If insurance would be changed I think CCP should take the route that the cost to insure your ship will increase based on your insured losses, much like they would IRL. Meaning if you keep losing ships that are platinum insured, the cost to insure platinum will increase with every ship you lose in this way. They could make the cost to insure platinum go down as well with every downtime or w/e by a certain amount that is considered fair and balanced.

Eliminate bounties, unless it's the game NPCs (not CONCORD) who come after the player. Otherwise, it's (still) a joke mechanic.

real world analogies rarely work with eve. In fact the first bounty implementation worked like real world bounties work(ed). Evil guy dead, good guy has all the money. I am sure the devs had similar thoughts back than as you have right now - since the exploit is and was obvious. Sure you can get rid of the bounty via friends or alts... but not everybody would do that.. right?

Once its known, EVERYBODY will do it. If you can withdraw your bounty you placed on someone, why even think about it if you should place it or not? Just do it without consequences.

I think you miss the whole point of insurance.

The point of insurance is to encourage you to PVP. It hurts to lose a ship, but not "too much".

Change the insurance the way you suggest, the PVPers take bigger losses when they lose ships, they have to spend even more time grinding ISK to replace ships, they PVP less, or PVP in cheaper ships.

real world analogies rarely work with eve. In fact the first bounty implementation worked like real world bounties work(ed). Evil guy dead, good guy has all the money.

I would still urge everyone not to raise the general threshold too much. I just made a quick market comparison.
Look at Oxygen Isotopes:
Estimated price: 583 isk
Jita sell: 489 isk

---

Prozentual difference: 19,4 %

And this was just one random item out of my hangar, I am sure you there are many items with better ratios that can easily be found.


But to bring this value into context: If the bounty payout was 90%, then someone with a bounty on him could gank his isotope-hauler with an alt, negate all the bounty and gain rougly 10% of it (!). Even though it is a crappy item with a high market saturation.



We need to be able to set the threshold variable for trusted persons.

If the point of insurance was to encourage you to PVP I fail to see if being effective. I never once thought to myself, I think I will go shoot some spaceships today because my ship is insured. Neither have I had a freind say, Hey I got an insured ship I think it's time to PVP. All insurance does is reduce the consequences of losing your ship in my eyes. Also, in my eyes it does not hurt at all to lose a plat insured ship.

Reason lower is better:
1) If payout is 20%, then the character with a bounty has to lose 5x value ships as the bounty. So, you anger me, I put a billion ISK bounty on you, now you have to lose 5 billion ISK to get rid of the bounty. That is an incentive for me to bounty you. I am hurting you 5x as I'm hurting myself.

75% payout, I spend 1 billion ISK so you have to lose 1.333B ISK worth of ships? I'm hurting you only 1.3x as much as I'm hurting myself. Heck, why bother putting a bounty on anyone.


2) At 20% payout, I blow up a 100M ISK T2, get 20M ISK and 40M ISK salvage. No reason to altf-kill myself to collect the bounty.

At 75%, I hop in a 100M ISK T2, alt-kill myself, collect 75M ISK bounty and 40 million salvage.



The reasons are there, even if you don't like them.

I think this is a good idea. We had a similar story, but didn't have time to do anything with it for Retribution. I think there should be leverage to increase the payout up to around 30%, for kills on people with high bounty. Killing someone in the top 10 most wanted should definitely count for more.

This is a very good reason for keeping the bounties the way they are.

However, if you want some easy to use room to increase the payout for high bounty targets, offer a bonus based on the items destroyed seperately from the ships. You cannot increase the payout on ships without opening up exploits with alt collected bounties, but there is plenty of room to increase the bounty paid out on the value of items destroyed (modules, cargo, implants, etc). For example, keep the current bounty of 20% on ship value and offer a bounty of 20% to 40% on the value of the items destoyed depending on how the target ranks on the most wanted list. (Bottom of the list pays 20% for items lost, top of the list pays 40% of the

With this approach, we could get the best of both worlds. If there is a bonus for destoying modules, it gives bounty hunters more modivation to inflict losses that are not covered by insurance. The end result is that the bounty might be more effective than it would be if bounty hunters were equally happy to kill empty (or mostly empty) ships.

You're assumign that 20% is the maximum percentage you can pay without someone being able to self gank for profit.

It is not.
20% is lower on that scale than some people think.

I'm pretty sure that CCP relased it with a low percentage, specifically so they would have room to increase it. It would be silly to make the fist iteration payout the most possible before you could exploit it, and if SoniClovers responce is any indication, they obviously understood this.

I think this is a good idea. We had a similar story, but didn't have time to do anything with it for Retribution. I think there should be leverage to increase the payout up to around 30%, for kills on people with high bounty. Killing someone in the top 10 most wanted should definitely count for more.

How about letting the person setting the bounty also set the payout percentage?

just add a skill called Bounty Hunting or whatever

just add a skill called Bounty Hunting or whatever

If we implement allowing people to limit who can use their bounty (like corp mates only), then giving people some control over the payout percentage might be possible, as this would act as a separate bounty pool. Different percentages cannot function for the common bounty pool, as it would either make it a) insanely complicated to calculate payout or b) completely broken.

What about if your security status increases the payout, so if you are 0.0 you get 20%, but if you are 5.0 you get 25%, could also increase the security status to a max of 10.0 so you could get upto 30%.

That could also encourage mission runners to go out there and try some pvp.

Plus to avoid other people from having to blow up rats all day to increase there security staus you could make destroying a wanted player target also increase your security status?

EDIT: That would actually bring back a use for player security status, because now you can put a bounty on anyone, there is no point to player security status.

If we implement allowing people to limit who can use their bounty (like corp mates only), then giving people some control over the payout percentage might be possible, as this would act as a separate bounty pool. Different percentages cannot function for the common bounty pool, as it would either make it a) insanely complicated to calculate payout or b) completely broken.

Some of you are doing what this guy did.

You're assumign that 20% is the maximum percentage you can pay without someone being able to self gank for profit.

It is not.
20% is lower on that scale than some people think.

I'm pretty sure that CCP relased it with a low percentage, specifically so they would have room to increase it. It would be silly to make the fist iteration payout the most possible before you could exploit it, and if SoniClovers responce is any indication, they obviously understood this.

Edit: "time to do it before retribttion", that's your clue.

I think this is a good idea. We had a similar story, but didn't have time to do anything with it for Retribution. I think there should be leverage to increase the payout up to around 30%, for kills on people with high bounty. Killing someone in the top 10 most wanted should definitely count for more.

What relevance do NPC standings have, to a player driven standings bounty system?

I'd like the idea of raising the 20% payout to maybe 40% or even higher.

Some people still sound a little to happy having a substantial bounty on their head, not worrying about it.
The idea of putting a bounty on someone is not only making people interested in hunting that target down,
but also, making the target feel "oh shi".

Personally, i feel like 20% payout is somewhat on the low side, what say you all?

If we implement allowing people to limit who can use their bounty (like corp mates only), then giving people some control over the payout percentage might be possible, as this would act as a separate bounty pool. Different percentages cannot function for the common bounty pool, as it would either make it a) insanely complicated to calculate payout or b) completely broken.