Bounty Rewards

I don't really see much value in a bounty if it is a single kill quest. I like what EVE has done, when you kill a player with a bounty, you get a reward proportional to how much money the target lost.

When players issue a bounty, it shouldn't be a single quest, it should stay open for a week, and re-issue until the contract is finished. For the contract to finish, the target player must lose an amount of money specified by the contract. If you have the contract, and kill the target, you get an amount proportional to the reward money based on what they lost. So if the contract is 1000 coin, and the target must lose 100 coin, you get 10 coin for every 1 coin you make the target lose.

The value of the kill is determined by the regional average market value of what they lost.

If a contract isn't taken, or is not emptied, after a week, the player can collect their money, minus the posting fee.

I like the idea of bounty lasting longer too and also the EVE mechanism. I would like to see bounties issued by settlements against outlaw groups as well

I like the idea of bounty lasting longer too and also the EVE mechanism. I would like to see bounties issued by settlements against outlaw groups as well

That is called a war. If you want to place a bounty, as as settlement, then propose a war against the company. If they agree, you also open up all members of your settlement to consensual PVP.

It is so stunning to me. The most frequent voices calling for the death if others, are those that claim to be good. Oh how oppressive these large, good settlements are.

It will be so easy for my company of bandits to make gold from your corruption. We will make it when you move against the evil ones. We will make it when you look to crush those that choose no side. We will make it most, when the good settlements eat their own.

Well, the evil settlement could always place a bounty on the heads of good organizations too, it is not a goodie goodie exclusivity you konw...

But I agree with you that it would look much like war, just would cost the settlement some really high amount of money.

Also, I agree that some of the most subversive voices I've seen in this forum are just the voices of some who call themselves "the good side". Lets see how they will really behave in game...

How would a settlement 'wage war' against a group of bandits? Assuming that bandits normally operate as CC's out of hideouts, I think there should be a way for a settlement or kingdom to post bounties for attacking members of the bandit CC, and even a bounty for finding the hideout.

How would a settlement 'wage war' against a group of bandits? Assuming that bandits normally operate as CC's out of hideouts, I think there should be a way for a settlement or kingdom to post bounties for attacking members of the bandit CC, and even a bounty for finding the hideout.

Wouldn't you wage war against the CC (the UnNamed X) for example. It get's tougher if they don't have a CC. The hardest crime of all to stop is random acts of violence. Maybe only CC's could gain hideouts.

It will be interesting to see if non-CC small bandit groups have much in the way of access to skill training. Equipment and weapons they can obviously steal.

To our knowledge, CC's can't wage war, only settlement and kingdoms. I just want the mechanics in place so I can make such a contract. If it isn't a CC, just a group of unaffiliated individuals, I want to be able to create a contract that pays out when a hideout is destroyed that was used by people/CCs I designate.

Anyone can get a hideout that has the proper skills at materials, you then get to determine who has access. I don't think they should limit them, they will probably be the primary home base for the first several months of the game.

I don't really see much value in a bounty if it is a single kill quest. I like what EVE has done, when you kill a player with a bounty, you get a reward proportional to how much money the target lost.

When players issue a bounty, it shouldn't be a single quest, it should stay open for a week, and re-issue until the contract is finished. For the contract to finish, the target player must lose an amount of money specified by the contract. If you have the contract, and kill the target, you get an amount proportional to the reward money based on what they lost. So if the contract is 1000 coin, and the target must lose 100 coin, you get 10 coin for every 1 coin you make the target lose.

The value of the kill is determined by the regional average market value of what they lost.

If a contract isn't taken, or is not emptied, after a week, the player can collect their money, minus the posting fee.

No, I really can't see how this would be better, other than give bounty hunters an excuse to kill poor players again and again.

Looting other characters is is kind of weird too, after all real life bounty hunters don't get to keep the the equipment of those they hunt.

It will be interesting to see if non-CC small bandit groups have much in the way of access to skill training. Equipment and weapons they can obviously steal.

First I'm assuming "CC" stands for Chartered Company, which maybe a term only used here on the forums. Here it wrongly refers to those who bought the Guild Croudforger KS. My company is larger than many on that list but we all bought in as individuals.

As to your question, a non company, individual bandit would have access to any settlement his / her alignment permits. Based on my reading and inferences, the limit to skills would be only to the skills that are alignment based.

Example: Let say there is a spell / skill ability called: Serene Aura (NG), a Chaotic Evil character may not be able to train in it at all or may be severely limited in how far he/she can train in it. It may not be available in a CE settlement or extremely rare.

This is my hope that this how how skills vs. alignment work.

As for a settlement waging war on a company, we don't have the mechanics yet. But we do have idea of how to react if that should happen.

Hideouts can be destroyed, I read that somewhere. But not all bandit companies may have hideouts. Other options may be a better choice.

That's an interesting alternative. I like the flexibility of it to gauge a level of cost.

But I wonder if that could be achieved by having the bounty simply last longer as well. Atm, a bounty seems too short: I mean a bounty is all about hounding the target (you can run but you can't hide) and inconveniencing them that way as well, so they may not immediately get hit, but the bounty is out there: Perhaps adding a second bounty after the initial 24hrs, ie 24-48-72... 1-2-3 contracts running on the same target?

The other consideration we don't know about, is how the Career of Bounty-Hunter progresses with increasing positive success rate of b-contracts completed? Does that make the player better at bounty-hunting or improve their reputation/cost etc or all 3?

How would a settlement 'wage war' against a group of bandits? Assuming that bandits normally operate as CC's out of hideouts, I think there should be a way for a settlement or kingdom to post bounties for attacking members of the bandit CC, and even a bounty for finding the hideout.

That is exactly the kind of stuff I'm talking about. Also if they have no official guild that would work too as no war could be waged against individuals. After a long carrer of crime they could be considered public enemies of some settlement(s).

There should be a way for a settlement to use contracts (not bounties) to do things like locate a bandit hideout, or destroy the hideout. If the bandits are not operating out of a settlement, or are not even formed into a CC ie. they are just a Pug of outlaw characters terrorizing an area, a settlement should be able to use a contract(s) to stop them from attacking people. (I'm using a contract because I don't know if a settlement can issue a bounty. I'm pretty sure that bounties can only be issued if some form of action is taken by one player against another player, so I'm unsure how bounties would come into play on a settlement level).

As to your question, a non company, individual bandit would have access to any settlement his / her alignment permits. Based on my reading and inferences, the limit to skills would be only to the skills that are alignment based.

Example: Let say there is a spell / skill ability called: Serene Aura (NG), a Chaotic Evil character may not be able to train in it at all or may be severely limited in how far he/she can train in it. It may not be available in a CE settlement or extremely rare.

This is my hope that this how how skills vs. alignment work.

I still think GW must be very, very carefull while balancing this alingment-based skill access of players and settlements. I also still think that the neutral Settlements, especially TN, should be some kind of neutral skill access territory and allow all the alignments to train most of the stuff they need. Because if you make it much difficult for Evil (especially CE) to have access to some skills the appeal of playing an evil char will be severelly reduced. They will already be hunted downw allover the good aligned settlements so reduce too muche their access to skills will be an unbalance that I'm not sure will be compensated by the possibylity of robbering os cast evil spells. I trust the DEVs ability to handle that correctly though.

Bounty, Contracts and Wars are all aspects of the game that have to be fleshed out.

I have some concerns about wars for instance. but I will save that for its own thread because this one is about Bounties.

Here is another Bounty Question:

Will it be possible to Reward a Bounty with something other than coins?

Reward: Items, Training or Other Services, Access to Resources, etc.

I could see using this as an initiation process for my company. "Hey Recruit, fulfill this bounty and you will get membership in The UnNamed Company."

Meanwhile the target of the bounty is one of our own, and we gank the recruit. If he holds his own for a bit and impresses us, we spare him and admit him.... Hehehe... Then he can look back on this, years from then and think "Good times, good times you bastrds", as he does it to some new recruit.

I think the enemy list is quite functional as killers stay on bounty list for several days and the bounty can be renewed. And the bounty hunters can loot the kill. Sounds good to me.

Bounty, Contracts and Wars are all aspects of the game that have to be fleshed out.

I have some concerns about wars for instance. but I will save that for its own thread because this one is about Bounties.

Here is another Bounty Question:

Will it be possible to Reward a Bounty with something other than coins?

Reward: Items, Training or Other Services, Access to Resources, etc.

I could see using this as an initiation process for my company. "Hey Recruit, fulfill this bounty and you will get membership in The UnNamed Company."

Meanwhile the target of the bounty is one of our own, and we gank the recruit. If he holds his own for a bit and impresses us, we spare him and admit him.... Hehehe... Then he can look back on this, years from then and think "Good times, good times you bastrds", as he does it to some new recruit.

A Very good idea!

What I'm unsure about is how the game will be able to recognize if the reward has been given in your example. In the blog that mentions contracts they use an example of a player issuing a contract where they are seeking 10 rat tails. Unless rat tails are one of the selectable choices within the contract system, how would the game tell that 10 rat tails were delivered?

This is similar to settlement laws. If a settlement passes a law outlawing say an action or an item, how would the game recognize if that this has been done within its boarders unless the action/thing were part of a selectable option within the settlement laws system?

This seems like a difficult hurdle to overcome, but hopefully the Devs have already worked out a fix for these issues <wg>

Bluddwolf wrote:

Will it be possible to Reward a Bounty with something other than coins?

Reward: Items, Training or Other Services, Access to Resources, etc.

I could see using this as an initiation process for my company. "Hey Recruit, fulfill this bounty and you will get membership in The UnNamed Company."

Meanwhile the target of the bounty is one of our own, and we gank the recruit. If he holds his own for a bit and impresses us, we spare him and admit him.... Hehehe... Then he can look back on this, years from then and think "Good times, good times you bastrds", as he does it to some new recruit.

A Very good idea!

What I'm unsure about is how the game will be able to recognize if the reward has been given in your example. In the blog that mentions contracts they use an example of a player issuing a contract where they are seeking 10 rat tails. Unless rat tails are one of the selectable choices within the contract system, how would the game tell that 10 rat tails were delivered?

...

This seems like a difficult hurdle to overcome, but hopefully the Devs have already worked out a fix for these issues <wg>

Bluddwolf, I love that idea because it's just like gang initiation. It kind of creeps me out. Thumbs up.

Valandur, I think that would be pretty easy to do if the GUI basically had a box (or several) into which one could place items, gold, etc to be the reward. The difficult thing would be rewarding guild membership, training, etc. Those things are intangible and would have to be selections, as you said, in the GUI.