do this you have to be pretty much on the ball 100% of the time, its not like you have to bother to remember to press that button once every hour or something... a lot of work for not that much of a reward, and they might warp out just because a fleet passes by the radius of the scan.


Or grab a friend, fit 3 webs and mine aligned at ~7m/s and only have to pay attention to your overview and fleetwarp. More importantly, that semi-surprise costs the ganker their ship.

Quote:
This is kind of mitigated by the barge EHP buff I guess, meaning that suicide ganking barges has become something that is less about profitability and more about griefing in the context of ganking mining barges. I think that transferable killrights in this sense could drive more emergent gameplay out of such events, for example disgruntled ganker being RETRIBUTIONED in his own blingy ship after ganking a miner as a result of some personal fallout... Roll


If you want retribution, why can't you do it yourself? Why do you need someone else, with a game mechanically enforced element of consequence free surprise to do it?

Quote:
I mean can't you imagine the story of a freighter pilot being ganked and getting very angry, transferring each of the killrights to some other vicious gankers and paying them extra with bounties to exact economical harm on his new enemies? Sounds like the plot of a movie. The more you increase the ability of players to drive each other mad the better the game becomes. Twisted


Except that's not going to happen. Buying a killright comes with no disadvantages whatsoever, so imagining that you would have to pay someone to purchase it is ludicrous.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

Pipa Porto
#340 - 2012-10-08 14:56:12 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
They weren't bounty ops per se, but they were offering full reimburse to their own members who in addition had the opportunity to loot and salvage. So it more or less equates to the same deal.

I guess we'd need corestwo or someone to comment on whether it could be profitable at the current "low" price of Tech. Of course, his making a reply would in turn affect the potential for profit, so I'm not sure his reply could be relied upon to be objective.


The Ice interdiction wasn't predicated on Tech, it was all (ok, mostly) about the Ice. I'm fairly certain that saying whether it's still feasible or not with current ganking costs wouldn't significantly harm the chances of it being effective again (though, if they were planning to bluff...)

But, as you say, we need numbers.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto