These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Is the bounty system a bad idea

First post First post
Author
Lei Gao
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#121 - 2013-02-14 18:01:33 UTC
Mag's wrote:

nonsense

EVE has a pretext of law and order. There are criminals, there are suspects, there are people who skirt the law. There are people who are jerks. Being a jerk is not illegal. Placing a hit however, does not fit within the established pretext of law and order. If it's illegal to loot someone else's container, then it should be illegal to offer a payout on someone's head.
Whitehound
#122 - 2013-02-14 18:04:41 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Well I see your point. But it still boils down to their reason for placing the bounty, is not what you would reason to be a good one.

Yes, of course. I do not judge them based on what may have triggered the bounty (ship explosion, theft, etc.), but what it means for the game play of EVE. The more meaning something has got, the more fun it becomes. Just like loss is meaningful.

Or what is good about many little bounties when nobody likes to go for them? It actually becomes pointless to argue why a particular bounty is good or why it is bad, when in the end nobody cares for it.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Mag's
Azn Empire
#123 - 2013-02-14 18:05:08 UTC
Lei Gao wrote:
Mag's wrote:

nonsense

EVE has a pretext of law and order. There are criminals, there are suspects, there are people who skirt the law. There are people who are jerks. Being a jerk is not illegal. Placing a hit however, does not fit within the established pretext of law and order. If it's illegal to loot someone else's container, then it should be illegal to offer a payout on someone's head.
Nice edit.

You seem to be playing the wrong game. A game where criminals hide in all areas and are not bound by NPC standings. Or you're simply still confusing a game, with RL. Who knows?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Mag's
Azn Empire
#124 - 2013-02-14 18:08:20 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Well I see your point. But it still boils down to their reason for placing the bounty, is not what you would reason to be a good one.

Yes, of course. I do not judge them based on what may have triggered the bounty (ship explosion, theft, etc.), but what it means for the game play of EVE. The more meaning something has got, the more fun it becomes. Just like loss is meaningful.

Or what is good about many little bounties when nobody likes to go for them? It actually becomes pointless to argue why a particular bounty is good or why it is bad, when in the end nobody cares for it.
On that we'll have to agree, to disagree. Cool

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Lei Gao
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#125 - 2013-02-14 18:11:37 UTC
Mag's wrote:
You seem to be playing the wrong game. A game where criminals hide in all areas and are not bound by NPC standings. Or you're simply still confusing a game, with RL. Who knows?

What are you even talking about? People with neg sec status show up in high sec all the time. What does that have to do with the bounty system?
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#126 - 2013-02-14 18:13:29 UTC
Lei Gao wrote:
Mag's wrote:

nonsense

EVE has a pretext of law and order. There are criminals, there are suspects, there are people who skirt the law. There are people who are jerks. Being a jerk is not illegal. Placing a hit however, does not fit within the established pretext of law and order. If it's illegal to loot someone else's container, then it should be illegal to offer a payout on someone's head.


Lots of things in Eve don't follow real world logic, so that's not a particularly strong argument. And most of the activities Psychotic Monk describes WOULD be illegal in real life, but are deemed legal in-game in terms of CONCORD intervention.

Also its not like having a bounty on your head means people can safely attack you, they still need the killrights.

Honestly I think between the tradeable kill rights and the new bounties, things are looking a lot better.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#127 - 2013-02-14 18:14:09 UTC
Lei Gao wrote:
Mag's wrote:
You seem to be playing the wrong game. A game where criminals hide in all areas and are not bound by NPC standings. Or you're simply still confusing a game, with RL. Who knows?

What are you even talking about? People with neg sec status show up in high sec all the time. What does that have to do with the bounty system?
Bound as in anyone can be a criminal. Even noobs. The fact you thought I only meant neg sec players, speaks volumes.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Lei Gao
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#128 - 2013-02-14 18:19:18 UTC
Takseen wrote:

Also its not like having a bounty on your head means people can safely attack you, they still need the killrights.

Which I did state in a previous post, and makes the bounty system pretty useless.
Lei Gao
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#129 - 2013-02-14 18:22:47 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Lei Gao wrote:
Mag's wrote:
You seem to be playing the wrong game. A game where criminals hide in all areas and are not bound by NPC standings. Or you're simply still confusing a game, with RL. Who knows?

What are you even talking about? People with neg sec status show up in high sec all the time. What does that have to do with the bounty system?
Bound as in anyone can be a criminal. Even noobs. The fact you thought I only meant neg sec players, speaks volumes.

Okay then. Explain to me what you mean. Without asking me if I can read, please. And for the record, I was not assuming you meant only neg sec players, that was just an example I used.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#130 - 2013-02-14 18:39:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Lei Gao wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Bound as in anyone can be a criminal. Even noobs. The fact you thought I only meant neg sec players, speaks volumes.

Okay then. Explain to me what you mean. Without asking me if I can read, please. And for the record, I was not assuming you meant only neg sec players, that was just an example I used.
The status of criminal, has a different meaning within the bounty system. Any player can be considered a criminal by another player. Some may have a very high sec status, but their actions with a corp or individual, may have made them highly despised and thus wanted.

Then someone may consider a players actions in a chat channel criminal and place a bounty on them.
As daft as any reason may sound to you and I, it's their reason and I believe we should respect that. Many calls for change, seem to be based on this. People think the reasons are wrong and want it limited to stop what they consider are, bad bounties.

One of the early reasons for limitations, was the charge that everyone was getting a bounty. That it wouldn't be long before all of New Eden, were flying around with 100k. But this has all but vanished, mainly due to CCP's blog and it's numbers.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Psychotic Monk
Wardecs Without Borders
#131 - 2013-02-14 18:59:48 UTC
This all begs the question, though, why people seem to feel that not interefering with others gameplay in a direct way should be considered morally right, or "good", and why being "good" should be a protected game style.

It's a bit like going into a game of Team Fortress 2 and not shooting anyone and saying that you should also be immune to being shot because of it.
Psychotic Monk
Wardecs Without Borders
#132 - 2013-02-14 19:05:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Psychotic Monk
To follow that along, should no space get invaded if the owners of it acquired it through peaceful means? Should nobody's orders ever get undercut?

Should nobody ever initiate an action against another player in any way? If so, what do you propose the end state of this should be?

Or should only certain motivations allowed in order to take an action? Should wars only exist so that carebear corps can clear off the abandoned POSs of other carebear corps?

Ninja edit: Is it possible for me to use more question marks?
Whitehound
#133 - 2013-02-14 19:10:16 UTC
And shall I eat pizza tonight?

(I thought I add another important question here.)

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Mag's
Azn Empire
#134 - 2013-02-14 19:11:22 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
And shall I eat pizza tonight?

(I thought I add another important question here.)
I've just had Thai. Cool

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Lei Gao
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#135 - 2013-02-14 19:20:56 UTC
Mag's wrote:
The status of criminal, has a different meaning within the bounty system. Any player can be considered a criminal by another player. Some may have a very high sec status, but their actions with a corp or individual, may have made them highly despised and thus wanted.

Placing a bounty doesn't make a player a criminal, nor is a player considered a criminal simply because he or she has a bounty. Nothing in the dev blogs, the Retribution notes on bounties, or in evelopedia state that. The Retribution notes say that it's another means for pilots to seek redress. That's all. Nothing about criminals. There are some pretty clear rules on what makes a criminal a criminal, and another player can't just decide that.

Quote:
Then someone may consider a players actions in a chat channel criminal and place a bounty on them. As daft as any reason may sound to you and I, it's their reason and I believe we should respect that. Many calls for change, seem to be based on this. People think the reasons are wrong and want it limited to stop what they consider are, bad bounties.

Well, it is daft. I don't have a problem with players putting innumerable hits on other players, but how about we call it what it is and stop pretending that Player B is a criminal because Player A decided that he was. Player B is not a criminal if he hasn't met the guidelines already set out, and that's what I mean by people who skirt the law. It's annoying and Player B may be a jerk, but he's not a criminal.

Quote:
One of the early reasons for limitations, was the charge that everyone was getting a bounty. That it wouldn't be long before all of New Eden, were flying around with 100k. But this has all but vanished, mainly due to CCP's blog and it's numbers.

I was pretty surprised that more people don't have bounties because someone was handing them out to nearly everyone in Rookie Chat my first day. That's pretty obnoxious, and not to mention frustrating for noobs who don't really know what it means or how it works.

But, CCP doesn't care what my opinion is anyway because they've made it clear that they're more than happy with how it works.
Lei Gao
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#136 - 2013-02-14 19:29:08 UTC
Psychotic Monk wrote:
This all begs the question, though, why people seem to feel that not interefering with others gameplay in a direct way should be considered morally right, or "good", and why being "good" should be a protected game style.

Nobody's protected in EVE. If you're a law-abiding citizen and get ganked in high sec, CONCORD doesn't protect you, they punish the guy who ganked you.

Placing a bounty is not a direct interference in someone's gameplay. You're asking a third party to take care of this nuisance for you instead of sacking up and doing it yourself.
Psychotic Monk
Wardecs Without Borders
#137 - 2013-02-14 19:33:27 UTC
Paying someone to do something is doing something.

But yes, exactly. EvE does not (or at least claims not to) value one morality over another, and I don't see why they should start with who you're allowed to place bounties on or for what reason.
Santo Trafficante
Kira Inc.
#138 - 2013-02-14 20:33:03 UTC
The bounty system currently kicks ass + the kill rights u can make sum serious cash if u do it the right way
Angelique Duchemin
Team Evil
#139 - 2013-02-14 21:14:30 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Angelique Duchemin wrote:
Placing a bounty on someone who deserves it is meaningless because you're just feeding their ego and placing a bounty can be done so lightly that it's become greatly abused.
Greatly abused? In what way?



People spam bounties on hundreds of people just for laughs. This is especially common in NPC corps.

The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity.

Mag's
Azn Empire
#140 - 2013-02-14 21:42:48 UTC
Lei Gao wrote:
Placing a bounty doesn't make a player a criminal, nor is a player considered a criminal simply because he or she has a bounty. Nothing in the dev blogs, the Retribution notes on bounties, or in evelopedia state that. The Retribution notes say that it's another means for pilots to seek redress. That's all. Nothing about criminals. There are some pretty clear rules on what makes a criminal a criminal, and another player can't just decide that.
Why do I need to rely upon CCP or Evelopedia, to tell me when I or anyone else for that matter, consider someone a criminal? The fact is I don't. If I decide they are in my eyes and I want them wanted, I shall place a bounty accordingly. Or simply shoot them myself. It's not your place to tell me otherwise and this is why you are misunderstanding the bounty system. You are quite obviously still of the mind, that only those with negative sec status can be criminals. How wrong you are.

The bounty system is a player led standings mechanic. When a player places a bounty, they consider that person to be of a lower standing and therefore wanted. It's their personal standing towards that player.

You see Concord, cannot get involved in all criminal activity. They are only there to punish. This is where players need to get involved and dispense justice. Either by facilitating others through the bounty system, or shooting them themselves.

This is another reason why I think the bounty system is great. It opens up the possibility of player retribution. Which is why it's no coincidence, that name was chosen.

Lei Gao wrote:
Well, it is daft. I don't have a problem with players putting innumerable hits on other players, but how about we call it what it is and stop pretending that Player B is a criminal because Player A decided that he was. Player B is not a criminal if he hasn't met the guidelines already set out, and that's what I mean by people who skirt the law. It's annoying and Player B may be a jerk, but he's not a criminal.
Daft to you maybe, but not to someone else. That's the whole point and one that seems to elude you.

Lei Gao wrote:
I was pretty surprised that more people don't have bounties because someone was handing them out to nearly everyone in Rookie Chat my first day. That's pretty obnoxious, and not to mention frustrating for noobs who don't really know what it means or how it works.

But, CCP doesn't care what my opinion is anyway because they've made it clear that they're more than happy with how it works.
Many of us expected there to be a mad rush of bounties early on, but other took this as the norm. It calmed down rather quickly, so it's quite obvious it wasn't.
I can see you think many bounties are obnoxious, others don't. I have a feeling you'll never see the other peoples views in this regard.

CCP does care, but not for those who think sandbox means the game should only be played their way. Blink

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.