EVE General Discussion

The gripe with kill rights being an FFA trigger is essentially the point of this thread.

Then yes, that I can agree that is a bad system.

This is what I meant by "Tradable killrights" but would more appropriately have been stated as the reworking of killrights in general. And in that case as stated above, I agree.

Which is what many bounty hunters were asking for. The ability to actually be a bounty hunter, and earn a reputation as such. The victim's ability to choose who could execute justice for him, rather than the criminal's alts. For me as a pirate to be hunted by a professional killer rather than gangbanged by an angry, yet most likely incompetent lynch mob.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=162204&p=50

A quick update for you guys on the latest few pages of the dev blog thread:

1. CCP called our 6-year-old proposals for kill rights to be sellable to individuals or corporations "lame, on-the-fly ideas."
2. CCP wants pvp (bounty hunting) to be a PUG (pick-up-group) activity.
3. CCP acknowledges the system to be of "limited value" and able to easily be bypassed.
4. CCP makes a whole bunch of excuses about our proposals being too difficult to write code for.
5. CCP says that corporations aren't a good mechanic to support cooperative gameplay.
6. CCP says our solution is great but "aw shucks guys, too many technical hurdles so you're getting this."
7. CCP claims that one person can defend himself as a suspect against an unlimited number of players as long as he's flying in "something powerful."
8. CCP puts a big "IF" on future iteration of kill right content.

And much, much more!

I swear I'm not making this stuff up; go see for yourself, starting on page 50.

Yup. It's really too good (bad?) to be true. You guys should go read those posts before they go into damage control mode.

Truth o'clock for me.

I was about to jump on this with a usual htfu rant 'cos I'm in a bad mood. Then I went and almost read the entire 50 pages of the thread linked above. Now I'm not angry anymore, I'm brain-dead.

But I've seen the light.

I see the point about the killright claim being publically available and being shared (which is good for the victim selling the killright because he don't care who kills him - I've said same).

But it's bad for the person claiming the killright so why would he bother (unless a big bounty is also attached).

ofc, the argument presented was to make sure you activate the killright somewhere "safe from interference" which I know is going to be bloody near impossible. Time to lock and fire is in the order of seconds - not minutes.

So public broadcast at hubs etc. of "KILL HIM" (which is inevitable) is bad for the person claiming the killright.

I am and remain convinced that the argument against being able to buy and keep the killright "within" was bad because the ganker could just buy his own killright back with an alt.

This was bad for the originator of the killright.

So obviously the simple solution is to make the rights a market commodity - on a proper contract preferably - as long as the originator can buy the damn thing back - 1 for 1 - if the contract is not completed.

(In fact, he shouldn't even have to buy it back. If the contract is not completed within n days, he get's his money back auto.)

..oo0oo..

So Destiny, in retrospect and with further reading I concur on your key points.

Public killrights is bad and should not be introduced until a contract system is worked up. In the interim, the originator of the killright could place a chunky bounty to get his revenge if he should chose. All he wants is revenge and cares not for the mechanics to do so.

PS: I see that the right to keep the killright in-house is WiP but that just screams, "we couldn't do it in this iteration, sorry. have this instead".

I still have a problem with this thread. This problem being about choice/consequence.

No one tell you to trigger the killright when everyone and his cat can shoot at it

No one ever tells you where, when and with what. You have to make a choice and then assume the benefits or the consequences for that choice.
This is why this system is good. There should not be or ever exist a trigger button in Eve making you above all mechanics and eventual "exploits", invulnerable to Concord+everything around.

The killrights mechanic is good, it's rather how smart players are to use it and not the other way around.

Once again, high sec is not getting safer but harsher, it's only players who are unable to realise it because lack of creativity.

Lin, the intent behind transferable killrights is sound. I'm a big believer in consequence and have said this so many times I've gone blue. It gives the victim a chance at "retribution" as it were and for mine, is long overdue.

That's my stance on the theory behind it. Always been clear on that - it's a disagreeable point for some. I accept that.

BUT....

The practise of the public killright is bad because the value of the kill is depreciated - i.e. The incentive to buy and act on a killright is removed. This is actually bad for the intent.

We want the hunters to be motivated enough to undertake the task. If they can buy the rights exclusively they'll be more likely to deliver on the contract, otherwise, why bother.

Yes, for the originator of the killright, he cares not, so for him he's in effect excluded from the argument. He just wants the job done and BOTH methods will work.

So make the system work where the originator get's the kill regardless and the bounty hunter has a reason to do it.

As an aside, sorta wondering whether a choice of public or private contract is worth considering too. If I sold a killright, I might want private just so the bounty hunter can say on my behalf "so-and-so said hi".

Maybe I just want him dead so make it a public kill.

Just a thought.

The "future iterations" stuff is speculative. If I'm going to bet money, then I'll bet that CCP won't iterate on this content for years, if at all, just like they didn't for FW. That line seems to me to be an effort to placate the angry, dissatisfied players into letting them push through the terrible crap they've already coded.

All of us here, even the people arguing against my points for example, are smarter than that. We're fully aware that what CCP says, and what CCP does, are completely unrelated to each other.