| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
KageAkurei
Gemini Dawn
   |
Posted - 2011.02.07 07:47:00 -
[31]
Sorry but I think it's silly to get bounties off the ship when the isk is placed on the person's head, plus with loot drops and insurance it seems a bit much.
My idea would be to make it so that bounties on people will only pay out based on the person's clone worth.
So say someone puts a bounty on me for 20mill, if they pod me they will only get 13mill since the clone I use costs that much. Then after that the left over isk that was placed on me will be my bounty and will show up for 7mill unless someone else adds more to it.
With this it makes it so that the older the player the bigger the pay out on bounties.
Also destroying their ship for loot is an added bonus, plus they lose implants if fitted which costs them.
_____
|
Kepakh
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 08:26:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: Drebble
I dont understand you.
If insurance is subtracted from the bounty and 100M worth T1 ship gets blown up, the bounty will be 60M only. And that is with default insurance.
Subtracting insurance payout from the bounty is a must otherwise you end up with people taking bounties off of their heads with no ISK loss as I pointed out above.
However, problem is that this 'tweak' makes bounty collection non-profitable not only for the hunted but for hunter as well. That beats any meaningful purpose of bounty hunting as I pointed out above.
In a meaningful bounty hunting system, the value of bounty creates incentives and profit for the bounty hunters as well as increased danger for the hunted. Higher the bounty, more people I have on my back.
Your proposal though, denies the basic principles of bounty hunting, and converts the system into NPC bounties we can see on rats = bigger/harder the rat, more ISK I will collect.
There is no relation between the bounty and attractiveness of the target in your proposal as you move the bounty payout from the bounty to ship flown.
|
Drebble
Gallente
North Star Networks
The Kadeshi
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 08:44:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Donnovich Vacano
Several problems with your plan:
1: The pirate could eject from their ship so the full bounty from being claimed
2: If insurance is factored into to payout then people could abuse this by flying a ship which has insurance that is higher than the bounty.
3: The pirate would still be able to make money by making the ship themselves for much less then the bounty.
Solution for all of these problems: Make bounties pay out in loyalty points. They are non transferable. The only way to get enough to be of any value would be to be an active anti pirate. Plus this would be the perfect way to introduce concord lp.
1: I feel that this is a minor problem, as he will be giving the entre ship to the bounty hunters, and risk being podded. Under my system the intact ship is always worth more than the bounty pyout for destroying it, so its kind of a strange move. Self destruct would be more of a problem, but that issue deserves its own thread.
2: You misunderstand. The insurance is not compared to the bounty. The insurance is just part of the calculation to find the true amount of lost ISK. If you lose 150 millions worth of ship, modules and cargo, and the insurance payout is 50 million, you only really lost 100 million. The maximum bounty payout for that kill becomes 75% of 100 million = 75 million.
3: If the ship could be built and fitted for less than 75% of the calculated mineral value, then the pirate could theoretically gain money by destroying it. BUT, he would gain MUCH MORE money by just selling those ships.
The LP part is interesting. I need to think about it for a while before I comment.
//Drebble
|
Drebble
Gallente
North Star Networks
The Kadeshi
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 08:47:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Mushin Zen
So a bounty cannot be claimed by anyone who is in the same corp or alliance as you. This will reduce (but not eliminate) that friends pod each other to get the bounty.
Why could not a corp mate betray you and collect the bounty? Its one the of the good parts of having a price on your head - who can you trust?
And as long as the payout is always less than the loss, as I propose, then there is no way to profit from it.
//Drebble
|
Drebble
Gallente
North Star Networks
The Kadeshi
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 08:51:00 -
[35]
Originally by: KageAkurei
Sorry but I think it's silly to get bounties off the ship when the isk is placed on the person's head, plus with loot drops and insurance it seems a bit much.
1: Capusleers are immortal, they just clone and keep going. In that light, any bounty is kind of silly.
2: My system pays out for ships AND implands AND clone cost.
What you pay for when you place a bounty on someone in my system is a carrot to hurt that person. Which is as good as it gets when immortals are involved.
//Drebble
|
Drebble
Gallente
North Star Networks
The Kadeshi
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 09:07:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Kepakh
If insurance is subtracted from the bounty and 100M worth T1 ship gets blown up, the bounty will be 60M only. And that is with default insurance.
Yes, if the pirate flies unfitted, insured, T1 ships the rest of his life there will be little ISK to get. But putting a bounty on someone and seeing them self-grief their game to incredibly booringness is money well spent in my book. Needless to say I dont think it is very likely to happen.
Originally by: Kepakh
However, problem is that this 'tweak' makes bounty collection non-profitable not only for the hunted but for hunter as well. That beats any meaningful purpose of bounty hunting as I pointed out above.
Its like ganking a faction fitted missionrunner in high sec. It takes skill, planning and opportunity.
Originally by: Kepakh
In a meaningful bounty hunting system, the value of bounty creates incentives and profit for the bounty hunters as well as increased danger for the hunted. Higher the bounty, more people I have on my back.
Your proposal though, denies the basic principles of bounty hunting, and converts the system into NPC bounties we can see on rats = bigger/harder the rat, more ISK I will collect.
There is no relation between the bounty and attractiveness of the target in your proposal as you move the bounty payout from the bounty to ship flown.
Any other system than loss based bounty payouts can and will be abused. I cannot stress this enough. Any other system WILL be abused. Its too easy to have an alt do the collection.
In a world where the criminal is immortal, the best you can do is create a carrot to hurt him.
When a criminal is in a faction fitted T3 cruiser with a 500 million bounty on his head, he will be a very attractive target. Anything destroyed goes to bounty payout, and the rest you get as loot.
If he only flies T1 cruisers with civilian modules, chances are he never will have a price on his head.
//Drebble
|
Kepakh
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 09:16:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Drebble
Its like ganking a faction fitted missionrunner in high sec. It takes skill, planning and opportunity.
/thread
|
Drebble
Gallente
North Star Networks
The Kadeshi
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 09:23:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Kepakh
/thread
Thank you Sir for your in-depth, reasonable and well-constructed feedback.
//Drebble
|
Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 09:29:00 -
[39]
I think what he/she is saying is, with your idea, it'll be more profitable to gang mission runners than to hunt bounties.
Not bothered either way tbh, just like the wanted sign.
Originally by: Allestin Villimar
Also, if your bookmarks are too far out, they can and will ban you for it.
Originally by: Torothanax
Low population in w systems makes afk cloaking unattractive. |
Drebble
Gallente
North Star Networks
The Kadeshi
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 09:38:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Mag's
I think what he/she is saying is, with your idea, it'll be more profitable to gang mission runners than to hunt bounties.
Not bothered either way tbh, just like the wanted sign.
Well, I think there are a lot more missionrunners with high-value ships than there are wanted criminals with hundreds of millions on their heads. So yes, as a primary source of income, ganking missionrunners is a better career choice than bounty hunting. I am not terribly upset about this.
The primary goal of this system is to allow meaningful bounties at all. Bounty hunting as a mini-profession would come at a later stage, with bounty hunter licenses, concord LP and so on and so forth. But it all stand or falls with the non-exploitability of the payout system.
//Drebble
|
|
|
Cruthensis
Gallente
Xeno Tech Corp
Black Cartel.
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 15:14:00 -
[41]
A great core idea Drebble. The only downside with having a bounty system (we effectively don't right now) is that it will be abused by some rich players to annoy/harass poorer players. Any thoughts?
|
betoli
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 16:15:00 -
[42]
Like.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 17:38:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Cruthensis
A great core idea Drebble. The only downside with having a bounty system (we effectively don't right now) is that it will be abused by some rich players to annoy/harass poorer players. Any thoughts?
Easy enough to attach the ability to issue a bounty to the existence of a killright or low sec. status on the individual, that way only aggressors will be able to have bounties.
Ideally I would want a bounty rehash to combine killrights and bounties into a single marketable commodity .. but probably too much work to ever be realised 
|
Ephemeron
BeerTia Maniacs
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 18:39:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Cruthensis
A great core idea Drebble. The only downside with having a bounty system (we effectively don't right now) is that it will be abused by some rich players to annoy/harass poorer players. Any thoughts?
Bounty cannot be placed on people with positive sec status. Noobs and carebears all have positive sec
|
Donnovich Vacano
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 23:48:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Drebble
Originally by: Mag's
I think what he/she is saying is, with your idea, it'll be more profitable to gang mission runners than to hunt bounties.
Not bothered either way tbh, just like the wanted sign.
Well, I think there are a lot more missionrunners with high-value ships than there are wanted criminals with hundreds of millions on their heads. So yes, as a primary source of income, ganking missionrunners is a better career choice than bounty hunting. I am not terribly upset about this.
The primary goal of this system is to allow meaningful bounties at all. Bounty hunting as a mini-profession would come at a later stage, with bounty hunter licenses, concord LP and so on and so forth. But it all stand or falls with the non-exploitability of the payout system.
//Drebble
that's why i suggested bounties being paid in lp. A bounty is only placed on someone when they blow up a player with no bounty, and you can only claim a bounty if there is none on you. The only way to get rid of a bounty is by someone claiming it (ie blowing you up) LP are not transferable, so you can't have a friend kill you to claim them for you. They would get them but you don't get anything. The only way to profit from the system is by not being a pirate. You could have an alt claim them, but then there would be no way for your real character to profit from it. any reward that is in a form that can be transfered can and will be exploited. Any method that would prevent this would also prevent legitimate uses of the system. Only non transferable rewards will work.
|
NinjaSpud
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 00:23:00 -
[46]
Wow
Despite all the Nay-sayers here I think you're really on to something.
I have a very slight fix to suggest. Tell me what you think!
(first, my little supporting rant)
Putting the bounty on the hull instead of the head is a great idea...most people didn't get a bounty from killing, but from stealing...I'm proud to admit a small bounty I have on my head (1/2 mill) that I got from ninja salvaging. I "legaly griefed them" and so they are hopeing to "legally grief me back" by putting a bounty on me. People will actually take bounties seriously now.
+1 to that overall idea.
Now, that leaves 'preventing the exploit'. Most people are worried about ship insurance exploits. The fix there? No insurance for people w/ bounties.
Think about it in real life. I got a speeding ticket last month, fallowed closely by a 'failure to yield' at a stop sign ticket. ya know what happened? My insurance agency booted me. they dropped me because i was 'too high of a risk'.
It happens every day! might as well have it happen in Eve too.
Greate idea man. 100% supported
|
Epiphany Genesis
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 02:47:00 -
[47]
Make Bounties non-collectable penalties that effect NPC standings or station standings.
Making it a form of faction, using ISK.
For example: You gank my ship, I pay 10,000,000 isk to a bounty.
You now have a 10,000,000 bounty debt that has to be worked off through something like missioning, or ratting, and not directly payable by wallet transactions.
Pehaps have some stations only open to those with large bounties, for ammo, repairs etc, and block access to others with bounties.
This also acts as a great ISK sink. The money spent on bounties is removed from game, the target doesnt reap benefit from it, and actually has to work it off and THAT ISK is also removed from game as a non spendable income (slider bar to delegate how much of acrued income is to be paid to the debt if at all).
|
Mitherien
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 03:35:00 -
[48]
I think you should add in a bounty license that all bounty hunters must purchase and renew each month that allows them to actually collect the bountyÆs as well as mark them as bounty hunters to those around them and gives them the right to hunt in high and low sec with a tax on the ISK earned from bounties in high and low sec with high having a higher tax rate than low.
I also think that those that have bounties placed on them need to be able to have these bounties removed. Say you ****ed the wrong individual off and they place a 3,000,000 bounty on your head and you want it gone. So you pay 1,500,000 to the bounty office and you are left with half the bounty on your head until someone either collects or you finish paying it off.
Further more I think that each bounty placed should be taxed a percentage of the amount being placed to cover the costs of making sure that things are legit as well as the costs of setting up the bounty just like there is a cost for creating a contract.
Those with bountyÆs on their heads and those that are bounty hunters are at war.
|
Imigo Montoya
Hysterically Unforgiving
Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2011.02.15 10:49:00 -
[49]
I like it.
I came up with the seemingly very obvious idea that the payout should be tied to insurance payout amount which is already being calculated from market value.
Check out my very similar proposal here.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |