Maybe as a way to control income from rats, making the bounties correlate with what ship/weapon is being used when you kill the rat. CONCORD makes the statement that they’d like to see more daring combat with the enemy or whatever, I’m sure CCP will come up with something.
The general premise will be explained through he example of two imaginary players: afk and dns.
Afk flies a tristan to a refuge anomaly. he unpacks his drones and goes to get a sandwich, knowing he put the right tank on his ship. He comes back to loot his wrecks.
Dns uses an atron with civilian tank and t1 guns because he hadn’t thought of using anything else. He brawls down the site, he may have to warp in and out a couple times depending on how tough those waves are gonna be. He loots his wrecks after a job well done.
By current definitions, the bounties supplied would be the same, but under my idea, dns makes more in bounties because he used a more active style of play, being, he used zero drones, and even used what others would say substandard guns.
Whether or not these bounty adjustments will vary by ship or by weapon system stands to be a matter of debate, but perhaps using both could be argued to be too taxing on systems.
But… The bounties go up as the rat difficulty does…
CONCORD established the bounties due to how dangerous it is to bring down specific rats, not how you kill it, if you do a thing one way or another you are still paid for the job not by the method.
You pretty much want to add a way to get better pay for having a fit that will turn things much slower to do than they should, this is entirely pointless to say the least because in the end if you just get a better fit or skill up a better ship which is perfectly doable in a short amount of time you will just keep the money flowing, where with a frigate you are limited to what you kill because of how small and weak you are.
I’ve heard people state a way to control isk inflation would be figuring out how to stop people from making isk while afk ratting, so you’d have to throttle off what they can make by discriminating against what they use. such as the example provided, obviously both these players would get rekt if they stepped into tougher sites, could they make more isk if they’re lucky? i don’t see why not, but how much more?
Thanks for inspiring that point, what would be the baseline, and what would the discount be? you can’t make it too drastic otherwise people complain, but people ask for a way to interrupt this inflation thing.
If anything EvE already does a great job doing its best to avoid hyper inflation
Insurances, taxes from corps, taxes on the market, tax making contracts, skill books, taxes setting up buy orders, you already got things trying to combat inflation
well, I guess what I can only say after watching that vid, is why people are making a big stink about them anyway? CCP definitely made sinks left and right, but why is it still a problem?
People will always complain about anything, and in this case they just do not realise that the game already has methods to combat that. As long as people continue buying and selling and doing whatever pulls a tax out of their pockets or buying stuff from NPCs that money is gone for good.
My guess is they want a better isk sink, the issue with that is reflected on the video, it would then be too much of a grind to get isk to buy something, and already we had a guy complaining he hates grinding and complaining about market prices and that he was all only pvp stuff…
Solve one ‘problem’, another will rise, the complaints never stop, either through lack of information or just because.
the whole idea of describing dns with a shitfit ship and winning is only supposed to be an easter egg into what dns stands for. how you tank the ship means nothing in the idea for the mechanic.
