EVE Search - Retribution's New Bounty System

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Retribution's New Bounty System

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 29 post(s)
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 43	Posted - 2012.10.08 03:12:00 - [1] - Quote I love how some of the people in here are afraid of getting caught with their pants down. When someone is ganked there are certain people who are claiming that they should have realized it was going to happen. I disagree. As someone who often uses a Freighter on his alt let me tell you that it isn't as simple as some people are trying to claim. Yea, I am careful about how much I keep in my cargo and I have never been ganked. However, when you jump into a system with 100s or even 1000s of people in it you can't go "Oh no! There are 50 people on the gate in various ships that may or may not be fitted for high alpha!" Even with a scout, which I have used on occasions when I really had a lot to move, there is no way to see a gank coming 100% for sure. There may or may not be hints but then again if your freighter is getting bumped for 10 minutes while they get the numbers they need chances are there was 0 warning. If you're a highsec ganker and you're afraid of getting ganked all I have to say to you is "suck it up buttercup." I think that changes to killrights are very interesting. Whether the person knows their killrights have changed hands or not it will add an interesting dynamic to ganking. Ganking is 0 risk as it is now in most instances. A ganker chooses where, when and how they lose their ship. They control their sec status. They control almost all of the variables in some cases. Yes, maybe the miner tanked but you know that with a scan don't you? Yes, the freighter may have too much in its hold. Then again, sometimes you need to move expensive stuff in a short amount of time. That is a risk a freighter pilot takes. The gankers who got him picked the when, where and how. That isn't risk; that is acceptable losses. Stop claiming concord is part of the risk. Concord goes into the cost-benefit thought process of whether to gank or not. Just in case you didn't read all that. To gankers I say "suck it up buttercup."
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 43	Posted - 2012.10.08 03:25:00 - [2] - Quote Quote: You mean like we've had to do for every major change to high-sec and/or mining, ever? Including the release of the Tier 3's, due to the removal of insurance? We already were sucking it up, Buttercup. No, you're whining on the forums. You don't get insurance for losing your ship to an illegal act? Makes sense to me. Miners get ships that have viable tanks vs new and upgraded ships (T3 BCs and Buffed Destroyers). That was needed. ISK isn't a tank but even a tanked hulk was paper thin before the buff. Now y'all just have to bring friends to be successful. CW2 makes it so your precious PvP is less about picking on people (stupid or not) and more about actually risking retaliation? Awesome, needed to happen. Kill Rights can be transferred from indy character to PvP character or to someone you pay to deal with it for you? That seems logical. All it is doing is giving people more tools to deal with the advantages you have over them. Yes, suck it up.
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 43	Posted - 2012.10.08 03:29:00 - [3] - Quote Quote: Let me ask you, how does it feel to be mollycoddled and henpecked at the same time? Lol, look at my corp history. I lived in 0.0 for the past few months and just left. As soon as I get my invite to the corp I am joining I'll be in a WH. Just because I think these changes are good doesn't mean I am a highsec dweller.
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 43	Posted - 2012.10.08 03:36:00 - [4] - Quote Quote: Then just imagine what it must feel like for them, then. How humiliating! You're not making any sense. I think the dreaded carebears will enjoy this new more fair highsec. The only people who don't like it are the people who are gaming the current system to their advantage. Edit because of other person's edit: I think there are less bots in highsec than some people like to go on about. There are too many but every miner who doesn't want to chat with you in local isn't a botter.
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 43	Posted - 2012.10.08 04:06:00 - [5] - Quote Quote: CCP confirmed at fanfest that the majority of bots operate in Caldari High-sec space. That's a fact. How many you think we think there might be compared to this metric is irrelevant. So tell me who's gaming the current system, please. I'd say both. Botters are bad. Easy mode ganking is bad. Both are bad. Did they differentiate between miner and trading bots? I am not trying to pick you apart. I am honestly curious. Either way I think the risk in ganking is too easily managed. The ganker sets the when and how without any retaliation that they didn't also calculate in. Concord is predictable and not a risk or variable. Their biggest risk is not bringing enough alpha which is also a manageable variable by scanning to predict the other person's tank or knowing how much HP a freighter might have.
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 43	Posted - 2012.10.08 04:25:00 - [6] - Quote Quote: They most certainly did. Miners got a buff, trading bots didn't. I hope that helps clear up some perspective on that question. Not what I was asking but sure. I'll bite. Mining bots didn't benefit from the barge changes as they relate to ganking. The bots are more perfect than humans at avoiding ganks. They have a perfect attention span and a perfect handle on local/d-scan. Also, are you arguing that the game should stagnate at the fear of making botting easier? Human players also benefited from the mining barge/exhumer changes. They were the ones that benefited the most from those changes. They are the ones that will benefit from these changes. Ganking will still be possible it will just have variables that are outside the gankers control. In the system as it exists now where is the non-controlled risk to gankers? Where is the surprise gate camp? Where is the "oops they brought our fleet comp's perfect counter," that exists in PvP? Where is the "they brought more people," that also exists in PvP? Where are the unpredictable variables in highsec suicide ganking in its current state?
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 43	Posted - 2012.10.08 04:49:00 - [7] - Quote Quote: There are no unpredictable variables. In contests between miners and gankers, the ganker loses every time now, even if the target drops. That's because there's no way with the current mechanics to kill miners efficiently when they are displaying highly bot-like ignorant behavior by sitting still while mining instead of mining aligned and warping out at the first sign of ships on grid. High-sec mining bots don't look for new arrivals in local because they are surrounded by CONCORD and operating the most overpowered mining equipment we've ever seen in Eve in the form of the new Mack. Inferring they do otherwise is disingenuous when they can ignore almost any threat with overwhelming confidence now? The highlighted part is a different argument. Who says ganking miners should be efficient? I believe it was CCP Soundwave that said ganking isn't supposed to be about profit. I don't remember where exactly. Either way the variable is how many ships does it take to kill a Mackinaw? That is predictable. I do not know the answer as it is not a part of the game I participate in. If you want to kill a Mack you can predict the exact force needed and the cost of that force with much more accuracy than any other "PvP" situation in the game. Your variable is essentially limited to "do they warp away?" If they do it is 0 cost to the ganker unless somehow they get their ship destroyed due to low sec status which is also something he/she alone controls. They can not "ignore" any threat. I assure you that if 50 thrashers hits grid and targets them it is a threat they couldn't afford to ignore whether they do or not. I also assure you that if I logged into my trade alt and looked at Jita I could give you an exact cost for those 50 thrashers. All I would need is a ganking fit.
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 43	Posted - 2012.10.08 05:00:00 - [8] - Quote Quote: Not if they pay the least bit of attention, or change the game in any way by say, tanking their Mackinaw. If they are paying attention they warp away and the ganker suffers no loss. Ship Scanner The Ship Scanner is an active, mid-slot item. Using this will allow you to check what modules a ship is carrying. Using this module you can predict their tank and therefor predict with high accuracy how much force is required. You can then calculate whether that amount of force is worth the cost of ganking the target. The variables are predictable. I am not saying that ganking is cost effective if you're trying to turn a profit but I also think that making a profit off high-sec ganking shouldn't be the point. From my perspective the cost and process of ganking lacks variables and it also lacks a way for a ganked target to retaliate once their ship is destroyed. Most miners and haulers lack combat skills. These changes means that they won't be forced to deviate from their chosen profession to seek some retribution. It gives them a viable avenue to pay the gankers back. I still don't see a problem with any of it.
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 43	Posted - 2012.10.08 05:10:00 - [9] - Quote 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. The only thing you are entitled to in this game is the Undock Button and the risk that comes with it. 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. I didn't want to come across as abrasive but that is essentially how I feel.
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 44	Posted - 2012.10.08 22:22:00 - [10] - Quote Quote: 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? I took this up in an earlier post. Most mining/industrial characters simply have no combat skills. Those skills would deviate them off their chosen path. I imagine it is part of the reason that they are so often targeted. They don't retaliate. They often can't. This gives them a fair avenue to do so. I still maintain that high-sec ganking has an extremely low amount of unknown variability on the ganker's side as it is. This gives them a ridiculous advantage over high-sec miners. "But they can tank!" - Shut up, bring more destroyers and next time scan their ship to see if it is tanked or not. "Ganking doesn't make me money!" - What other form of PvP (and I use the term lightly) is done for profit? Even in FW the PvP is just to protect non-PvP content that is then used to turn a profit as I understand it. To be clear there is PvP done to gain access to profitable things. Sov and FW mostly are the examples. Protecting a WH is another. The PvP itself is an operating cost though or sometimes a leisure activity. It never is the thing itself that makes you ISK. "Sellable killrights mean I might get ganked without warning!" - The only answer I have to this is a bout of uncontrollable laughter. Perhaps maniacal in nature. "Miners get all the love blah blah blah blah!" - Destroyer buffs meant that mining barges became to easy to gank. T3 Battle Cruisers, especially the Tornado, just made it worse. The buffs to barges were mostly needed because the tools for gankers had by far and away surpassed the old Barges/Exhumers. Even a tanked hulk was paper thin pre buff. "But its too hard to gank now as it is!" - Seriously? Give me 5 players, five Tornadoes, and a target. As long as they aren't in a bait skiff I'll get them and if they are I'll just have to make more friends. Oh I forgot, ganking in highsec is mostly the realm of the antisocial or so it seems to me.
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 45	Posted - 2012.10.09 04:22:00 - [11] - Quote Note: I had to italicize quotes because it wouldn't let me quote them all. "That's their choice. You have access to every skill that everyone else has access to. Choosing to put yourself in a position where consequence free retaliation isn't feasible is a choice. If you can't do it yourself, hire a mercenary to do it. You can do it right now via the forums. They Suicide Gank your target (or disrupt their ganks, or whatever), and you pay them." Sandbox means they shouldn't be forced into training those things. Transferable kill rights allows them to retaliate by hiring mercenaries without their mercenaries needing to worry about sec status hits. I am glad we agree on that point. It is a good change. "First, they don't need to tank in order to be unprofitable to gank now. That is the problem. Nobody was arguing that miners shouldn't be able to tank against suicide gankers. And pre-buff, the Hulk had no trouble tanking enough to be unprofitable to gank anywhere in HS." For the love of god read the rest of the thread where I posted. Ganking isn't supposed to be profitable. "Sov War, Gate Camping, Piracy in General, Missionerbaiting, Awoxing, hunting Ratters, and I'm sure I'm forgetting some other examples of PvP intended to turn a profit." Let me repost again so you might read what I said. I'll highlight the parts and then explain in small words for you... "Ganking doesn't make me money!" - What other form of PvP (and I use the term lightly) is done for profit? Even in FW the PvP is just to protect non-PvP content that is then used to turn a profit as I understand it. To be clear there is PvP done to gain access to profitable things.. Sov and FW mostly are the examples. Protecting a WH is another. The PvP itself is an operating cost though or sometimes a leisure activity. It never is the thing itself that makes you ISK. Sov War is PvP done to control space. Once that space is controlled you can then do anomalies, mine, get moon goo. The PvP is not the profit is an operating cost to gain the space to make the profit. Awoxing and Mission Baiting are forms of ganking and arguably PvP. Awoxing is different because you have to do more than fit a destroyer and warp to a belt. It takes actual effort so it should have reward. In mission baiting the person has to choose to engage and therefor they are at fault. Miners aren't given that choice. I am not a fan of Mission baiting either and I am fairly sure that that form of ganking will suffer the same consequences as miner ganking after the changes. So that is a yay. Gate camping has to occur in Low or Null where PvP is expected. Not that Pipa the gankbear would know about that. Hunting ratters, similarly, requires you to be in a part of space where PvP is a part of life more so than highsec and the person that is caught should have been prepared. Arguably if they are prepared and you don't bring 20 people you should be able to cost you a little. That is rarely the case of course. Their fault. Some PvP does turn a profit I suppose. Gate Camping and catching expensive boats in belts. Those are actual PvP examples and I will admit in some limited cases PvP may turn a profit but comparing Low Sec gate camps and Null Sec ratter catchers to ganking is like comparing a chicken egg to an ostrich egg. Technically the work on the same principles but I don't think anyone would say they are the same and one is a lot more interesting. It also has a higher risk. Imagine how much it would hurt to drop and ostrich egg on your toe! "First, the problem is the mechanically enforced, consequence free nature of that surprise." Mechanically enforced? You mean like sitting a belt minding your own business just to have a bunch of destroyers show up and blow up your ship without provocation? OH THE HORROR! "Crucible made ganking more expensive. Ganking a Hulk with a Destroyer costs significantly more than ganking one with a Thorax or Brutix did pre-Crucible. Good job already forgetting the part of Crucible all the miners were cheering about." Was that the intro of the Tier 3 Battle-Cruisers with their relatively cheap Battlship damage that could easily alpha the pre-buff hulks and still can if you bring a friend or two? That really rocked for the miners! "And tell me how you can make a profit wasting around 400m ISK on one Exhumer (well, Mackinaw, since it's a one ship class again)?" Do you even read other people's posts? Please refer higher up in this post where I explain PvP and making money. I will elaborate if you still fail to comprehend my argument. If you ask nicely I'll even work really really hard to write in smaller words. Words are hard, I know, it is ok, we'll get through this together. Edit: P.S. I always use a Skiff even in Null. I like the tanky little bug. So no, not everyone uses a Mackinaw. 2nd Edit: because I fail at formatting.
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 47	Posted - 2012.10.09 08:33:00 - [12] - Quote They're not forced to train anything. Thats why choosing to put themselves in a position where taking retribution isn't feasible is a choice. EVE is a Multiplayer Sandbox, which means you can do anything you want, and so can anyone else including screwing with your plans. Once again, I have no problem with transferrable killrights. The problem is blind transferrable killrights. Why should the mercenary get a mechanically enforced element of surprise with no consequence? No matter what you argue all I hear is "I want easy targets." You're afraid to be put in the same position you put other people in. So you're claiming that every ISK you put in a ship should increase its tank? Wait what? You're very good at reading what you want to read. I never said ISK is a tank. I will however claim that ganking had become too easy. The buffs to mining barges simply made the playing field more even but still in favor of the gankers no matter how much you whine about it being otherwise. Exactly. And without the possibility of profit, suicide ganking largely disappears. You're cherry picking. If you go back and read you will see the examples I gave of potentially profitble PvP all occur in open PvP areas and involve risks. Low and Null have risks. High sec ganking has operating costs. D-Scan lets you eliminate that surprise due to the constrained nature of ganking ships. Therefore, surprise is in no way guaranteed. Blind Transferrable killright hunters are in no way constrained, so there's no ship types to look for. Therefore, surprise is mechanically guaranteed. Name for me a current mechanic by which someone cannot find out who can legally shoot them. Current mechanics where someone can not find out who can legally shoot them in advanced I assume? There isn't currently one and frankly I don't care one way or another if the person can see who has the killright. That doesn't make your arguments for not wanting it any less flawed. Ganking a ship in a Tornado costs significantly more than ganking one with a pre-Crucible Battleship. Like I said, you're entirely (and conveniently) forgetting the Insurance nerf. Good for you. Please, keep making yourself ridiculous by trying to turn my argument against itself by ignoring one of the key points. Might I suggest that instead of ignoring where I say ganking shouldn't be profitable you argue against that point instead of continually discarding it. You're reading comprehension is seeming pretty poor since you keep overlooking that. Kind of a key point. Here, before you start saying I am being obtuse for arguing that CCP Soundwave wrote: Tyberius Franklin wrote: Zagdul wrote: Gone are the days where EVE is a dangerous place. I seem to have missed the part when they made all player ships immune to damage. That won't happen as long as I'm around, btw. Suicide ganking wasn't designed to be profitable, it's meant to be an option that let's you punish someone else at your expense. The money you paid for a ship to gank with compared to the money lost by your target was completely off and this change should bring that to a better spot. That said, the numbers can still be adjusted. Cited Dev Quote on this page: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=137125&p=3
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 48	Posted - 2012.10.09 18:13:00 - [13] - Quote Quote: So you're not very good at reading. No because your entire point hinges on you never ending up at a disadvantage against an unknown variable. That makes you a coward. Quote: Ganking an unfit Hulk was not profitable pre-buff. Ganking a Tanked Hulk was not profitable pre-buff. Only an untanked, fitted Hulk was profitable pre-buff. There were ways for Miners to ensure that they could not be ganked (they took some slight effort). Suicide Ganking an untanked, fitted Mack is not profitable now. That means that the miners, without expending any effort whatsoever, are safe. Claiming that Suicide Ganking is not meant to be profitable is claiming that ISK should provide a Tank. Simple as that. No, Pipa, they are not the same damn thing. Ganking has high operating costs because you are guaranteed to lose your ship. That is why it shouldn't be profitable. Quote: And paying those operating costs for an uncertain outcome* is a risk. Tracking and Damage randomness, Loot Drop randomness, ECM Drones, etc. No Pipa, that is RNG. Risk means someone else to shoot back at you. If you ever left high sec you'd know what I mean. By that definition WoW is a risk laden game because people don't always get the drops they want. Quote:* And Bolded is where CCP Soundwave is arguing for an ISK tank. If you read the rest of that thread, you'll notice that he's unclear on what the term "Profit" actually means as well. No Pipa, that isn't what that means at all. What it means is the pre-buff hulks were ridiculously paper thin even when tanked. They had been surpassed by the tools CCP provided to gankers.
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 48	Posted - 2012.10.09 18:49:00 - [14] - Quote Lieam Thellere wrote: At this point, I think we may as well let the thread die. It's just Pipa vs Everyone Else, going around in circles. We'll never convince Pipa that this is a good thing. While I agree with you a little part of my brain enjoys making her/him look like an idiot.
Jaison Savrin Ministry of War Amarr Empire 50	Posted - 2012.10.11 16:23:00 - [15] - Quote Asuri Kinnes wrote: Seriously, JUST because there has been another reply to a thread is NO reason to discard everything I typed. It was discarded because it was of no value.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.