These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Proposal] Bounty system reform

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Alizandro Goderaski
Evolution
Northern Coalition.
#61 - 2011-11-06 07:22:29 UTC
What I would like in this bounty reform proposal:


Insurance gets taken out of the game. No insurance for anyone, there's enough isk fountains in game and manufacturers would enjoy the buff to the value of the items they produce and to their value as players in game to other pvpers. (I'd be making deals with industrial buddies all the time to stretch my isk out to the fullest)

You can put a bounty on anyone you want. (you still can't shoot at people with bounties in high sec unless they're at war with you or you're willing to risk a suicide gank)

Suicide gankers get a bounty pay out just like any other pilots in game.

Bounty hunters get a high percentage of a ship hull's worth (whatever feels right), items don't count and you have to beg the loot gods to drop the good stuff in your wrecks like every other pod pilot does. I say don't count items in your mark's ships because:

1. Faction/COSMOS/Officer items are contract only and tend to violently shift up and down in price all the time (especially officer items)

2. If for some reason you get that sweet sweet Estamel invuln on that BURN EDEN Nightmare you and your buddies have been tracking around New Eden for the past couple of weeks, you wouldn't like it if you were payed doubly for the item in bounties, now would you? (yes you would, but deal wid it)


But yeah, these proposals sound like a wet dream with :insert favorite porn star: made into reality, so the possibility of these suggestions ever even being considered is null, unless Trebor sees something in these ideas that makes him TwistedTwisted as much as me.


Oh man I'm fapping so hard at the idea of a much darker, scarrier eve. Bounties for everyone!



Also, page 4 snypa
Solo Player
#62 - 2011-11-07 21:41:41 UTC
I gather concordokened insurance payouts are rumored to be gone from Sisi. While I'm aware there may be ways around this (get killed before CONCORD arrives, for one), how - if at all - would this affect the proposed bounty system?

(Also *bump* - shouldn't let this one rot on page two anytime soon!)
Ogopogo Mu
O C C U P Y
#63 - 2011-11-07 21:46:02 UTC
Solo Player wrote:
I gather concordokened insurance payouts are rumored to be gone from Sisi. While I'm aware there may be ways around this (get killed before CONCORD arrives, for one), how - if at all - would this affect the proposed bounty system?

(Also *bump* - shouldn't let this one rot on page two anytime soon!)


Shouldn't affect the proposal at all. The ship/modules destroyed payout stands at 25% because of alt-killing insurance, which isn't affected by the SiSi change. That's the only impact insurance has on it.
Juwi Kotch
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2011-11-20 13:19:42 UTC
This needs to be back to page 1!

"Our lives are not our own. We are bound to others, past and present. And by each crime, and every kindness, we birth our future." Sonmi-451
Evei Shard
Shard Industries
#65 - 2011-11-21 20:21:20 UTC
+1 on the idea presented by the OP and Vile Rat.

Reworking the bounty system in this manner would encourage "roams" looking for wanted individuals.

I agree that complicating this idea with proposed changes to kill-rights might have a negative effect on the potential of the idea, however if the proposed idea is implemented properly, it could provide a great alternative to making changes to kill-rights.

I support changes to either the bounty system or kill-rights for a number of reasons, and one of them is to allow new people more of a chance at getting back at their assailants when they lack the skill/experience to do so.

Profit favors the prepared
SMT008
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#66 - 2011-11-24 23:26:01 UTC
Bumping, because this idea is great, quite easy to implement, and it would GREATLY enhance the game in lowsec (But not only in lowsec though) :)
SMT008
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#67 - 2011-11-26 10:44:24 UTC
Come on, I don't quite understand what's wrong with you guys. Awesome idea, supported by 2 CSMs, we need a dev answer and here we go, content for the next expansion Cool
Solo Player
#68 - 2011-11-26 20:37:08 UTC
Indeed. We want to know which session exactly CSM members are planning to bring this up in. Broken systems?
Ogopogo Mu
O C C U P Y
#69 - 2011-11-27 12:00:35 UTC
I've chatted with 2 (that I know of) previously, but not for a while now. I have a feeling the proposal is currently in NDA-land or "wait for an opportune time"-land. I don't know much about how CSM operates, but I hope it's not based on "attach a bunch of riders to this bill"-land so common in US politics.
Juwi Kotch
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#70 - 2011-11-28 12:40:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Juwi Kotch
This proposal is on CSM's list for years already. Well, not this particular variant, but ideas to make the bounty system viable. It even has already been voted on some years ago. All in all, it seems to be regarded as not that important, not that beneficial, not that high a priority as to put some real effort in it or to invest development time and ressources. This will only change if we can mobilize significantly more people advocating for it.

"Our lives are not our own. We are bound to others, past and present. And by each crime, and every kindness, we birth our future." Sonmi-451
Juwi Kotch
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2011-11-29 21:31:58 UTC
One problem which could arise with the proposed system is the possibility to use this modified bounty system for griefing purposes: You want to create tears? Just slap a bounty on that unsuspecting miner ...

Any idea how to avoid that?

"Our lives are not our own. We are bound to others, past and present. And by each crime, and every kindness, we birth our future." Sonmi-451
Ogopogo Mu
O C C U P Y
#72 - 2011-11-29 22:00:02 UTC
Juwi Kotch wrote:
One problem which could arise with the proposed system is the possibility to use this modified bounty system for griefing purposes: You want to create tears? Just slap a bounty on that unsuspecting miner ...

Any idea how to avoid that?


Addressed earlier in the thread. That unsuspecting miner would have to be at -1.0 security for this to happen.
Ogopogo Mu
O C C U P Y
#73 - 2011-11-29 22:02:05 UTC
Juwi Kotch wrote:
This proposal is on CSM's list for years already. Well, not this particular variant, but ideas to make the bounty system viable. It even has already been voted on some years ago. All in all, it seems to be regarded as not that important, not that beneficial, not that high a priority as to put some real effort in it or to invest development time and ressources. This will only change if we can mobilize significantly more people advocating for it.


I tried to keep the idea as simple as possible so not many resources would be needed. Hell, all it really is is math, and not a lot of it. One set of references to a master table that's updated infrequently (and probably offline).
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#74 - 2011-11-30 22:03:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Kolonko
I will add my voice to this. I haven't read all responses, so I'm not sure if it was proposed, but:


Player/s get 25% of destroyed ship value (+ destroyed loot?) just as proposed in OP (up to the level of bounty)

But at the same time victim gets its insurance reduced by the same exact value

to prevent situation where a T2 ship destroyed gives victim 0 insurance (insurance being much smaller than ship real value) the minimal insurance (as if there was no insurance at all) is always paid out. This minimum could possibly be higher (lets say to the point of cheapest insurance version)

This should prevent any form of gamin system (apart from some really extreme mineral/insurance value fraud)

What do you guys think of this?

Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Adoniah Carrefour
the Whatley Brothers
#75 - 2011-12-05 20:08:00 UTC
I am fairly new to Eve .. if it makes a difference to the Devs or whatever, this topic is the first I have read on the forums that has inspired me to actually participate. I play this game with a small group of friends and that's how it will stay regardless of how impractical it may be in the game world . Most of the game mechanics that punish the little guy make sense within the greater scope of Eve and so, although they might make my life difficult they also make sense and create the challenges inherent to Eve that make it fun to play.

All that being said, FIX THE FVCKING BOUNTIES!!

The fact that this idea in particular creates a profitable pursuit for small corps and gangs, which the most ambitious and dedicated of your new players are going to be in, should make it an easy sell. On the flip every pirate dreams of being chased across the galaxy by bounty hunters. That's like a 'thing', which was obviously intended for Eve but ended up being every grifter's wet dream. The system as it stands makes literally no sense. I can't think of any other game mechanic that makes entirely no sense to me, except this one. The one that I would most like to make some sort of workable sense doesn't. It makes more sense for me to just go gank. Not the sort of elegance I have come to like so much from this game.

No new skills are needed and screw the insurance problems (although of course they would pay the bounties and of course being a wanted criminal should affect your ability to get insurance, the fact that it doesn't is also completely illogical but I digress) this idea is ace. What's the effing point of tier 3 hunter-killers like what we got with the expansion if there is no game mechanic that allows players to profit from going hunting? What's the point of having criminals if you can't get paid to chase them? Where's the bling? I have to be a slimy scam artist to be Legend in Eve? No epic criminals who escape capture for months, years? No good men with bad connections that can get the job done? Fail, man.

I get miners or griefing miners. Or I go fight for the man in nullsec in some anonymous fleet. Wow, epic. Or, this basic spreadsheet payout scheme that makes the Bounty Office button in my station services into something that does something other than mock the reasons I started playing this game. How about that for a reason to fix the effin' bounties?
Jesse Jacobs
Vicis Dominatio
#76 - 2011-12-14 08:37:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Jesse Jacobs
I would just like to say that I fully endorse many of the ideas in this thread as well as this one: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=32462 . You might as well connect the two Smile

I've played EVE off and on for years. In fact I was in beta way back before the first launch, not that I stood by it since then.... whenever there's been a huge positive change to the game I flock back and have a bit of fun. Of all the features that interest me the most, the bounty system is one that would greatly help the game feel more alive and with more variety. Why is this? Because it's been there, but it's been broken and bare; there need's to be incentive to use it, and people with a bounty on their head need to either be fearful of the death they face soon or they need to be giddy with excitement over the prospect of being prey from an unknown predator.

To be able to hunt a player would be a very fun task, and having a fun and intricate system to do it with would help the game do it justice and not waste office space in a space station.

It would also make some players more weary to attack in high-sec, which may be more peace of mind for some people who don't feel like being ganked at that very moment. Because to be honest, as much as EVE is a PvP heavy game, it should also cater to a wider audience and have areas of space in it's vast universe that let you kick back, at least a bit. If the bounty system was more harmful to a player's standing in high-sec, they might think twice before wreaking havoc on unsuspecting players (or suspecting players). I'm not saying turn 1.0 or 0.9 security into a carebear friendly area- players can still gank or what not as they always have and will be able to do, but as exciting and fun as it is to have a bounty on your head, in reality that's a serious accusation for someone and in a game like this, it could be a dangerous thing to have on you.

For any player who loves danger and the threat of death, having abounty on their head is great. But let a bounty hunter teach them a lesson or two (or the other way around).

On the flipside, if a bounty hunter collects a lot of bounties, the bounty hunter might start having player placed prices on his/her head. An interesting turn around, but one that I could see happening if you pissed off enough dangerous criminals with high bounties.

Pride can be a very dangerous thing, but once it's shattered, such as a never dieing high-bounty player getting hunted and blown up, who know's what it may turn into..revenge perhaps, or shock, or perhaps a commendation to the hunter. In any case, bounty hunter's rule.

Oh, and Boba Fett was always one of my favorite characters in Star Wars. Just thought I'd throw that out there Cool ... Oh, go figure, he's an infamous bounty hunter...hint hint.

Fear the fearless.

-Jesse
Lillyanne Waters
Vicis Dominatio
#77 - 2011-12-14 08:42:36 UTC
I would have to agree, having something much larger and grander would be great. I wouldn't mind going on hunts. However, with how it stands there isn't much epic feeling to it. By adding a bit more and taking some care to this part of the game would add more action for players to jump on. I think Jesse hit it on the head when it comes to the bounty hunting in this game.
Adoniah Carrefour
the Whatley Brothers
#78 - 2011-12-16 00:03:06 UTC
Jesse Jacobs wrote:


Oh, and Boba Fett was always one of my favorite characters in Star Wars. Just thought I'd throw that out there Cool ... Oh, go figure, he's an infamous bounty hunter...hint hint.

Fear the fearless.

-Jesse


Right!!?? It's a 'thing'.
Utsen Dari
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#79 - 2011-12-17 08:22:29 UTC
Excellent ideas in this thread. Tying payouts to a non-100% value of ship/pod losses seems like the right way to plug that pod-yourself-and-profit loophole.

As long as the bounty payout is less than (total value of the ship & mods - the insurance payout + the cost of insurance), I don't see how insurance will be too much of an issue.

However, I can see a non-dirt-poor hunted pilot trying to grief those who placed the bounty on him by destroying his own plat-insured ships for a small loss each and eating up the bounty escrow quickly. Hunted pilot loses a bunch of isk but the party who placed the bounty loses a lot more since the hunted pilot's losses are mitigated by insurance. Such a tactic being available would reduce the potential for gudfights arising from the bounty's placement.

Perhaps the insurance payouts to the hunted pilot for dead ships should also be paid into his bounty escrow with matching amounts to eliminate this tactic. i.e. if the hunted party plat-insures all their ships, they still get the insurance but the bounty sticks around longer, and trying to bleed down the escrow by self-killing would require more isk sacrifice by the hunted pilot.

Of course this injects double the isk into the economy from insurance payouts on the hunted pilot, so perhaps it's undesirable; I'm no market guru.
Simeon Whiteheaven
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#80 - 2011-12-18 10:29:58 UTC
+1

It looks like something It can functioning well, I think I may support this.