I was going to post an analogy about putting sticking plasters on top of bandages, but thanks to Agony Aunt's excellent post here, I don't need to now - you've nailed the issue perfectly there mate. [up]
Proposal Discussion Kill Warrant Scanner Feedback
- Thread starter Sandro Sammarco
- Start date
I was going to post an analogy about putting sticking plasters on top of bandages, but thanks to Agony Aunt's excellent post here, I don't need to now - you've nailed the issue perfectly there mate. [up]
I don't think you can say that unless you have a very deep insight into how things are counted. For all we know the old system is completely rewritten to accommodate the new C&P system and old system wouldn't work any more, even if you wanted it to.
Instinctively I wouldn't want to use two systems either anyway though. In fact two systems like a REALLY BAD idea to me - a bug fest. Better to use the same C&P system for both .. and if necessary adjust influence + cred score generated on NPC's to reflect the fact they're not persistent like players are .. and adjust for the PvE gameplaying fact that a KWS scanned NPC has X% fewer bounties on it in Beyond Chapter 1. If each bounty pays X% more though, then what's the diff?
What I think IS a fair point is that local faction influence changes should be a yellow flag, just to double check that killing NPC's doesn't have unduly bigger effect on the BGS than killing players does, and vice versa.
Last edited:
Actually, it doesn't solve it for PvE. The larger issue is how only using the largest bounty affects reputation and CG progress. If the new KWS restricted the claimable bounties to the top 3 (very few NPC ships have more than 3 bounties) it would solve a lot of issues, as well as not being too punishing to criminals.
No? Then it would render the KWS completely useless for PvE... i'm fairly sure that isn't the case. Unless you misunderstand what i mean by secondary. I mean the bounties on NPCs that are not the primary one, the one the KWS is used to detect, which under the current system would be the largest non-primary one on players and NPCs. NPCs without a secondary... welll... erm..
To be honest, that is something i hadn't considered, but then, if you are working for bounties for the BGS etc, as it is now, you are normally going for the primary bounty. If you are using a KWS you're then (in my experience) cashing in those bounties in other locations to as not adversely affect your BGS work. For CGs, again, normally going for the primary bounty and hunting specific targets. I can only see it being useful in situations where getting targets with the primary bounty is an issue. I remember CGs in systems without RES being a problem, used to get around that by dropping into signal sources near the target faction's station.
Maybe this is a bigger issue than i'm thinking, but not something i feel is as big as the credit side one.
Last edited:
In 3.0 beta KWS offered only biggest bounty on ship. That's what caused biggest complains and why Sandro offers this change.
With all due respect Sandro, this sounds overly complicated, and useless mechanic from a players perspective. Maybe you have thoughts for the future, but this change makes obsolete the KWS for any NPC gameplay.
I do not involve in PvP at all.
All I see the KWS will be a modula non grata from now and on.
Not well thought solution if you ask me.
Again with all due respect and from the players perspective.
I do not involve in PvP at all.
All I see the KWS will be a modula non grata from now and on.
Not well thought solution if you ask me.
Again with all due respect and from the players perspective.
Thank you for responding.
The issue is that many of us use the KWS for gaining reputation, and not against commanders, but NPC's.
I understand your reasoning, if this game was a single-mode game; i.e., Open.
However many of us play only in solo, or private groups, and the gathering of reputations with factions is *far* more important to us than any bounty/credit reward.
I also realize the difficulty that may result in programming this lost functionality into the Beyond series. All modes are tied together by the BGS.
However, the loss of the KWS is a loss of gameplay value for those of us who stay out of Open. Your suggestion is interesting. It *might* help to minimize the impact on non-PVP gameplay.
But, if the implementation is such that reputation gathering is not productive any longer, then the KWS is a redundant utility slot.
Only in play can it be determined if this workaround is a reasonable compromise.
I thank you for coming forward, and presenting this suggestion.
Here's an example of what I mean https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/404627-Alliance-Security-Initiative-(Bounty-Hunting)
The home CG system is LP 128-32, yet there are two other systems (G146-60 and 37 Ursae Majoris) that have potentially better sites to progress the CG.
There is therefore no guarantee under the 3.0 system of only using the highest bounty that going to those 2 other systems will help at all. Also, if you use the KWS in LP 128-32 then there is no guarantee the bounty you wanted (that of LP 128-32 Corporation) wont be over-written by one from somewhere else. So it's better if you don't use the KWS at all...
So basically, the change negatively affects CG progress. If you then factor in, that the other factions in LP-128 could become hostile to you simply because bounties they used to take into account will no longer count, then it becomes a wider issue than just pure money.
Sandro's proposal does help, longer term but in no way helps the above while we wait.
Last edited:
@Sandro: is this proposed change for KWS meant also for npc bounty hunters?
It seems to me that two separate processes are being conflated as one when there is no need to combine them.
The Bounty Hunter doesn't care what happens to a player after their revival at the detention center.
All they know is that they were wanted in X number of systems, and they killed the target on behalf of all of them.
The big risk of your proposal about only clearing one bounty at the Detention Center, is that these locations just become base camps for griefers pretending to bounty hunt.
Any player trying to leave will likely still have bounties on them, potentially leading to repeated kills on them until they mode switch or all the bounties get claimed. This behaviour which would be seen a harassment at the moment would be vindicated by your proposal.
Basically, you've created the worst of both worlds.
For PvE, you've nerfed both an income and reputation source, as well as a driver to travel around cashing in your claims.
For PvP, you've created spawn points and justified repeated griefing.
The Bounty Hunter doesn't care what happens to a player after their revival at the detention center.
All they know is that they were wanted in X number of systems, and they killed the target on behalf of all of them.
The big risk of your proposal about only clearing one bounty at the Detention Center, is that these locations just become base camps for griefers pretending to bounty hunt.
Any player trying to leave will likely still have bounties on them, potentially leading to repeated kills on them until they mode switch or all the bounties get claimed. This behaviour which would be seen a harassment at the moment would be vindicated by your proposal.
Basically, you've created the worst of both worlds.
For PvE, you've nerfed both an income and reputation source, as well as a driver to travel around cashing in your claims.
For PvP, you've created spawn points and justified repeated griefing.
Sir:
This is not about the money.
It is about the faction reputation gained for each claimed bounty.
I hope this clarifies things.
Players leaving Detention Centers are put into solo mode automatically till they jump out/or low wake. That's like 3.0 b1 stuff.
Last edited:
I haven't seen that, but even if it is true - this system still legitimizes repeated hunting and killing of players.
My take is that there is no such thing as 'too harsh' or 'crippling' - if you can't take the punishment, don't do the crime, or 'git gud' and don't get caught.
It's not as if these bounties are huge. The only reason they could even get big is for ganking weiners in your battle-cruisers. If that's the case, you deserve all you get if you get caught.
The major issue I see with this proposal is the truly Lawless systems (i.e. the ones without ANY factions). This proposal would mean you never get anything in one of these systems (which incidentally, they constitute the vast majority of systems in the galaxy)
I actually think the KWS should just be the same as it currently is only instead of all pilot bounties, it get's all bounties on the scanned ship. I don't think it should legitimize attacking and killing that ship, however it should notify the relevant bounty issuers, so they can pick them up and prosecute (i.e. it forces detention if you are KWScanned and die in that encounter regardless of jurisdiction).
As far as the cost (possibly) being too high, my attitude is you do the crime you do the time, worst case scenario where all of it really can't be paid could be a bankruptcy option where you lose everything and start with a sidewinder and maybe $100 credits (you still keep your ranks, rep etc). I doubt this would actually happen much, once people knew it could, criminals would just need to be smart enough to know when it's time to throw away a ship that isn't worth keeping anymore (either sell it or never use it) with engineering changes, you could always make an identical ship (again if you're smart enough to not use old un-converted engineered modules). I actually think the added risk would be kind of fun.
I actually think the KWS should just be the same as it currently is only instead of all pilot bounties, it get's all bounties on the scanned ship. I don't think it should legitimize attacking and killing that ship, however it should notify the relevant bounty issuers, so they can pick them up and prosecute (i.e. it forces detention if you are KWScanned and die in that encounter regardless of jurisdiction).
As far as the cost (possibly) being too high, my attitude is you do the crime you do the time, worst case scenario where all of it really can't be paid could be a bankruptcy option where you lose everything and start with a sidewinder and maybe $100 credits (you still keep your ranks, rep etc). I doubt this would actually happen much, once people knew it could, criminals would just need to be smart enough to know when it's time to throw away a ship that isn't worth keeping anymore (either sell it or never use it) with engineering changes, you could always make an identical ship (again if you're smart enough to not use old un-converted engineered modules). I actually think the added risk would be kind of fun.
It's the rep, not the money.
Sorry. This game has an inherent schism in it, and Frontier backed the wrong horse on this one (KWS).
Not sure what's your gripe here. It seems Sandro position this as you just can't get clean ship with dying once. You don't get from the hook so easily. That's why you can peal bounties off the player one by one. But still....even let's say you get a hit on wanted ship and bring him down - he is moved lots of light years away. And it is someone who just obsessed to hunt you due of your many bounties - he will have to find you again. So putting distance between players will also bring some cool down.
Actually, the spawn point issue was addressed in the initial detention center proposal and implementation. Any Commander "brought to book" at the Detention Center remains clean until they Jump out of system, so it gives them a window in which to escape.
Not exactly. In Sandro proposal there's point that KWS will reveal other superpower bounties if player has ones (same with NPCs). So there still will be bounties in Anarchies - and no one to oppose to you cashing in.
I like the new KWS option. Better then the version in beta.
Let me try to work logically through the implications for bounties against NPCs. I'll put this in spoilers, as those who have already worked through this themselves (unlike me!) can skip straight to the summary point
Summary:
For me, what worries me is the fact that the impact is much greater in independent systems. It is not clear whether that is deliberate or unintended. Certainly, if either of the 3.0 proposals are what is implemented when 3.0 goes live, it would be essential for this to be taken into account when issuing bounty hunting community goals, as they will be much harder if the goal-issuing faction is independent.
This is based upon my understanding that NPC bounties work as follows (I am, of course, making the assumption that this isn't changing):
- Criminal NPCs will have one or two bounties.
- Bounty A will always be issued by one of the local minor factions.
- Bounty B will be issued either by another local minor faction, or by a superpower; and its amount will be equal to or less than bounty A.
Current (2.4) situation:
- Without a kill warrant scanner, you can only claim bounty A (or not, if in an anarchy system)
- With a kill warrant scanner, you can claim both bounty A and bounty B. Importantly, this increases your chances of getting a bounty for a specific minor faction, as you have two chances for the bounty to have been issued by the faction you are after.
Originally proposed 3.0 situation:
- KWS only shows the single highest bounty; thus you would only ever claim bounty A (since bounty B is never more than bounty A). For PvE, KWS would stop having any effect at all in non-anarchy systems, and in anarchy systems would only show up a single bounty (bounty A).
That would be a significant impact compared to the current live situation, especially when considering BGS / CG implications where players are particularly after bounties issued by a specific faction.
New proposed 3.0 situation:
- The kill warrant scanner will show up bounty B if (and only if) either (a) bounty B is issued by a minor faction of the same superpower that controls the system (so this will never apply in independent systems), or (b) bounty B is issued by a superpower.
This means that the earning potential of the KWS against NPCs would likely be significantly reduced in independent systems (as it would only show up bounty B when bounty B is issued by a superpower rather than a minor faction), and somewhat reduced compared to live in other systems (since it is quite common for secondary bounties to be issued by factions that are independent or from a different superpower). It would also impact the search for bounties from a specific minor faction for BGS / CG purposes, and again with a more significant impact in independent systems.
- Criminal NPCs will have one or two bounties.
- Bounty A will always be issued by one of the local minor factions.
- Bounty B will be issued either by another local minor faction, or by a superpower; and its amount will be equal to or less than bounty A.
Current (2.4) situation:
- Without a kill warrant scanner, you can only claim bounty A (or not, if in an anarchy system)
- With a kill warrant scanner, you can claim both bounty A and bounty B. Importantly, this increases your chances of getting a bounty for a specific minor faction, as you have two chances for the bounty to have been issued by the faction you are after.
Originally proposed 3.0 situation:
- KWS only shows the single highest bounty; thus you would only ever claim bounty A (since bounty B is never more than bounty A). For PvE, KWS would stop having any effect at all in non-anarchy systems, and in anarchy systems would only show up a single bounty (bounty A).
That would be a significant impact compared to the current live situation, especially when considering BGS / CG implications where players are particularly after bounties issued by a specific faction.
New proposed 3.0 situation:
- The kill warrant scanner will show up bounty B if (and only if) either (a) bounty B is issued by a minor faction of the same superpower that controls the system (so this will never apply in independent systems), or (b) bounty B is issued by a superpower.
This means that the earning potential of the KWS against NPCs would likely be significantly reduced in independent systems (as it would only show up bounty B when bounty B is issued by a superpower rather than a minor faction), and somewhat reduced compared to live in other systems (since it is quite common for secondary bounties to be issued by factions that are independent or from a different superpower). It would also impact the search for bounties from a specific minor faction for BGS / CG purposes, and again with a more significant impact in independent systems.
Summary:
For me, what worries me is the fact that the impact is much greater in independent systems. It is not clear whether that is deliberate or unintended. Certainly, if either of the 3.0 proposals are what is implemented when 3.0 goes live, it would be essential for this to be taken into account when issuing bounty hunting community goals, as they will be much harder if the goal-issuing faction is independent.