Forums » Suggestions
Bounties.... Again
I was just thinking today, and it may already have been suggested, but here we go:
The major problem that I've heard with bounties is the tendecy for them to be abused... I.e. I've killed lots of people, so I get somebody to kill me and we split the cash.
So how bout this:
the bounty IS based on the number of kills, but the second that the bounty is collected, the bounty goes to zero. So that the highest bounties are on people who have strings of kills with no deaths. This both keeps players who have insane amounts of kills from always being at the top, and prevents serious abuse, since you're simply getting, for example, 5000 creds for each player kill.
Opinions?
The major problem that I've heard with bounties is the tendecy for them to be abused... I.e. I've killed lots of people, so I get somebody to kill me and we split the cash.
So how bout this:
the bounty IS based on the number of kills, but the second that the bounty is collected, the bounty goes to zero. So that the highest bounties are on people who have strings of kills with no deaths. This both keeps players who have insane amounts of kills from always being at the top, and prevents serious abuse, since you're simply getting, for example, 5000 creds for each player kill.
Opinions?
welcome to how it was.
it was still abused.
badly.
it was still abused.
badly.
Well, you play on people's pride. With a news system that promotes the most feared pirates, and associated bounties, people aren't going to readily get themselves killed, and removed from that list, for 100k are they?
yeah well ud be surprized at how little bounty hunters/pirates care about there standings
I should know i was one :)
I should know i was one :)
I'm a pirate... and I don't make too much money at it(mostly because they know they can run the first time), even if I got 5k per kill, I'd still only be at 300k.
Trade still makes me much more for the same amount time.
But the standings are pretty neat, and I wouldn't mind some people hunting me, I'd have a steady stream of PvP
Trade still makes me much more for the same amount time.
But the standings are pretty neat, and I wouldn't mind some people hunting me, I'd have a steady stream of PvP
Sounds like fun to me.
How about making it so that the person collecting the bounty immediately becomes listed as a bounty hunter with no ability to lawfully interact with the hunted. It’s like judgment in court. A real bounty hunter wouldn't interact with the bounty anyway so why allow it.
My thought: take the money for the bounty from the person who has the bounty on their head. This would kill two birds with one stone: it gives us something to lose money on (something that has been complained about alot since the demise of license costs), and it eliminates the abuse Shapenaji outlined in the original post: you can't make money off of the bounty on your own head.
I can just hear the screams of outrage from all you dirty pirate scum.
I'd like Voldon's idea, except it's basically impossible to enforce. Even if /givemoney is disabled from the bounty hunter to the bountee (it's a word, I say so), how do you stop the bounty hunter from buying half of the bounty worth of luxury goods, and jettisoning it for the bountee to pick up?
I can just hear the screams of outrage from all you dirty pirate scum.
I'd like Voldon's idea, except it's basically impossible to enforce. Even if /givemoney is disabled from the bounty hunter to the bountee (it's a word, I say so), how do you stop the bounty hunter from buying half of the bounty worth of luxury goods, and jettisoning it for the bountee to pick up?
Maybe there should be added consequences to being killed with a bounty on your head, like a significant loss of standing in whatever your highest faction rating is. It might not be worth splitting the money if your standing also took a dive.
I think it makes since too. If you are a feared enough Serco Warrior that the Itani put a bounty on your head then you most likely would have much respect from Serco. This would undoubtably dimminish if you were killed for Itani money.
I think it makes since too. If you are a feared enough Serco Warrior that the Itani put a bounty on your head then you most likely would have much respect from Serco. This would undoubtably dimminish if you were killed for Itani money.
Beolach: You're just a fountain of good ideas today.
There's even a good logical explanation for the process, which is that when a pirate's ship is blown up, they have to get a ride back to their home base, since escape pods aren't able to travel much. Since the pirate's location is known, once they've been confirmed shot down, the constabulary is who picks them up and takes them home, and extracts the money at gunpoint at the same time. This would explain why bountied chars don't stay dead when shot down, provide HUGE incentive for bountied chars not to die, and would remove any real potential for exploitation of this nature.
There's even a good logical explanation for the process, which is that when a pirate's ship is blown up, they have to get a ride back to their home base, since escape pods aren't able to travel much. Since the pirate's location is known, once they've been confirmed shot down, the constabulary is who picks them up and takes them home, and extracts the money at gunpoint at the same time. This would explain why bountied chars don't stay dead when shot down, provide HUGE incentive for bountied chars not to die, and would remove any real potential for exploitation of this nature.
How about if a nation/faction where the bounty is placed will not pay out to someone else who has a bounty from that nation, and possibly even people who are at poor standing. They would also not pay out to someone affiliated with that player (guild members). Perhaps there are other ways to prevent the bounty from getting to the bountied player.
I do like the idea of some sort of monitary penalty when they are caught... maybe a percentage of the bounty on their head or something.
I do like the idea of some sort of monitary penalty when they are caught... maybe a percentage of the bounty on their head or something.
"How about if a nation/faction where the bounty is placed will not pay out to someone else who has a bounty from that nation, and possibly even people who are at poor standing. They would also not pay out to someone affiliated with that player (guild members)."
The problem was traders just finding some random person to help them, not just guild members.
"Perhaps there are other ways to prevent the bounty from getting to the bountied player."
Not really, not with utterly MURDERING server performance, I suspect.
"I do like the idea of some sort of monitary penalty when they are caught... maybe a percentage of the bounty on their head or something."
Why not make them pay all of it, then?
Getting a bounty at all requires that you WANTONLY make a complete, ruinous menace of yourself, so it's not like somebody could claim they 'did it by mistake.'
I was thinking that it would be VERY good to make it so that if someone does not have enough credits to cover the bounty, that enough of whatever cargo or ships/weapons they had be sold to cover the difference, because I can see some jerk-off actually buying 30,000 plasma coils to run their liquid cash down to 0, then going out and racking up a million credit(or whatever huge sum) bounty, so that they wouldn't lose much(or any) money when killed.
The problem was traders just finding some random person to help them, not just guild members.
"Perhaps there are other ways to prevent the bounty from getting to the bountied player."
Not really, not with utterly MURDERING server performance, I suspect.
"I do like the idea of some sort of monitary penalty when they are caught... maybe a percentage of the bounty on their head or something."
Why not make them pay all of it, then?
Getting a bounty at all requires that you WANTONLY make a complete, ruinous menace of yourself, so it's not like somebody could claim they 'did it by mistake.'
I was thinking that it would be VERY good to make it so that if someone does not have enough credits to cover the bounty, that enough of whatever cargo or ships/weapons they had be sold to cover the difference, because I can see some jerk-off actually buying 30,000 plasma coils to run their liquid cash down to 0, then going out and racking up a million credit(or whatever huge sum) bounty, so that they wouldn't lose much(or any) money when killed.
I'd like to see the restrictions, but I'd like to see some of the loopholes too. Money laundering should be a part of the universe. It shouldn't be easy, but it should be possible. Buying cargo and giving it away, for example, is excellent.
Also, shouldn't bounties be put up by players too? It'd be something to spend those hundreds of thousands of credits on. Factional bounties should include fines that draw from the player's account (possibly reducing them to 0c, forcing them to take a bus and do some humble cargo running before they can afford a nice ship again).
Also, shouldn't bounties be put up by players too? It'd be something to spend those hundreds of thousands of credits on. Factional bounties should include fines that draw from the player's account (possibly reducing them to 0c, forcing them to take a bus and do some humble cargo running before they can afford a nice ship again).
You know, it occurs to me that the supposed issue of people collecting bounties comes from a lack of fore-knowledge about the bounty-hunter.
If people are worried about people taking their money, then they shouldn't offer the bounty to any "bounty hunter", who says they get a kill. This makes Bounty hunting guilds vital. If it becomes clear that a bounty hunting guild is working in collusion with pirates, no one will pay them for their services anymore.
If people are worried about people taking their money, then they shouldn't offer the bounty to any "bounty hunter", who says they get a kill. This makes Bounty hunting guilds vital. If it becomes clear that a bounty hunting guild is working in collusion with pirates, no one will pay them for their services anymore.
The problem with that is multifold:
First, bounty-hunters are, by nature, a solitary breed. Not all, of course, but it's smart to work alone if your business is killing.
Second, from a balance perspective, it's not very fair to players who don't like guilds to force them to join up to be able to collect bounties.
Third, a bounty is just that: a bounty. It's not a contract. It's a promise that "anyone who brings us the head of this bastard will get X money." Trying to shape it into something where they only offer the bounty to specific people is completely contrary to its nature. There should, of course, be missions to eliminate troublesome players, but those shouldn't interfere with bounties, and vice versa. (The missions to kill players should prolly be as a way for factions to kill enemy players who are so high profile it might be a bad idea for them to post a public bounty)
First, bounty-hunters are, by nature, a solitary breed. Not all, of course, but it's smart to work alone if your business is killing.
Second, from a balance perspective, it's not very fair to players who don't like guilds to force them to join up to be able to collect bounties.
Third, a bounty is just that: a bounty. It's not a contract. It's a promise that "anyone who brings us the head of this bastard will get X money." Trying to shape it into something where they only offer the bounty to specific people is completely contrary to its nature. There should, of course, be missions to eliminate troublesome players, but those shouldn't interfere with bounties, and vice versa. (The missions to kill players should prolly be as a way for factions to kill enemy players who are so high profile it might be a bad idea for them to post a public bounty)
lowguppy:
The problem with your ideas is that they detract from realism.
It's not realistic that a pirate would be like, "Okay, kill me and give me half the money." Allowing such an exploit just means that the whole purpose of bounties, which is a means of regulation, is negated.
The problem with your ideas is that they detract from realism.
It's not realistic that a pirate would be like, "Okay, kill me and give me half the money." Allowing such an exploit just means that the whole purpose of bounties, which is a means of regulation, is negated.
I never said that loophole is good, that's a lame exploit, but money laundering is sweet. As for players putting the bounties, that's how it works in anything resembling reality. If no one puts up the money, where does it come from. Government bounties do exist, but the real cash-ins should be private.
I misunderstood you. Sorry about that.
There are all sorts of things that work differently in VO than in the real world. The idea is to work out fair game mechanics that still 'feel' real.
Player sponsored bounties are an idea, but the proposed method is frankly a lot better. It provides all sorts of interesting motive forces ingame.
There are all sorts of things that work differently in VO than in the real world. The idea is to work out fair game mechanics that still 'feel' real.
Player sponsored bounties are an idea, but the proposed method is frankly a lot better. It provides all sorts of interesting motive forces ingame.
Soltis, please consider this a gentle prod, but I'm feeling that you're blotting out ideas you don't agree with by sheer volume of posts, let some other people respond a little.