Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 01:25:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah One more issue that doesn't seem to have been mentioned yet: Should the bounty hunter be able to be attacked by the target player as well, or should it only work one way? Referring to highsec and concord interference here if the target fires the first shot, obviously.
In hisec I'd say it works like current killrights - ie the hunter gets the first shot. Obviously in lowsec the hunted can certainly get the shots in first and take gate-gun aggression in response.
CSM Election Manifesto 2008 |
Max Torps
Gallente eXceed Inc. eXceed.
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 01:28:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Max Torps on 26/04/2008 01:30:44
Originally by: Jade Constantine
@Max. Not sure how you've reached the negative opinion you've expressed. All I can say is that ordinary players are managing to have respectful and productive discussions in these threads. As a CSM rep the least you could do is put aside personal bias and attempt to do the same.
I've posted Jade. Don't get me wrong. I've even paid you compliments. However I do note that when certain "camps" of CSM post in your threads they are either ignored or responded to negatively or patronizingly.
Originally by: Jade Constantine
[Part of the role of CSM representative we're standing for is engaging with and encouraging discussion of key gameplay and community issues. Its neccessary to keep an open mind and listen and learn from other people posting. Ultimately the CSM is going to be responsible for escalating selected issues for CCP council discussion and its important for the eve electorate to understand how our minds work and how well we can work with others.
I really do think you should read that yourself.
Please don't get me wrong. I like these discussion threads. They remind me a lot of issues that have been brought up before by players many times. Issues that I feel are important too.
I have yet to see how these threads "prove" anything other than a capacity to hit on a hot topic and garner votes by making unsustainable promises by inference. That's what these threads look like to me. I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong...
EvE blogspace, free! Max Torps CSM Candidate |
Nemiron
Amarr Katsu Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 01:34:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Goumindong Basically players who are bidding make bids on a contract for a low-ball. I.E. The hunter to makes the LOWEST bid wins the contract and gains the kill rights. Then that amount of money is transfered to the hunter at the termination of the contract. There would be a buyout and a top price.
I like the idea of "I'll get you your revenge for less than he does". But what what would keep the criminal from using an alt, bidding 1 isk, getting the contract and blowing himslef up in a pod without imps? Mark dies - killright is gone - problem solved.
Adding the possibility of giving the contract to hunters with high rep might help here. Who would give his killright to someone blowing up only the marks' pods over and over again without causing any losses?
As for why not having the contract last "untill ship loss uses up bounty" see my other post.
|
Hardin
Amarr Force Liberatrice du Quebec Lonetrek Industrial Mining Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 01:36:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Max Torps
I've participated in a JC thread before and found it not to my likening. Perhaps if JC could be more team orientated than "have to play the lead" then maybe there would be room. As it is, I think in any JC thread there is only room for JC.
Kinda agree with this viewpoint.
That said I do also agree that Bounty Hunting as a profession should be revived and Jade actually has some good points here. I certainly think it is a topic worthy of debate and development for the CSM.
Creating a workable bounty hunting system is something I would welcome but if we are going to look at the reintroduction of the bounty profession then I would also suggest that we should also look at developing the requirement/ability for pod pilots to play semi-official 'lawmen'.
At the moment in low-sec it is way too easy to be 'bad'. People who want to provide 'law and order' and play anti-pirates end up with sec ratings that can often be worse than those of the pirates they hunt.
Anyone remember EVE Marshalls? Anyone remember Celestial Apoc before it went 0.0? Anyone remember PIE's work in Sarum? This all added flavour to the game. Yet with the current system its almost impossible to consistently play the good guy in low-sec without appearing to be the bad guy.
If we could have a rebirth of bounty hunting alongside the redevelopment of semi-official 'lawmakers', that really would be opening up choices for new players.
So, while I may not agree with Jade hijacking every EVE bandwagon that has rolled across the forums for the past five years to further his prospects in this election, some of them at least are worthy of further discussion and development by the CSM - and Jade's stories are always a nice read anyway
----- Alliance Creation/Corp Expansion Services
Advert |
Max Torps
Gallente eXceed Inc. eXceed.
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 01:40:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Max Torps on 26/04/2008 01:41:36
Originally by: Hardin That said I do also agree that Bounty Hunting as a profession should be revived and Jade actually has some good points here. I certainly think it is a topic worthy of debate and development for the CSM.
I totally agree.
It's important that there's a yin for every yang. As I've posted before, anti-pirate issues need to be addressed. I really feel though that this is not just an isolated area. If we address this area, all of low sec and even gang aggro options need to be addressed too.
EvE blogspace, free! Max Torps CSM Candidate |
Hardin
Amarr Force Liberatrice du Quebec Lonetrek Industrial Mining Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 01:41:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Max Torps Edited by: Max Torps on 26/04/2008 01:40:37
Originally by: Hardin That said I do also agree that Bounty Hunting as a profession should be revived and Jade actually has some good points here. I certainly think it is a topic worthy of debate and development for the CSM.
I totally agree.
It's important that there's a yin for every yang. As I've posted before, anti-pirate issues need to be addressed. I really feel though that this is not just an isolated area. If we address this area, all ofd low sec and even gang aggro options need to be addressed too.
Yep...
----- Alliance Creation/Corp Expansion Services
Advert |
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 01:49:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Jade Constantine on 26/04/2008 01:51:50
Originally by: Max Torps I've posted Jade. Don't get me wrong. I've even paid you compliments. However I do note that when certain "camps" of CSM post in your threads they are either ignored or responded to negatively or patronizingly.
Max, its not about compliments. Its about sensible and useful debate. I make a point of answering all relevant points that are raised in connection to these issues. I'm not here to be arguing silliness with other CSM candidates - thats not my business and its not in the interest of the electorate. If I don't have anything good to say about a person or post I reserve the right to say nothing at all - people really aren't obligated to post negative commentary on these forums for the sake of posting.
So lets fight the campaign on the issues, on personal strengths and abilities and game knowledge and possession of the neccessary "big picture." I have no interest whatsoever in negative bickering. Lets keep it positive and play to everyone's strengths, the game of Eve can only benefit as a result.
Okay with you?
CSM Election Manifesto 2008 |
Kuranta
Minmatar Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 01:54:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Hardin At the moment in low-sec it is way too easy to be 'bad'. People who want to provide 'law and order' and play anti-pirates end up with sec ratings that can often be worse than those of the pirates they hunt.
I haven't ever been pirateing, so I don't know how hard it is to stay above -4.9, even when not going for the pods.
But certainly, being an anti-pirate and loosing sec status when killing knwon pirates with above -4.9 is an issue. Is it too easy to stay above -5 when not kiling pods? Too less consequence?
Solution might be that registerd bounty hunters (pos sec status) do not lose sec status when destroying pirates (no matter if -10, -5 or -2) No pod-killing, sentries will not intervene, eventually "hunter tags" in overview, so pirates do know when to pay attention.
On the other hand, who needs transfereable killrights when you can attack pirates without consequences when beeing a bounty hunter.
|
Max Torps
Gallente eXceed Inc. eXceed.
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 01:57:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Max Torps on 26/04/2008 01:58:34 No. These threads are not useful debate when debate is in it and you demean it and those in it. These are about power and control. Enjoy your thread. edited to note "okay with you" added to JC preceding post.
EvE blogspace, free! Max Torps CSM Candidate |
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 02:02:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Max Torps Edited by: Max Torps on 26/04/2008 01:58:34 No. These threads are not useful debate when debate is in it and you demean it and those in it. These are about power and control. Enjoy your thread. edited to note "okay with you" added to JC preceding post.
Sorry you feel that way Max. But I obviously disagree with you completely. Good luck with your campaign.
CSM Election Manifesto 2008 |
|
Max Torps
Gallente eXceed Inc. eXceed.
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 02:06:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Sorry you feel that way Max. But I obviously disagree with you completely. Good luck with your campaign.
Thank you. Good luck with yours.
EvE blogspace, free! Max Torps CSM Candidate |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 02:20:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Goumindong on 26/04/2008 02:25:00
Originally by: Nemiron
Originally by: Goumindong Basically players who are bidding make bids on a contract for a low-ball. I.E. The hunter to makes the LOWEST bid wins the contract and gains the kill rights. Then that amount of money is transfered to the hunter at the termination of the contract. There would be a buyout and a top price.
I like the idea of "I'll get you your revenge for less than he does". But what what would keep the criminal from using an alt, bidding 1 isk, getting the contract and blowing himslef up in a pod without imps? Mark dies - killright is gone - problem solved.
Adding the possibility of giving the contract to hunters with high rep might help here. Who would give his killright to someone blowing up only the marks' pods over and over again without causing any losses?
As for why not having the contract last "untill ship loss uses up bounty" see my other post.
Three things:
First, a "buyout" Such a contractor can say "I am willing to pay 10m isk, and will pay a minmium of 2m isk, start bidding". If someone bids below 2m the amount is 2m.
Second, a "collateral". When buying a contract, the bounty hunter puts up money saying "ill go kill this guy" so if he fails, he loses that money to the guy who put the contract up. The collateral is equal to 1/4 or 1/2 the bounty amount to be payed.
This way if a pirate used an alt to buy a bounty with the intention of not fulfilling it and just clearing it off the market. He would end up paying money to the person he attacked.
Quote:
So, while I may not agree with Jade hijacking every EVE bandwagon that has rolled across the forums for the past five years to further his prospects in this election, some of them at least are worthy of further discussion and development by the CSM - and Jade's stories are always a nice read anyway
This quite irks me. Especially since these threads sit in general discussion and not features/ideas where they belong[and will die a slow death due to the fact that no one reads that forum]
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Nemiron
Amarr Katsu Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 02:21:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Max Torps Edited by: Max Torps on 26/04/2008 01:58:34 No. These threads are not useful debate when debate is in it and you demean it and those in it. These are about power and control. Enjoy your thread. edited to note "okay with you" added to JC preceding post.
This is a discussion board. Everyone, EVE celebrity, forum warrior, normal player or CSM candidate comes here with just his opinion. As soon as you start a thread, there's nothing you can do but stating your opinion and hoping (or giving a ****) that someone shares your POV.
Retreating from a thread instead of fighting and arguing for your opinion shows either a) you dont care about others sharing your POV b) you are not able to back up your POV c) you don't want to fight for your POV
The only ones with a kind of "power" on a board are the mods.
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 02:25:00 -
[44]
Whilst our erstwhile candidates pose and posture for the cameras, (remember youve not been voted in yet!) might I remind them that youre applying to be the voice of the entire community: not mini devs.
Im sure thats no ones intention, just a word of caution from a voter that percieves a dash of arrogance amongst CSM candidates bickering amongst themselves. Continue down that path and you'll end up being the oligarchy Ive already predicted.
However, that aside back to the topic at hand and something else for the candidates to cast their view upon:
Whilst we're discussing bounty hunting and 'anti-piracy' whats the candidates view of a lack of "honourable" actions within EVE? If EVE is a embryonic society why has nothing like a code of chivalry manifested itself?
If we consider martial socities from the past we do see this custom adopted almost voluntarily by specific segments of a society: Chivalry for feudal knights for example, or the strict codes of the samurai class of Japan.
Do the mechanics of Bounty Hunting / anti piracy need to be developed in order to nudge some players (by reward or otherwise) to this custom - or should CCP not interfere and see if it develops of its own accord?
C.
A new look at Local - IDEA |
Nemiron
Amarr Katsu Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 02:28:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Nemiron
Originally by: Goumindong Basically players who are bidding make bids on a contract for a low-ball. I.E. The hunter to makes the LOWEST bid wins the contract and gains the kill rights. Then that amount of money is transfered to the hunter at the termination of the contract. There would be a buyout and a top price.
I like the idea of "I'll get you your revenge for less than he does". But what what would keep the criminal from using an alt, bidding 1 isk, getting the contract and blowing himslef up in a pod without imps? Mark dies - killright is gone - problem solved.
Adding the possibility of giving the contract to hunters with high rep might help here. Who would give his killright to someone blowing up only the marks' pods over and over again without causing any losses?
As for why not having the contract last "untill ship loss uses up bounty" see my other post.
Three things:
First, a "buyout" Such a contractor can say "I am willing to pay 10m isk, and will pay a minmium of 2m isk, start bidding". If someone bids below 2m the amount is 2m.
Second, a "collateral". When buying a contract, the bounty hunter puts up money saying "ill go kill this guy" so if he fails, he loses that money to the guy who put the contract up. The collateral is equal to 1/4 or 1/2 the bounty amount to be payed.
This way if a pirate used an alt to buy a bounty with the intention of not fulfilling it and just clearing it off the market. He would end up paying money to the person he attacked.
Such if a pirate wanted to
Thanks for clearing it up. It's kinda early in the morning here. I especially overlooked the "collateral" thing.
Very good idea imho. The victim will get his revenge as cheap as possible and there is a barrier for alt-abuse. Makes it even more a business if the hunter has his own money at risk. I like it.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 02:28:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Cailais
Do the mechanics of Bounty Hunting / anti piracy need to be developed in order to nudge some players (by reward or otherwise) to this custom - or should CCP not interfere and see if it develops of its own accord?
C.
The mechanics of bounty hunting need to be changed because currently instead of an outlet for revenge its a way to give isk to pirates[they just clone jump to an implantless clone, then get podded by an alt or friend and collect the money]
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Kilhu Emmek
Minmatar Redshift Industrial
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 02:29:00 -
[47]
Text wall, wrecking shot.
I may have lost the ability to read entirely, now.
Can anyone sum up Jade's points in fewer than like ten lines? Is that a remote possibility? --
Recruiting. |
Cailais
Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 02:32:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Goumindong
Originally by: Cailais
Do the mechanics of Bounty Hunting / anti piracy need to be developed in order to nudge some players (by reward or otherwise) to this custom - or should CCP not interfere and see if it develops of its own accord?
C.
The mechanics of bounty hunting need to be changed because currently instead of an outlet for revenge its a way to give isk to pirates[they just clone jump to an implantless clone, then get podded by an alt or friend and collect the money]
Yes Im well aware of the faulty mechanics in this regard - what Im getting at is a more holistic approach whereby the game mechanics for War, BH, Kill Rights, crime (can theft for example), ship destruction, pod kills etc etc etc are brought under one unified umbrella.
C.
A new look at Local - IDEA |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 02:38:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Cailais
Yes Im well aware of the faulty mechanics in this regard - what Im getting at is a more holistic approach whereby the game mechanics for War, BH, Kill Rights, crime (can theft for example), ship destruction, pod kills etc etc etc are brought under one unified umbrella.
That would be nice, but its a lot easier to say "hey lets do this" than it is to actually do it. Its very similar to the "we can just remove local and kinda integrate its functionality into the scanner" problem. You can't simply remove local and integrate its functionality into the scanner, you end up with various problems and material changes no matter what you do.
If you, or anyone can come up with a unified solution that is simple, easy, intuitive, and gets the job done then that would be great. But its a lot easier to make simple, easy, intuitive solutions for each problem individually than it is to make that solution for all of them in one package.
Originally by: Kilhu Emmek Text wall, wrecking shot.
I may have lost the ability to read entirely, now.
Can anyone sum up Jade's points in fewer than like ten lines? Is that a remote possibility?
TL;DR
Help me co-opt this long time bandwagon issue for my campaign!
Vote Goumindong for CSM |
Nemiron
Amarr Katsu Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 02:39:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Cailais Whilst our erstwhile candidates pose and posture for the cameras, (remember youve not been voted in yet!) might I remind them that youre applying to be the voice of the entire community: not mini devs.
Im sure thats no ones intention, just a word of caution from a voter that percieves a dash of arrogance amongst CSM candidates bickering amongst themselves. Continue down that path and you'll end up being the oligarchy Ive already predicted.
However, that aside back to the topic at hand and something else for the candidates to cast their view upon:
Whilst we're discussing bounty hunting and 'anti-piracy' whats the candidates view of a lack of "honourable" actions within EVE? If EVE is a embryonic society why has nothing like a code of chivalry manifested itself?
If we consider martial socities from the past we do see this custom adopted almost voluntarily by specific segments of a society: Chivalry for feudal knights for example, or the strict codes of the samurai class of Japan.
Do the mechanics of Bounty Hunting / anti piracy need to be developed in order to nudge some players (by reward or otherwise) to this custom - or should CCP not interfere and see if it develops of its own accord?
C.
It's the internet. Even worse - a game. On the internet. You will never bring code of honor to those who opt not to have it in a game. Even though they might be honorable persons in RL. It's a game and you can do stuff you would (or could) never do in RL.
Since this is EVE, CCP will never make people behave more than ultimately nescessary. Which is good. Concerning players punishing players - I think it's kinda eye for an eye in EVE. You get blown up - get Killrights. Someone steals - you may shoot - he may shoot back. He smacks - war dec. (well---we have NPC corps, but CCP needs carebear money as well).
|
|
Cailais
Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 02:55:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Cailais on 26/04/2008 03:04:43
Originally by: Goumindong
If you, or anyone can come up with a unified solution that is simple, easy, intuitive, and gets the job done then that would be great. But its a lot easier to make simple, easy, intuitive solutions for each problem individually than it is to make that solution for all of them in one package.
Thats true, but the need for a simple, intuitive solution is a pressing concern.
Currently we have a growing mish mash of mechanics being applied (Wars, BH, Piracy, Soveriegnty, Kill Rights, agro timers and soon factional warfare) that determine who can shoot whom when and where. - That alone is complex enough for experienced players but sets the learning curve very high for new players and creates an artificial barrier for PVP.
Furthermore its all handled in seperate aspects of an already clutterd UI. e.g:
War Decs: Corp Tab BH: BH Office (stations only - proposed by many under the contracts system) Sec Rating: Overview and Character tab / info Kill Rights: Character tab Aggro: Overview
And then we through into the mix the Sec rating of a system, insurance etc etc. Does it really need to be this complex?
My argument then is we shouldnt be considering BH and its mechanics in isolation, but instead consider what the PVP 'Laws' of EVE are, how theyre conveyed and applied to enable PVP rather than obfuscate it.
C.
edit: Oh I see this has been chucked into the proverbial bin of the forums, features and ideas, to rot away. Thanks CPP, thanks a bundle. We need a CSM forum.
A new look at Local - IDEA |
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 03:30:00 -
[52]
Yep, until we get a custom CSM forum section I think the General Discussion forum is the place for these threads to go (where the rest of the CSM threads are) Any chance of moving it back please mods?
Thanks in advance.
CSM Election Manifesto 2008 |
Kovid
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 06:07:00 -
[53]
I would love for this kind of idea to take shape into a working bounty system. Also a question was asked about what pirates think:
My experience lacks the experience of piracy. But with that being said I hear often how pirating is becoming less and less of a profession, especially among low sec. And low sec is its own debate. Still, if this reduces piracy then it would be a bad thing. However suicide ganking in high sec has come to the forefront. I suppose the suicide freighter ganking is where it originally registered on the radar of most. WeÆve all seen the whinging on the forums about it and then lately even more so about the high sec barge and faction battleship ganking. Jihadswarm and Triumvirate are known for such things.
If this bounty hunting thing still gave pirates a certain badge amongst themselves then that would be great. People like to see that red stamp on their portraits and the bounty showing how good they are at their job. At least the wannabes do. Further integration with the Concord billboards would be nice in any way. Some small concessions towards the targets of these contracts need to be considered. Obviously they got a concession by the original kill, but you don't want to stifle the act of piracy or combat. A mark of how many contracts set against the player and failed might be worth showing publicly. It doesn't need to be concrete either. This discussion really does need more pirates and other people that would be the target of such contract.
|
Kovid
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.04.26 06:07:00 -
[54]
My suggestion to counter exploitation would be that maybe the contract system might not be suitable for the whole process of transferring kill rights. It might be best for a form of advertising of such things, along with billboards. A bit of personal interaction or more control over the contract system might be best so that the original kill right holder could have control of who gets the ôcontract.ö By doing the deal personally, the auctioneer could have some measure of control of the ISK he is willing to commit to the affair and most importantly, filtering out alts of the offender. By not making the process so automatic it gives the auctioneer a little more involvement in the justice instead of just throwing money up and hoping for the best and waiting to see a blinking wallet indicating a job well done.
The contract system still could be a base and allow bids to be placed. These bids could come with info on who placed them. ItÆs like people applying for a job which is really what they are doing. An employer should see who is interested and give it to who they believe who fits best for it not merely who bids the highest or lowest. The ultimate goal for them is a measure of justice and seeing the kill rights actually go to someone who wants to fight and willing to do on their behalf, of course for something in return.
The single shard server has reputations good and bad for all to see.
By this method the reputation of bounty hunters would increase their chances of getting a contract. An auctioneer would best not be selling his contract to someone in a NPC corp, or of dubious nature. We have mercenary corps. I donÆt see why we canÆt have bounty hunter corps, or mercenaries taking up that role as well. It could be a tiny boon to mercenary corps in the age of capitals and stifling sovereignty mechanics.
I can imagine if the threads that people complained about being suicide ganked where directed to this one, the traffic would be great. Hopefully the quality of the discussion would remain of course. I am sure there are many suicide gankees who would love to have some measure of justice. If an unexploited system could be thought up, that would further the PVP centered people. And possibly encourage more solo, or small group working as only one person can have the kill rights per contract. Anti blob play is always good for the servers. Using players over an in-game correcting mechanic (CONCORD) makes things more enjoyable for all.
|
PeacefullNub
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 00:48:00 -
[55]
I like this idea. If it will be realised correctly - it gives to Eve new job - bountyhunter.
Maybe it gives some uniq skills for hunting and tracking the prey, interracting with concord. Maybe even bounty hunter specialised ship...
how i see this: killrights changed to inactive bountyhunting contracts (wich is allready in bounty hunting office). 1) Contract owner may use it for himself. contract owner=bountyhunter, so he may use concord tracking agents to get base price (depends on ship, fit and pod imps+clone price - for example 30-50% baseprice) and lp (depends on ss of system where prey will be killed, and crime record of prey), and to fullfil his own revenge, 2) or contract owner may pay additional summ (optional) and change inactive contract to public contract. Just like normal contracts there may be simple contracts (to first hunter that clames it. If contract owner havent use his contract for some time - it becomes simple contract by default, so anyone can use it), private contracts (contract owner ask his friend bountyhunter to help), auctions, free hunts (for many bountyhunters, anyone who wish to participiate pay some isks - first one who kills prey takes contract reward + all isk in pool.)
What could contract owner add or change in public contract? 1) price for contract (it prevent "false" hunters to clame it) - concord takes this money 2) bounty for pod (other peoples may add some isk - like bounty system today - they just placed directly to reward for pod) 3) time restrictions for hunt (for example - 1 month=no restrictions) 4) Pequest proof of dead (frosen corpse of prey must been aquired to clame the reward)
Prey aquired notification about acepted contract. But names of hunters and time before hunt ends is unknown. After contract is expired, pery aquire notification.
|
Drakhis
Caldari Sky Net Industries Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.04.27 01:52:00 -
[56]
/signed.
One gripe, notification of the target of a contract on them.
Hardly seems balanced to be honest.
I see the notification somebody is gunning for me and only has a limited time to blast me, I dock and I win, enough said. |
SecondChance
|
Posted - 2008.04.29 16:29:00 -
[57]
bump
|
Michal Aniol
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 11:05:00 -
[58]
I'm a kinda new player, i'm trying piracy as much as my low sp allows me to, but one thing wonders and a little worries me - if there'll be nice, fancy and maybe easy bounty hunting system, won't the all pirates gone, and reroll to bounty hunters? What if it'll make not enough pirates to hunt on and make disbalance?
+ sec status for bounty hunters: will it be fair to players who would like to become BHs but now are pirates and have this -10 security, i suppose rising it up could be too boring to even try. Yeah, we can: say you wanted to be a pirate (exile), so you are, but when game's rules are changing... maybe you'd like to change smth too?
Ideas are interesting, but personally i think, simple contracting kill rights (like item exchange/auction) could be enough. |
Wever
|
Posted - 2008.05.05 11:25:00 -
[59]
Love this idea, and a nicely written bit of fiction too.
|
Ashnagala
Caldari Cybertec Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.05.10 22:54:00 -
[60]
this is too so tripple-/signed - i like your ideas, jade ___________________________________ Best regards, ALPR Co-CEO Ashnagala
Alphrenel Productions - making nice videos for everyone! |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |