|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Whitehound
795
|
Posted - 2013.02.13 18:03:00 -
[1] - Quote
It has a few oddities in how it pays out the bounties as it can happen for dead players to receive a payout, too, even when they have lost in a fight. This is the case when CONCORD or another police force kills a player does it then simply pick the first next player involved in the fight. To me does this make little sense as I see bounties as a reward and dying in the process just does not fit in here.
I am also not sure how it is handled when two corporation members (of the same corporation) kill each other and their corporation has a bounty on it. From what I have read does it then pay out the corporation bounty to the corporation members, which again makes little sense to me. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
799
|
Posted - 2013.02.13 23:53:00 -
[2] - Quote
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:silens vesica wrote:Ralinastrife wrote:oh wow...the bounty system is good then!!!!!! Rare instance of "rational argument convincing OP to change mind" observed. Next such event scheduled for: 1st Quarter, 2015. Im not sure what just happened here...im scared... I blame ISDs. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
804
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 12:22:00 -
[3] - Quote
Angelique Duchemin wrote:In order for bounties to actually work. It would have to be a bad thing to have one. Now it's just a badge of honour to pirates and an annoyance for regular people who never earned them.
Bounties do not work at the moment no. I agree to some extend here. Bounties should not start below 10m ISKs (in the current economy). Too many players are willing to give away 100k ISK or 1m ISK just for laughs. It needs to mean something. Smaller amounts may seem reasonable for rookies, but I would not mind if they were spared the occasional joke bounty if all it means to increase the minimum. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
805
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 12:48:00 -
[4] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Maybe it was a typo. But then that nullifies the point of their post. I am sure the percentage of bounties is higher in Jita than somewhere in 0.0 or W-space. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
805
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 12:58:00 -
[5] - Quote
Karak Terrel wrote:Whitehound wrote:Mag's wrote:Maybe it was a typo. But then that nullifies the point of their post. I am sure the percentage of bounties is higher in Jita than somewhere in 0.0 or W-space. All it takes is to klick the link and read the devblog. There is a graph for that too. Enjoy the colors, it's a Punkturis devblog No. It only shows the bounties claimed per sec level. You think all those 100k ISK bounties in high-sec are getting claimed?
Takes a little bit more than clicking stuff, son.
Edit: And don't bother about the colours. CCP Punkturis is pregnant... SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
805
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 13:19:00 -
[6] - Quote
Karak Terrel wrote:Whitehound wrote:Karak Terrel wrote:Whitehound wrote: I am sure the percentage of bounties is higher in Jita than somewhere in 0.0 or W-space.
All it takes is to klick the link and read the devblog. There is a graph for that too. Enjoy the colors, it's a Punkturis devblog No. It only shows the bounties claimed per sec level. You think all those 100k ISK bounties in high-sec are getting claimed? Takes a little bit more than clicking stuff, son. You mean you prefer to take a wild guess over an approximation based on related data? Maybe that works for you dad. You do not get it, right. I will explain.
First of all is nobody here talking about the total average except a couple of forum warriors who want to win a non existing argument as they always do. No news here.
Now for a player who lives in high-sec will the number of players with an active bounty be higher. Just stay long enough in Jita and players will give you a bounty if you do not have one already, because they only need to look at the icons.
The dev blog, when looking at the pie chart for the sec levels, then only shows the amount of total ISKs claimed per sec level. It is then important to understand that a bounty can disappear if enough of it is being claimed. So since the ISKs claimed in 0.0 is much higher than for high-sec will this mean that there are a lot more unclaimed bounties to be found than in 0.0.
Just because it is not write pink on black so you can get it, does not mean one cannot draw conclusion out of those numbers.
You get this now? SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
805
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 13:43:00 -
[7] - Quote
Mag's wrote:You shouldn't base game changes, on anecdotal evidence or assumptions. Is this an assumption of yours?
Let me help you out.
If there is an imbalance, which does not show up in an average statistic, than your so called "anecdotal evidence" may be your only evidence for it. So it is good to look at those once in a while.
And every developer assumes their changes will work and improve the game. And if they have done their homework will their assumptions almost always prove right. They only will not know before it goes live. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
805
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 13:58:00 -
[8] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Also, Devs assuming things will work, is not the same as basing changes on assumptions. Just helping. Actually it is.
You look at your evidence and draw conclusions, and when you implement a change then because you assume that whatever it is you want to change is going to work out. Only when you do not change a thing do you have certainty. So each time you make a change do you take chances. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
805
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 14:11:00 -
[9] - Quote
Mag's wrote:I bolded the important part. That's the part I'm talking about. Yes, exactly! Your evidence shows you the is-state. So what happens when you change the is-state? ... You invalidate your evidence! You do so purposely, because you want the evidence to go away, because it is the evidence of the problem you want to fix! SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
805
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 14:22:00 -
[10] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Now I'm not even sure, you know what you're disagreeing with. Being as you're saying what I'm saying. I disagree with your statement:
"You shouldn't base game changes, on anecdotal evidence or assumptions."
It makes no sense, because you do look for evidence (anecdotal, hidden, odd, strange, funny or otherwise) and you do make assumptions.
Perhaps explain to me why one shouldn't do it. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
|
Whitehound
805
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 14:29:00 -
[11] - Quote
Mag's wrote:The OP suggested a change that required us to jump through hoops, because he assumed that 3/4 of people had bounties.
That's why I said what I said. No dev in their right mind would say, "Oh look, 3/4 of people have bounties, let's change them." Why not? You have based your assumption that no changes are needed on the average value of 3.4%, because you believe it is a low enough number, meaning it represents only a minority. Do you then know what an imbalance is and what an imbalance in bounties could look like? ...
@Karak Terrel: I won't reply to your comment as I do not want to run two conversations and you already seem to be happy with just picking the crumbs out of my comments. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
806
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 14:39:00 -
[12] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Planetary Mnemonic wrote:Ratmuss wrote:The bounty system should be open to all, but when a "Law-Abiding" citizen, AKA "carebear", places bounties, there should be some negative effects on their public standing.
Suggestions:
- Placing Bounties on players with positive sec status costs the issuer sec status.
- The higher the bounty's sec status, the greater the minimum cost. Substantial enough that putting a hit on an otherwise "upstanding citizen" too often can lead to "legal" problems in Hisec.
- Set a cap on number of active bounties per account. 10 is a good number. If people have issues with more than 10 people, they should be placing bounties on corps, or alliances.
Yes, this is a good way to vastly lessen the crap bounties you see everywhere, give a consequence to putting multiple bounties without damaging the rest of the bounty system. +1 lol Except that bounties are a player standings led mechanic, so NPC standings are irrelevant. He seems to be talking about the sec status and not NPC standings. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
806
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 14:55:00 -
[13] - Quote
Karak Terrel wrote:Whitehound wrote: It makes no sense, because you do look for evidence (anecdotal, hidden, odd, strange, funny or otherwise) and you do make assumptions.
Perhaps explain to me why one shouldn't do it.
Because they are statistically irrelevant, which means they are completely worthless? Why do I even have to explain this.. oh wait this is a discussion on the internet.. right. All you are explaining to me is that you do not understand it. I'll help...
With an "imbalance in bounties" do I not mean the ratio of players with bounties versus players without bounties. In fact, I believe that it should be completely acceptable to have 100% at one point in time and as long as it is not a permanent state.
What I then mean by an "imbalance in bounties" is the distribution of bounties among those players who have one.
What if all those 3.4% could always only be found in 0.0? Or what if they were all in high-sec?
Such things need to be looked at, because you do not want to have every rookie in high-sec running around with a bounty while they are new to the game.
Does this make sense to you? (I doubt it ) SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
806
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 15:04:00 -
[14] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Ratmuss wrote:Mag's wrote:He's talking about peoples sec status. Which is an NPC standing. When sec status goes below a certain level, players can attack them with impunity, thus is is not exclusively an NPC standing. And? Just because people use it, doesn't make it not an NPC standing. It's given and taken away by Concord, who just so happens to be an NPC. In real-life is placing a bounty often a criminal act (in some countries). He seems to suggest to make it one in New Eden as well. I think he is making a fair point. I just do not believe CCP will take the technical effort, which is behind this. Increasing the minimum is in my opinion a better and simpler way. If someone wants to place lots of bounties when the minimum is like 10m ISK then why not?! SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
807
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 15:21:00 -
[15] - Quote
Mag's wrote:It's still an NPC standing and irrelevant to the player led standing bounty system. And why do you believe should CONCORD be looking away? So you can be a nice carebear with a 5.0 sec status??
Other than this do I not see your point. The fact that the sec status is an NPC standing is at best a meaningless coincidence. It sure is not a point when it could be implemented in such a way. CONCORD is already looking at fights in high-sec, decides over wars and takes money of alliances. I see no problem for them to get involved in bounties, too.
It may only not fit into CCP's long-term plans on what the role of CONCORD shall be. I think we all want less CONCORD, but it does not quite work without them. Maybe it never will... SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
808
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 15:51:00 -
[16] - Quote
Ratmuss wrote:- Bounties could only be placed while in stations, and only stations in NULL or Losec would be immune to Concord's influence on the issuer's standing. This makes no sense for W-space hooligans, 0.0 POS dwellers and AFK cloakers. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
809
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 16:00:00 -
[17] - Quote
Ratmuss wrote:Whitehound wrote:Ratmuss wrote:- Bounties could only be placed while in stations, and only stations in NULL or Losec would be immune to Concord's influence on the issuer's standing. This makes no sense for W-space hooligans, 0.0 POS dwellers and AFK cloakers. Could you elaborate on what doesn't make sense? when i said Bounties could only be placed in stations, i meant: The issuer must go to a station to place the bounty with a bounty NPC; the target can be in space - anywhere in the universe. A station might simply be unreachable for them. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
809
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 16:21:00 -
[18] - Quote
Debora Tsung wrote:Since the bounty payout is only 20% of the forcefully decomissioned ship, it does make sense. You (the despicable person that voluntarily stays in a corporation that most assuredly encourages antisocial behaviour) loose more than You earn when You kill Your corp mates.
EDIT: that is to say, the corp as a whole looses more than it earns. You however, despicable and antisocial as You are earn ISK in the process. I say kill them all, get rich and the leave the corp. If I took your point of view, then it must be allowed to self-destruct and claim 20% of one's own bounty... which is not allowed.
If I want corp members to kill each other and to have a bounty can I place individual bounties on the members. Here it makes sense, because these are individually placed bounties.
I want corporation bounties to be different from individual player-bound bounties so that corporation members cannot get any ISKs from it. Some corporations then hold little PvP matches, where they destroy their own assets purposely, but to train their pilots. I do not want a corporation bounty to serve here as a payment for such events.
SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
810
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 16:37:00 -
[19] - Quote
Ratmuss wrote:Maximum number of bounties 3 per lvl of Criminal Connections Interesting.
I'd like to add another to this:
- Reduction of the payout from 20% to 5% - A new skill Bounty Negotiations, which gives 5% extra payout per level with a maximum of 30% at level 5. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
810
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 16:44:00 -
[20] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Ratmuss wrote:Hows this then? (for issuing)
Minimum bounty 10 mill
Maximum number of bounties 3 per lvl of Criminal Connections
(once max is reached, one bounty must be revoked before issuing another) Why? Honestly, I can only think of two reasons... because training skills is fun and it should have been in there right from the start!! SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
|
Whitehound
810
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 16:52:00 -
[21] - Quote
Mag's wrote:His ideas so far, just look at limiting bounties. As the system has only just been delimited, it's odd to go backwards. His idea is brilliant, because it is just funny. Run it through your head a few times... you need to train Criminal Connections in order to place bounties!
The value itself seems low and I would probably vote for like 10 bounties per level. It leaves plenty of room for casual bounties but stops the nutters, who place 50 bounties per day on random players. I sure EVE has got these players... SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
810
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 17:12:00 -
[22] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Ratmuss wrote:
the idea is to reduce rampant bounty spam.
not to limit, but to rationalize.
What rampant bounty spam? Imagine the guy who got banned for botting recently, who had 300b ISKs. If he had given out 300 times 1b ISKs bounties then this could have caused quite a nuisance and also a lot more work for CCP.
I can also see a positive side on such a limitation, because once one comes close to the limit or simply cannot place another one will some choose their bounties more wisely. This can (does not have to) lead to bounties of a higher value. The thought is that when one cannot place endless little bounties then some will place a few big bounties instead. This would play into the hands of bounty hunters. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
812
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 17:52:00 -
[23] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Whitehound wrote:I can also see a positive side on such a limitation, because once one comes close to the limit or simply cannot place another one will some choose their bounties more wisely. This can (does not have to) lead to bounties of a higher value. The thought is that when one cannot place endless little bounties then some will place a few big bounties instead. This would play into the hands of bounty hunters. Choose more wisely? Why should we say what's is and isn't wise, about any bounty placed? No, this is not what I meant. Players want to place bounties for many reasons and the most common reason will perhaps be retaliation. What it should not be is to place them for the sake of placing them, which is currently the case and because bounties are new. Point is, players want to place bounties and when they are being restricted will they not just sulk and walk off, but they will try to find ways to work around the limitation. So some will use alts (no surprise here), but some will simply place higher bounties as for their retaliation instead of many little ones. Others will try to place corporation and alliance bounties more often than individual bounties. This is why I believe it will play into the hands of bounty hunters when players are being forced to place bounties more wisely.
Bounty hunting has to face the mass of little bounties, which are simply not worth going for. So these really have little meaning until the ISKs eventually pile up, which means it is going to take a while and then a retaliation may have lost its purpose and it is only a lot of notifications to the players. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
813
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 18:04:00 -
[24] - Quote
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. SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
816
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 19:10:00 -
[25] - Quote
And shall I eat pizza tonight?
(I thought I add another important question here.) SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
821
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 21:48:00 -
[26] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote: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. You have figures to show me, just how abused it is? I could show you pictures of my private parts... SCAM CAT - Titan Jump - I was there - Goon Dog |
Whitehound
824
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 14:06:00 -
[27] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Where do people get this idea that a bounty is anything to do with being a criminal? Criminals put out bounties (or contracts) on people in the real world all the time, probably more than LEOs do. You say "Criminals put out bounties on people" and then you ask "Where do people get this idea that a bounty is anything to do with being a criminal?" ...
Are you joking or do you seriously not see the connection? Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
Whitehound
824
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 14:46:00 -
[28] - Quote
Debora Tsung wrote:No, You cannot and certainly not by my point of view claim bounties placed on yourself. Right, but I can use an alt.
Now explain why a corporation can claim their own bounty. And do not say because of awoxing. If I want to awox myself then I should have the same right as anybody else no matter if I use an alt or through self-destruct.
I call it a paradox, but I am curious how you will explain it. Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
Whitehound
824
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 15:22:00 -
[29] - Quote
Debora Tsung wrote:Which is completely and utterly useless as You still loose more than You gain. It'd be cheaper just to transfer the money from one alt to another.
regarding alts: everyone could be everyones alt, being in the same corp is not a valid indicator. So why is one not allowed to directly cash in on one's own bounty? Because it is meant to make abuse difficult!
And why is it allowed for corporations to cash in on themselves? Because CCP did not think it through and so it is being abused.
Conclusion: I cannot recommend anyone to use corporation or alliance bounties for this reason - do not use them. Instead, place individual bounties on only a few members and hope it does not encourage abuse as much as corporation/alliance bounties do.
If I wanted to put ISKs into the pockets of those players who I want to place a bounty on then there is already an easier way. Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
Whitehound
824
|
Posted - 2013.02.15 16:04:00 -
[30] - Quote
Debora Tsung wrote:I really do not get Your point. You do not get why people discuss issues on the game?
It is to bring the issues into the light. Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling. |
|
|
|
|