Personal revenge, player bounties.

[Lateralus]

Not sure about player-issued bounties (or contracts), there would have to be pretty stringent conditions such as;

• The player has attacked you while your criminal status was 'clean' in the last week (if you are wanted you cannot issue a contract on them)
• The contract only lasts up to one week
• You can only issue one contract for each time you were attacked by a player while you were clean
• You cannot issue contracts on players who are on your friends list or have been in the last 2 weeks
• The contract money comes from your own credits (when the contract is setup, the credits are ring-fenced for the duration of the contract's active period)

On top of that, we definitely need ways to track wanted players, I suggest;

• Player bounty data available from systems similar to trade data - you get it automatically from a system you visit if you have a kill-warrant scanner installed
• Every system needs a complete list of bounties available based on this bounty data, rather than a top 5 that doesn't work
• Tracker limpets that work for a set amount of time then expire - allowing the player to see the tracked-target on the galaxy map for the duration of the tracker-life
• Major faction bounties for the most notorious & prolific criminals - devs talked about including this back in the spring dev updates and haven't mentioned it since
• Each major factions 10 most wanted players on Galnet based on their total major faction bounty
• The 1million cr claimable bounty limit needs to be removed (there must be a cleverer way to stop exploiters surely?)

I also agree with Majinvash, something has to be done to reign-in the 'submit, high-wake' issue too otherwise all this is moot. I'm not suggesting it be completely removed from the game, but it shouldn't be usable at all times - maybe it should require an internal module that has ammo, like a SCB?

 

[Robert Maynard]

I also agree with Majinvash, something has to be done to reign-in the 'submit, high-wake' issue too otherwise all this is moot. I'm not suggesting it be completely removed from the game, but it shouldn't be usable at all times - maybe it should require an internal module that has ammo, like a SCB?

The Hyper-Drive does not need ammunition - just fuel.

 

[Deadspin]

There is still PM (private message) that can be spammed, that's how they do it in Guild Wars 2, and they spam so fast and with multiple accounts/character names you can barely catch their name to report/block, so the spamming COULD be a real issue and not just a minor annoyance that one may have to occasionally see.

And it's not about it effecting the economy, because technically it wont. I think the issue comes down to gold sellers spam, and believe me, just because you think there isn't a way, doesn't mean they wont find a way, then again, we may never see a single spam message. Personally I think they should NEVER add credit trading, nor player bounties. But again, neither really effects me as I play single player, but I still care for the whole of the community. There are too many exploits with player bounties, and too much scamming with trading credits. If players want a more "on the edge of your seat" experience, play chicken with a white dwarf.

If you get spammed with a PM, hit your comms panel key and (for me, it's been every time) a simple TAB hit will pull up said CMDR's name for the reply. I can see the potential issue with local spam though but I do believe the game has a spam buffer and due to the way things are instanced it's not like they're going to be able to hit everyone with spam all at once and just plop a new account in to replace the old one when they get called out (from a time and instancing perspective, at least). Another FDev could do is simply lock those accounts to Solo when they're found out.
.
I see everyone continuing to mention exploits and I'm led to believe that most people here are really using "exploit" as a blanket term for "I don't like someone earning more money than me". A true exploit gives a player an advantage over other players. Seeing as this game's PVP confrontations (Which is the only part of the game where players really butt heads) are almost entirely skill based and not based on the ship you fly (Unless you're a masochist and enjoy hunting other players in a Sidewinder or Eagle) the ability to make mad amounts of credits really isn't an exploit at all. The Anaconda/Vette/Cutter trio are not the end game here in the slightest.
.
Little Johnny down the block being able to buy a Conda 2 days after he logged in for the first time just means he's going to lose it nearly as fast, if not faster, because he doesn't know how to fly it or what its weak/strong points are.

Not played Eve (subscription) so don't know how they dealt with it.

My favorite part about your idea is this line and only because CCP's way of handling bounties has already been explained three or four times over by other players here.
.
Read back a few replies.
.
On high waking, eh, let em. I would like to see a proper combat-logging measure put in place. Again, like so many others, I will refer to how CCP handled combat logging.
.
Any time you took part in any type of combative action a timer would appear in the corner of your screen. For being attacked, but not shooting back, it was a very short timer. For doing the attacking it was a 15 minute timer. While this timer was active, even if you logged out, your ship would remain where you left it until the timer had expired. This would prevent griefers from being able to escape an overwhelming response while also acting as a double edged sword and preventing engaged players from jumping to PG/Solo to avoid being killed by another player (not necessarily a griefer).
.
Either way, this is entirely off topic. A bounty system is viable and copying CCP's method in order to make sure it isn't exploited for massive capitol gains would be the best route to take. At the same time, I wouldn't mind seeing FDev pursue a more robust system for players wanting to be bounty hunters, giving them more tools to track and bring down players with a bounty on their head.

 

[Lateralus]

The Hyper-Drive does not need ammunition - just fuel.

That's not what I meant; I was suggesting that instead of having an infinite amount of HW escapes, we get the option of installing a new internal module that you could fill a slot with - maybe called a 'mass-lock inhibitor' that would give you a specific amount of mass-lock escapes before requiring an ammo refill. This would make pursuing a target using the wake-scanner or the suggested 'tracker limpet' worthwhile as they would expend this escape ammo, eventually leaving them vulnerable to piracy/bounty-hunting.

The amount of escapes you get would depend on the class/rating of the mass-lock inhibitor you have installed vs the mass of your ship, I suggest classes 1-5 (variations in classes 4 and 5 would be power-hungry and heavy to balance).

With this feature in the game, mass lock could be then be changed to work the same way for LW and HW.

 

[Robert Maynard]

That's not what I meant; I was suggesting that instead of having an infinite amount of HW escapes, we get the option of installing a new internal module that you could fill a slot with - maybe called a 'mass-lock inhibitor' that would give you a specific amount of mass-lock escapes before requiring an ammo refill. This would make pursuing a target using the wake-scanner or the suggested 'tracker limpet' worthwhile as they would expend this escape ammo, eventually leaving them vulnerable to piracy/bounty-hunting.

The amount of escapes you get would depend on the class/rating of the mass-lock inhibitor you have installed vs the mass of your ship, I suggest classes 1-5 (variations in classes 4 and 5 would be power-hungry and heavy to balance).

With this feature in the game, mass lock could be then be changed to work the same way for LW and HW.

If the FSD Interdictor also requires to take ammunition then that'd not be too unreasonable.

 

[Tacheel]

I also agree with Majinvash, something has to be done to reign-in the 'submit, high-wake' issue too otherwise all this is moot. I'm not suggesting it be completely removed from the game, but it shouldn't be usable at all times - maybe it should require an internal module that has ammo, like a SCB?

Imho - this doesn't need extra complication or mechanics, just balancing of the mass lock/fsd cooldown mechanics etc.

If for example submitting only saved you from damage during an interdiction but still had the long cooldown, because you've allowed the interdictor to mess with your drive. Submitting to escape doesn't make sense - and it'd give a reason to fight the interdiction.

 

[Majinvash]

If the FSD Interdictor also requires to take ammunition then that'd not be too unreasonable.

Or Or Or...

Just make mass lock work like it should and take away this stupid get out of jail FREE mechanic.
It works around stations and in RES sites to inhibit High Wake but doesn't effect a sidewinder surrounded by Cutters.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=208483

Its still the simplest answer and easiest for the DEV team to sort.

But no, because everyone will get upset that the game would be harder and players who are better than others or are organised, some how have an unfair advantage over solo players.
And the game gets dangerously close to content being an option, rather than.. OH NO.. Submit, WEE FREEDOM.. zzzzz

So instead all these fantastic ideas come up, which are even less likely to happen.

Majinvash
The Voice of Open

 

[Daffan]

"2) Maybe we can get an option to put bounty on others manually from our own money?"

Not a good idea, would lead to credit farming, scams, cash for credits, exploits stype stuff in no time at all.

Umm. No. EVE doesn't have credit farming from bounties anymore. They fixed it years ago.

That's not what I meant; I was suggesting that instead of having an infinite amount of HW escapes, we get the option of installing a new internal module that you could fill a slot with - maybe called a 'mass-lock inhibitor' that would give you a specific amount of mass-lock escapes before requiring an ammo refill. This would make pursuing a target using the wake-scanner or the suggested 'tracker limpet' worthwhile as they would expend this escape ammo, eventually leaving them vulnerable to piracy/bounty-hunting.

The amount of escapes you get would depend on the class/rating of the mass-lock inhibitor you have installed vs the mass of your ship, I suggest classes 1-5 (variations in classes 4 and 5 would be power-hungry and heavy to balance).

With this feature in the game, mass lock could be then be changed to work the same way for LW and HW.

Mass should account in High waking period.

Secondly, make a new module that can slow FSD charge (or agility, or speed) based on percentage %. How does it work to keep it balanced? The less mass your ship, the more effective the module is. Boom, small ships become more relevant in PvP and wings and big ships don't get mega OP at keeping people in the fight (like FDL, Clipper)

 

[LawHunter]

My favorite part about your idea is this line and only because CCP's way of handling bounties has already been explained three or four times over by other players here.
.
Read back a few replies.
..

Thanks for the order but I have busy life and can't read every single post. Just putting out my idea. Which makes sense. Read it, move on.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Or Or Or...

Just make mass lock work like it should and take away this stupid get out of jail FREE mechanic.
It works around stations and in RES sites to inhibit High Wake but doesn't effect a sidewinder surrounded by Cutters.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=208483

Its still the simplest answer and easiest for the DEV team to sort.

But no, because everyone will get upset that the game would be harder and players who are better than others or are organised, some how have an unfair advantage over solo players.
And the game gets dangerously close to content being an option, rather than.. OH NO.. Submit, WEE FREEDOM.. zzzzz

So instead all these fantastic ideas come up, which are even less likely to happen.

Majinvash
The Voice of Open

Maybe, given that Frontier could have removed the short FSD delay after submission when they briefly considered it some time ago - but didn't - Frontier are considering the fact that not all of the player-base thrives on combat and are walking a narrow path trying to satisfy the majority of players the majority of the time with the mechanics available to them and the effect that that has on combat in general and PvP in particular. A balancing act, if you like, between the wants of the interdictor and those of the interdictee. Similarly with no mass-lock on Hyper-Jump.