Reward/Bounty for killing ships

I just had a great idea for Eve Online. I wonder why this hasn’t already been implemented?

Reward the guy with the killing blow on an players-ship/structure with 3-5% of the destroyed value (the ships value minus the stuff that dropped)
Maybe reduce insurance payout/cost by 3-5% to compensate if needed be.
Allow ppl to split the reward between all ppl in the fleet on grid (just like with NPC-kills)

I think this small change would greatly improve activity in space everywhere. A lot more stuff will be hunted and killed and it will greatly reduce item-inflation in the game. Also it will be a lot more fun if killing stuff finally had more than just intrinsic value. Currently killing a t2-fit t2 ship has no real gameplay value your killboard aside. the modules are almost for free and the expensive hull doesn’t give you any benefit killboard aside.

People have brought up that the game already has too much isk floating around. Therefore I’d suggest giving the 3-5% value to ppl via a special kind of LP depending on the value of the destroyed ship hull + rigs (the stuff that cannot drop). Maybe the same for implants.

Any suggestions/critique? I kind of think this is a no brainer and needs to be implemented.

If you join faction warfare and you kill an enemy militia ship you get a % of their ship cost in lp :slight_smile: its already done and in game.

If CCP wants to increase the loot/salvage value of a PVP kill, I have no objection, but we already have too much ISK flowing into the game. We don’t need more!


Agreed pure isk is always a bad idea, Lp/items is fine thou.

What you effectively suggest is “make suicide ganking empty ships profitable for gankers”.
Eve doesn’t need another Isk faucet.

IF you want fun kills and get rewards for killing - choose targets with player-set bounties on them or join FW.

Suicide ganking empty ships beeing profitable? I don’t think 5% reward is gonna change that in any meaningfull way. However, ff that really is an issue just make concord-responded attacks the exception. It is already an expection for insurance payouts so it would fit.

I think the isk faucet would be compensated by the increase in dead stuff. However I already expected that response, which is why i brought up the 5% decrease to insurance payout.

LP or annother form of reward would be ok too, but much harder to balance correctly. Isk however would be pretty easy to balance to make sure the payout isnt too much or too small.

Anyway: I think this would greatly benefit the activity levels and therefore playergrowth and help out against the asset inflation.

Loot/salvage adds an element of chance. Some kills will be worth a little, some a lot. It also increases risk since it will take time to loot the wreck.

The amount of kills has no impact on the amount of ISK in the game - cash simply changes wallets when the losses are replaced. Faucets need to be balanced by sinks - stuff we buy from NPC’s that actually removes ISK from the game.

There is no chance right now. t2 fit hulls give the killer nothing, no matter how lucky they are. killing a t2 fit tristan gives you almost the same loot as killing a t2 fit rattlesnake. Looting also has the disadvantage that you to stop pvping because you have to bring the loot to savety, which most pvp ships have no space to do anyway and again, is not worth it for t2 fit ships.

Looting is a non-fun activity that is mostly not worth it while your roaming. PvP is the strongest aspect eve has to offer and CCP would do good in getting ppl engaged in PvP for a high percentage of their playtime.

You still need a mechanism that doesn’t increase the money supply. Ideally it would be a net sink. Perhaps CONCORD LP which can be exchanged (along with some ISK) for LP store items - if and only if the PVP activity is not criminal (i.e. highsec ganking which should depend on loot drops for rewards)

From a logical/lore standpoint suggestion makes zero sense.

Why would Concord pay somebody for destroying somebody else’s ship and compensate the loss of the ship via insurance at the same time?

Having too much isk in the game aside does anyone have annother reason for beeing against this? Putting a new kind of LP into the game would solve these issues.

A commodity that only pvpers can produce on the side. Something that would be an utter waste procuring any other way ^^

I have put the LP suggestion into the opening post.

It makes as much sense as the notion that CONCORD would pay bounties for PVP kills! The objective is to find a mechanism that encourages more PVP interaction without increasing the money supply and in a manner that is difficult to abuse - it shouldn’t be profitable to shoot yourself!

I partially agree with you but what’s your point? Lets say it’s “Drifter LP” or some kind of “Pirate LP”. Or some rich entity. Something that wants to see the universe burn pays LP for it to happen. It wouldn’t increase the money supply, it would make sense lore wise and it would not be profitable to shoot yourself at 5% hull value. So what’s your argument?

and… what’s wrong with the loot/salvage that already drops?

That the biggest part of the value in pvp is usually the ship hull. t2 mods are for free/worthless. and ship hulls dont drop. Most faction/t2-pvp ships will have like 15mil in fitting and 300mil ship hull/rigs. then half of the 15mil drops ^^ t1 battleships have the same problem.

But faction/T2 ships have way better salvage.

Actually no. faction ships dont have better salvage. And even t2 salvage isnt great and who wants to bring salvergers and industrials with his pvp fleet… A lot of fun fleets dont even plan on coming back home

so what… you didn’t pay for the ship what do you care how much it cost you’re still getting what dropped and a lot of the time (particularly in solo/small gang) ships are faction not T2 fit. if you want to increase your ratio even further fight frigs where the majority of the value is in the fittings not the hull. a T1 frig is ~5-10m where less than 1m of that is hull.

This isn’t about what I want for me personally. This is what I think would be good for the game as a whole long term.