Whether you feel you can manipulate the base value of items in the game is between you and CCP.
Payouts based on base value is the standard way that CCP uses with insurance, is the most reliable way to avoid market manipulation.
Your exaggeration of the points people make is laughable.
Offer an actual point or stop posturing, go away and let the adults talk.
Your inability to remain civil it’s nothing to do with me dude. You have an inflated ego and not a lot more going on.
I think your idea should be discussed and is another alternative. And I’m happy to speak to you on your thread.
Do you have any points specifically about this proposal though?
You mentioned that you don’t like the idea of bounty agents.
The benefit of this approach though rewards an active play style. By offering the bounty kill rights only to bounty hunters, gives them someone to hunt providing a cat and mouse game. This is more akin to what CCP originally intended with the bounty system. Which is why bounty most wanted lists, and locator agents were added.
I too like quick pvp as soon as I leave the station. But bounty hunting doesn’t have that connotation, it needs the hunt.
Let’s change the talk a little bit, let me think about agents for a minute.
Did you consider using this agents for fixing faction standings? Example, factional warfare and criminals could fix their standings by killing criminals if they ran these agent missions as you say.
Although I’m not sure how that would factor into the lore, as the factions don’t really get involved in criminal aspects, that’s concord’s job.
Expanding FW would be nice, but I’m not sure that high sec is the place to do this. Faction standing outside of FW already can be raised using missions from the faction agents, but it is admittedly a grind to gain the standings to counteract negative standings.
I’m not sure there’s a need to gain faction standings from bounty hunting. It would be difficult to know which faction to apply a boost to. It’s it based on location of the kill?
I think bounty hunting standings would be either a new corporation standings or maybe linked to concord standings like incursions are.
But there are lots of PvP opportunities in high sec other than ganking. There even is a form of consensual PvP called duels. What do you mean high sec needs more PvP opportunities?
What?
This is wrong. There is a reason why the current (disabled) system only pays 20% of destroyed value. I suppose that might be increased, but don’t expect it to ever be greater than 50%.
And how is this supposed to work in practice?
Would your target get a notification that someone was assigned a bounty kill right on him? Would you have to activate the KR in space and that would cause the target to become suspect like regular KRs do? Or would you be able to shoot your target on sight without any activation process? Or what?
If there is no activation process that causes the target to become suspect and you’re the only one that may shoot him, how would you use it to deal with gankers sitting at a gate? I mean, you try to kill him there, he jumps gate, you cannot follow because you now have a weapons timer, then what?
What? This would be a HUGE nerf to suicide ganking. You’re not asking for more PvP opportunities here. You’re asking for anyone wanting to suicide gank in high sec to be punished with becoming the target of those PvP “opportunities” for as long as his victims are willing to pay…
A pilot that ganked just once could end up being hunted for a VERY long time if his victim gets mad enough and has the ISK to pay for that…
Sure that would be an improvement… for the owner of the KR or for the bounty hunter… How would it be an improvement for the game ?
Yeah, more opportunities… for the bounty hunter looking for easy targets he may engage at will in the relative safety of high sec…
And just to be clear, I love to do precisely that myself… But I don’t ask for game mechanics to be changed so I may get more of those easy targets with less effort…
Right. Because this is a problem needing a solution that CCP has not been able to figure yet…
It’s not that CCP introduced security tags precisely because they want gankers to be able to do that. It’s that gankers somehow managed to figure they could use those tags in a way they weren’t intended for and now we need some new mechanic to “fix” that “problem”…
If by “like for like” you mean ISK wise, as the miner gank example you used would seem to indicate, this is wrong and completely made up. Where did you get the idea the KR system was ever intended to provide like for like retribution ISK wise? Or that it should, for that matter?
Which would be wrong. This is EvE, not RL. That kind of “justice” does not exist in EvE, nor is it supposed to. The victim of a gank is not entitled to any retribution ISK wise. He’s only entitled to shoot and kill the pilot that killed him as many times (not for as much value) as he was killed…
Many of the complaints from high sec pilots who are ganked are based on a complete misunderstanding of the game mechanics and what the game is or should be about…
Except you don’t have to make them available to everyone, thus making them available to the ganker too. You may make them available to an actual hunting pilot or corp, and for a price you’d get paid, not pay for…
FWIW, I make heavy use of KRs myself, so much that I would have stopped playing if they had been disabled like CCP said they would when they disabled bounties. I made a thread some time ago about how to properly use them for anti-ganking purposes even, and your proposal seems wrong for the above reasons to me.
I don’t agree that there are lots of pvp opportunities, there are some pvp opportunities. I have engaged in duels myself, and they are usually performed by a few guys outside trade hubs, usually baiting to reship.
I mean high sec should have more opportunities for criminals and non-criminals to engage in real pvp, between pvp ships, not just gaking pve ships.
How can it be wrong? It is my proposal. This is what I am proposing the payout should be, not what it already is.
The reason the current system pays out 20% is to combat insurance fraud. It used to pay out 100% of destroyed value. CCP wanted bounties to pay out the full value, but had to nerf it to combat exploits.
My system is simply an alternative to a base 20% payout that still combats insurance fraud, by removing insurance payout from the bounty payout (and another 10%). This pays more than currently, especially for uninsured ship kills, and it doesn’t nerf destroyed module payout, which insurance doesn’t cover anyway.
It would work exactly the same as kill rights now. You know that a kill right on your character, the little icon will still be there. It can be a different icon/colour for a bounty kill right for example.
Any bounty hunter assigned the kill, will right click your name and activate it as you do with kill rights. Then the enemy goes suspect and anyone can kill them.
As above. You would use it in the same way you do with normal kill rights. You can have someone else on the other side of the gate, or alpha them.
I’m sorry, but this is more similar to how CCP intended it to be. Before they brought in security tags a suicide ganker was always suspect in high sec. They were -10 sec status and stuck with it, unless they went grinding NPC kills in low sec belts.
There was never an intention signalled from CCP that suicide gankers should be able to sit with impunity in highsec. Tags were implemented to allow pirates to reverse their security status in order to move into different areas of the game more easily, not to rinse and repeat after every few kills.
Crimewatch was designed so there were repercussions to criminal activity. You can gank if you want, but after a few you are a target to anyone who wants to make you pay for it, because your sec status was reduced to under -5.
My proposal is far easier on gankers than the pre-security tags system was.
The bounty kill rights wouldn’t be able to be topped up. You have to pay the full bounty you want to attach when you hand in the kill right to the agent. It is removed when that amount is paid.
I think that is perfectly balanced. A ganker scores a 1 bil loss for his victim and kill right only gets the victim a single catalyst kill. That’s in no way balanced, and not consistent with other areas of the game.
Having the kill right remain until a similar amount is lost from the ganker would be far better “for the game” in my opinion. Gankers should not have a free ride because of tags.
When we’re talking about balance you have to compare it with other areas of the game, that’s what balance is.
So, lets compare to the opposite activity of ganking in high-sec:
Bounty hunter “looking for easy targets he may engage at will in the relative safety of high sec…”.
This is exactly the position of almost every ganker in high-sec. They are looking for soft targets that pay out a lot and don’t fight back.
This system just affords opportunities to turn the tables on the gankers effectively.
Exactly how CCP designed the security status system. You shoot people in highsec. Good on you. But watch out because now you are permanent flashy and pilots can shoot you in the process.
Then we agree! Gankers are using tags in a way they weren’t intended to be used, and now something should be done to counter that. That is the point of my proposal.
I think security tags are useful outside of ganking, and should remain in the game. But the ability for non criminal pilots to engage with criminals in high-sec has been severely reduced. My proposal is a way to bring some of that back, without breaking security tags, allowing pirates to change to another play style if desired.
CCP have always referred to kill rights as “a pilot’s chance of retribution”. Retribution literally means something given in recompense, or “to return in kind”. I wasn’t say that CCP intended there to be an exact like for like response (as you can kill a more expensive ship during use of a kill right), but my point was that in practice there is a major leaning towards the ganker with kill rights in their current implementation. Gankers will almost inevitably receive a lighter blow then their victims.
I believe this should be balanced; hence the proposal.
See my point above. I know what the current system does. I believe there is room for improvement. The current system in practice gives an easy ride to gankers, this is nothing like the rest of eve.
Outside of high-sec, if you kill my blingy ship, then I sure as hell have the opportunity to hunt you to the ends of the earth to make you pay, assuming I have the desire and power to achieve it. I won’t be happy killing your catalyst. If you fly a catalyst then I’ll shoot every time I see your catalyst.
Which I am not one of. You and I have a disagreement about what high-sec is all about. If CCP wants high-sec to exist and send every signal with their mechanics that criminals in high-sec should be able to be engaged by other pvp pilots (security status, kill rights etc.). Then I agree with them and my proposal is adding to those mechanics.
Criminals should not be able to sit around with no way to engage them legally, except for a single time to kill their ship that is 1/250th of the price of ships they shoot all the time.
Don’t misunderstand, I do not want CCP to artificially make ganking impossible for high-sec, (which is probably what would happen eventually if the newbies whine enough and they lose new players). I want player-centric solutions. High sec anti-pirate corporations should have real legal tools at their disposal to counter gankers. You should not have to be a criminal to shoot a criminal. CCP designed the whole of crimewatch around this idea.
I agree that kill rights can sometimes still be useful. That’s why I don’t really have a problem with them being side by side. But they are not very appealing to highsec residents. The problem you have is there are not many (any?) well known, organisations that will use kill rights properly, and not just turn out to be ganker alts. How is a new player, or an industrialist/trader/mission runner supposed to know who is a reliable player to sell/give their kill right to?
There are so few because the system does not reward anti-ganking, whereas ganking is rewarded by (sometimes) considerable loot. Potential new pvp pilots in highsec will just gravitate to the option that pays more, and only hardcore white knights will align with the pretty much no-payout side.
Hopefully my above points will improve your outlook. The fact you had to post such a long and detailed thread (which I applaud you for doing btw) shows that kill rights are underused and in need of some love.
Making bounty hunting a real profession in game, that can be viewed in The Agency and with bounty agents, will draw players organically. Most of which will be new players (because experienced players don’t need The Agency to show them what they can do).
New players with little money will want an actual reward for risking their ship to other players. Then when they get a taste for pvp and see that it’s not as bad as they thought, they may be more likely to venture outside of highsec in to areas where you don’t need kill rights to shoot the guy who wronged you.
I am not going to give you a written spelled detailed knowledge report, contrary to popular carebear views… knowing how to play EvE is much more than SP. So I am not posturing, i did put out an actual point…in the other thread.
As to adults talking…you are the only 1 here mewling about like a stuck kitten…Im laughing that you are going to argue with Knowledgeminer with the same broken garbage you already have been spouting.
So please child, shut up now and go learn how to EvE.
Yes I know this is how it used to be. It is also to counter insurance fraud, or do you think they plucked that specific percentage out of thin air?
You’re harping on about experience and moaning because I didn’t mention something that was changed in 2012. Get over it. It’s been over 8 years since that expansion.
A player could have started 5 years after that and still have easily gained enough experience in the game to have enough valid experience to make proposals. You’re being an elitist moron.
Then don’t. You don’t need to comment with the same empty drivel over again.
Your point about gankers getting faction mining modules and giving them to you to sell in the market doesn’t make any point. CCP evaluate base value.
If that is your only point and you have run out of objections then that’s fine. You think that you can manipulate the market to affect base value, via faction modules or whatever, and I think that CCP will set the price accordingly so that it isn’t profitable.
You have made literally no other points and offered nothing of real value except elitism and pointless posts.
Contrary to your conceited opinion a forum poster doesn’t need your approval to post and discuss proposals. And you haven’t mentioned a single thing broken about the proposal. You just like to whine and moan about other players not being as “in control” of the markets as you.
Your killboard has 12 kills on it in your entire eve career, the majority of which were prior to 2015 and were structures. What makes you feel you have unending experience in PVP?
You have no idea what a PVP player wants or what motivates them.
They still mostly are. If the basis for this is to provide more opportunities to attack gankers, then this really doesn’t provide much addition to the game.
Pulling the last 2000 ganks conducted by CODE., Kusion Special Team and kills in Jita where CONCORD is involved:
unique gankers
total_killmail appearances
outlaw_status
outlaw_kills
235
5301
157
4479
So as a first approximation, about 70% of all gankers are outlaw and those outlaws commit about 85% of all ganks.
That’s not surprising, because the most active gankers are obviously going to be performing the most ganks and as a consequence, have the lowest security status.
In those cases, these characters are already freely engagable, killright or no killright.
Gankers don’t worry about using tags, because they can operate effectively at outlaw status anyway.
Tags are used primarily by the lowsec-highsec characters that pvp in lowsec but also need to operate normally in highsec (eg. buying ships, hauling, etc.)
If the proposal is to just give Bounty Hunting a refresh that’s one thing, but if this is supposed to be about adding more pvp opportunities to highsec, well they already exist.
The proposal has a few purposes, both of which you mentioned.
The primary addition would mean the 30% of gankers who do maintain status with tags would likely be valid targets now.
But secondarily, it would add incentive to attack all gankers. There is nothing in the game atm that directs you towards these targets smoothly. You generally just happened upon people with bounties.
Being assigned some targets pushes you in the direction of where they operate, with a purpose. This will particularly encourage newer players to get involved, who don’t necessarily know where to shoot criminals.
And a little bit of a boost in bounty payouts for the majority of kills (that doesn’t cause issues with exploits) would encourage uptake, and hopefully will be a conflict driver.
They don’t either. Generally, they are newer gankers that are just on their way to outlaw status.
This is harder to visualise, but I’ll give it a go.
The ones that do maintain their sec status are generally the gank nado characters that sit off the Jita undock.
They operate effectively even with killrights active and if anything, this proposal would either fail to affect them, or potentially push them out of their current play, in which case Bounty Hunters will just put themselves out of business.
There’s a whole anti-gank community.
The difficulty for anti-gankers (aside from just being bad at pvp) is that gankers know how to operate as outlaws and how to avoid being killed by facpo and other players.
Why are guys wanting to play Bounty Hunter suddenly going to be able to stop them?
I take your points.
Clearly by your post, you see the anti-gank community as being behind the gank community in skill and capabilities.
So, by adding incentive and opportunity to anti-gank gameplay it would work towards a balance.
The bounty hunters wouldn’t suddenly be able to stop them, but should at least be funneled in to a position where they try, and maybe eventually learn to be better at it. I imagine many be of the anti-gank community would take up these bounty kill rights as well if they were available.
This proposal on its own is not an answer to all things anti-gank. But could be a useful addition as part of a wider shake up of high sec.
If CCP felt that the calculation of payouts for bounty hunters in this system had merit and was feasible then it could be extended to all bounties, to drive conflict.
Actually, I think that for the most part, there aren’t many skills they can develop that can disrupt gankers in any meaningful way.
A refresh of Bounty Hunting is fine. We’ve seen many proposals before and we’ll see many more I suspect.
But aiming this at ganking is limiting it too much. CCP has access to much more data than I’ve pulled and if they looked at this proposal and then compared it against impact on the game, I suspect they’ve give it a hard no. It just won’t have much effect either in terms of successful bounty hunters, or really increasing the pvp opportunities in highsec. The pvp opportunities are already there.
I think I would be happy with disrupting gankers in an enjoyable way. Meaningful is a bit of a stretch. I think ganking is an interesting mechanic and I wouldn’t want to kill it all together. Just have some fun shooting between “criminals” and “champions of justice”. They can both then spout their spiel about the other being the scourge of high sec and everyone’s had a bit more content in game.
I would have to agree that if they are going to do anything about bounty hunting, they would likely roll it into a bigger update.
I would simply advocate this as one of those changes that could be fairly easily implemented along with their shake up of PvP and conflict drivers in high-sec.
It’s about both. I’m advocating for the profession of bounty hunting. So there is ISK incentive too. That way you fund your ship losses (I would hope for gankers to fight back).
I am currently enjoying FW where I get lots of opportunity for PVP, but I’m also rolling a high-sec alt to fully explore all of the anti ganking opportunities. I don’t have the need for it to be ISK positive myself.
But like I said, a viable profession needs income. So I plan to continue to put forward proposals to that effect.
Well, sorry but you cannot pretend that you should be able to repeatedly keep activating KRs on gankers just because engaging them in the ships they fly doesn’t satisfy you enough…
Because it doesn’t take into consideration the reason why the current system only pays 20% of the loss value.
Exactly. And I’m saying your proposal does wrong something the current system does right.
No. First off, the old system used to pay full bounty value regardless of destroyed value, not 100% of destroyed value.
Second, the current system doesn’t just aim at preventing insurance fraud. It also is the way it is because paying 100% of destroyed value could be abused in other ways in a player driven economy.
Many items don’t have a meaningful production cost and their market value could be manipulated. The only way to protect a bounty payment system from abuse in those cases is to only pay a fraction of the market value.
But you appear to have been told this already here and elsewhere. Why do I have to explain it again to you? WTF.
So you’re asking for the KR system to be made more complex by making it have to deal with and offer the user two different types of KRs at the same time, some of which would only be available to very few players, right? You don’t see a problem with this, do you? You even have claimed in previous posts that your proposal doesn’t increase the complexity of the KR system…
And who gets paid?
If it’s the bounty hunter who gets paid regardless of who kills the target, then he may simply activate the KR hoping someone else that happens to be around and may not even know what’s going on does the actual work. If nobody does, he may simply try again knowing the KR cannot be cleared…
Let me get this straight… CCP introduced security tags to make things work the way they do now, something that obviously benefits the most players that (1) live in high sec, (2) do stuff that cause them to lose sec status, (3) don’t want to rat in low sec, and (4) make enough ISK with those actions to make it worth pay for the tags… And you pretend the feature was never intended to be used by suicide gankers, as if this was some oversight CCP hadn’t thought of?
And you pretend this is the case not because you’ve seen CCP say anything to that effect, but because there was never an “intention signalled from CCP” that suicide gankers would be able to benefit from those tags?
And what do you think is the reason CCP hasn’t “fixed” that “oversight” in all this time? That they’re unaware of the “problem”? That they haven’t been able to figure a proper “solution” yet?
You know such a feature would have a dev blog and a corresponding forum thread discussing it, right? Did you bother to check those? Can you please go read them to check the facts instead of making them up, please? This is what a CCP Dev said in the very first post of that forum thread:
Sometimes you just need to do something that’s a little bit outside the law. Blow up a freighter, pod someone in low sec, or other nefarious activities that CONCORD frowns upon. Until now, the only way to get back in the good graces of the law was to kill belt rats for hours on end, but in Odyssey, we are changing all that.
Now, tell us again that those tags weren’t meant to be used by gankers to fix their sec status…
Not sure what you mean. Of course Crimewatch is meant to make criminal activity have consequences. So what? How does that relate to whether security tags were meant to be used the way gankers use them or not?
Yes. And security tags were introduced so you may then use them to fix that loss of security status for a price. When has CCP ever said anything that would indicate those tags weren’t meant to be used by gankers the way they do? You’re completely making that up…
The security tags don’t allow the gankers do something they couldn’t already do before. The tags just made it more convenient for them.
Your proposal, on the other hand, would completely change the battlefield by making it possible to repeatedly generate KRs with no way for the gankers to fix that by ratting like they can do to fix their sec status. This is total ■■■■■■■■.
Yeah, I understood that, but a single player could make it possible to generate a ridiculous amount of KRs by placing a high enough bounty. That’s ■■■■■■■■.
LOL. You talk about this as if it was RL and the victim was entitled to a retribution equaling the loss value…
Of course the way it currently works is consistent with other areas of the game. How is it not? It’s totally within the spirit of the game. What would be against the spirit of EvE is that the more lazy and careless someone is and the more mistakes he makes, the more entitled he would become to cause losses on whoever took advantage of his laziness, carelessness and mistakes…
I can’t believe I’m having to explain this…
This is the bottom line and the real motivation for your proposal, right?
It’s not that you want more PvP opportunities in high sec. It’s that you think gankers shouldn’t be able to fix their sec status with tags, and instead of simply asking for that feature to be removed or changed, which you know wouldn’t get you anywhere, you’ve come up with this ■■■■■■■■ of a KR system to “fix” that “problem” in a much more convoluted and broken way instead… As if that might end any better…
The don’t fight back part is wrong but irrelevant. Of course the gankers look for soft targets that pay out a lot. What they don’t do is ask for the game mechanics to be changed so they may get more of those… And if they did I would be against that exactly the same I’m against your proposal and for the exact same reason…
I’m not against you wanting to get easy kills from the gankers (or outlaws in general, for that matter). Heck, I already said I love to do that myself. What I’m against is you pretending the game mechanics should be changed so you may get more of those with less effort…
Man, I really hope you’re being sarcastic here and didn’t take seriously what I said that you’re replying to… If not, then please read what I said again taking into consideration the possibility that I was being sarcastic myself…
Again, retribution here means you get the right to kill when unlawfully killed, not the right to kill for the same value that you lost.
Balance in EvE is not about you being entitled to cause someone killing you a loss of the same value. Get that already.
So your proposal is nothing more than yet another “balance suicide ganking” thread in disguise, based on a complete misunderstanding of what balance in EvE is about. Why am I not surprised?
They don’t have to. Criminal hunters like me may send a mail asking for KRs and explaining how they work to victims of ganks, so they may make an informed decision how to best use the KRs they now have even if they had never heard of KRs before.
They may then ask around or use other means such as zKill to check whether the pilot or organisation that sent them that mail is reliable or not.
That’s how I get the KRs I need to do what I do. I don’t need the game mechanics to be changed so I may get more KRs with less effort…