[All] Bounties \ Hitlist - A possible solution to an age old problem.

For ages the subject has come up about bounties being unfair. I have personally made suggestions for ways to implement "protection" against people or changing costs to defending against attacks. All of which have been dismissed by the majority with the "it's a combat based game" mentality. It took a few other people giving decent debate on the subject (and not just whining) to give valid reason my suggestions weren't worthwhile.

In talking with players that I got to start playing the different games have come up with an idea I think is worth discussing when it comes to limiting the use of bounties by high level players on players much lower than themselves. Simply put, place a minimum on level you can bounty akin to the way attacking people with less experience is already in place.

What most have suggested is around a 25-30% cap on placing a bounty. So, that would mean a level 10,000 player would only be able to place a bounty on someone with a level of 2,500-3,000 or higher. A level 100 player would be able to place bounties on people starting at level 25-30. There would be no upward limit, if a level 100 player wants to bounty a level 10,000 player... let them.

This wouldn't apply to retaliations, obviously. If a person attacks or bounties someone of higher level, they deserve to get the same in return.

I look forward to a decent debate on this.

 

new players have a 30 day protection and also cannot be listed by anyone higher until they reach level 300,with the raids they can reach over level 2k way before that 30 day protection runs out, in fact they can do it a few days with raids, so No I gotta say no to your idea. Raid have changed the whole dynamic of the games, as it is and not for the good of the game,IMO .

 

Thanks for your input Kirsten. Your points for low level are valid, but what is your opinion on limiting the very high level (say 10,000+) from going after people still relatively low in comparison? I have a couple people in Viking Clan on Server2 that are being targeted by a person 9,000+ levels higher than them as a result of fighting in Guild Wars that happened quite a long time ago. Whenever these people are on & not in the hospital, this person bounties them. 1 of them would be safe from future bounties (for now) by this person while the other is within the 25% range (barely). The limit would thus protect some people in circumstances such as this while others wouldn't benefit. I'm an example of the latter for this person, but I make enough income to afford bounty traps on her. I have a nice buffer when I go into the hospital with a 50,000 health. I can keep myself from being bountied most of the time simply by attacking a boss enough to drop my health below the hospital threshold.

ADDENDUM: Perhaps using the same formula for being able to attack people of lower XP in battle could be applied to making bounties (not sure exactly how it works, I just know I sometimes cannot attack some people days after their initial attack).

 

I like the idea of using the same dynamics as the fight list basically they coudnt bounty anyone not on the fight list unless attacked first

 

I'd like to know that trick LOL, get your fact's right.

 

Thank you JADES for correcting my misconception.

Considering the "fact" you can be hitlisted while in the hospital isn't listed in the app & I was told long ago that you couldn't be hitlisted while in the hospital... as far as I knew what I knew was correct. I never tried to hitlist someone in the hospital & I was never hitlisted while I was in the hospital, so there was no reason to believe different. As it is, I seldom place a bounty or hit on anyone in the over 5 years I've been playing LCN, VC, & PC.

 

I can be listed if in the hospital ,if I have been offline long enough for my health to creep up just enough. If I were already listed and dead and offline for the same time, then no I have never been listed. So you don't set bounties, and you suggest limiting them?? Am I reading that right?? When for most players that is a very big part of the game, listing can be fun, brings some action to the game, getting a rival list definitely has benefits. I feel there are many limits in the game, in many areas ,so I gotta say I don't feel we need to make more limits,but I do understand why,you are suggesting it. There are a ways to avoid being listed ,may keep someone from being listed over and over ,for example if the person who likes to list someone is in the process of doing it ,don't heal, if ya want to not get listed when ya offline,a lot of players eat a trap,take a pill,kill themselves , how ever ya want to put it. This way the decision is now in your hands about when you die.

 

i just throw up a bunch of hits one after the other, that way only one of them can retaliate and take me out.

 

There is a vital point you are missing.

The game is built to depend on your squad. If your squad can't actually help you in a fight you have now taken out a large part of the game for large number of players.

My entire game play is pretty much based on reading feed and reacting to my squad under attack. Big acct on kp2 and little acct on fb.

I stir stuff up on fb so my higher squad has something to do. And my littles on kp do the same.

And as a bonus. The other high levels heal to go after that little one on their rivals. so yay the big ones can get a few attacks in on the hiders who only heal to return fire.

My point I suppose is that no matter what "protection" you try to give you kill the game.

little bosses give garbage xp. you only get a limited number of helps on things.

What you suggest just segregates the entire game.

That's what I see from it anyway. Who knows I may be entirely off base.

But here's the thing. I have 3 people on my FL on kp2. Finding honorables is near impossible with hidden factions and disabled links everywhere. So who exactly am I going to use the pvp against if you take away my ability to at least help my squad?

 

yeah, i like to stir stuff up, too. i just hate the players that don't actually play the games on a regular basis and have a load of coin sitting there from who knows when. then they log in just to bounty me and log out.

 

I don't need an armada ,squad ,guild to stir up trouble , lol , trouble finds me

 

honestly why is listing even an issue anymore, w/ all the free xp kano hands out listing has become irrelevant... maybe if they doubled or tripled the xp loss it may have some effect on leveling... yesterday i ate 25 traps,got listed multiple times and still leveled within a few hours... give it a rest and enjoy the killing

 

Totally

 

i seem to resemble this remark.

 

First: Thanks everyone for debating the topic. It looks like we are making more progress & interaction on the topic than I've seen for similar in the past.

Second: The main reason for bringing the topic to attentions is simply because of conversations I've had with people I've gotten to try playing the games (mostly over at Kongregate). They talked about the bounties by people thousands of levels higher than themselves that attacking in response wouldn't do anything but bring death & doom down upon them. Or, because of their incomes, would have to save money for days or even a week or greater just to place a bounty trap that would probably only anger whomever placed it in the first place.

Thanks AlterEgoT for bring up the group dynamic aspect. Thinking along the lines for reliance on fellow members could be used to work around the limitation. A person who wants to set a bounty on someone out of their range could simply request others in their guild, armada, etc., to place the bounty for them. I know people that can't afford the cost to place a bounty on someone often have players with enough income or level to do it for them.

So, in another way of looking at it, putting a limit like this would actually influence people to get help from their fellow players. It could very well help to increase participation & interaction in the game. (Something I hadn't considered until AlterEgoT brought that point of view to light).

 

No

Not really. As a level 4k. I'd have NOTHING to do.

You seem to have missed the point entirely.

You would effectively create my account as only a tattle tell. All I would be able to do is tell one squad member to list for another squad member I see in feed.

what fun is that?

To understand you need to think of what you would do when you have been around long enough to have run out of things to do.

I can look back and remember the frustration. And I distinctly remember asking squad what I was doing to get listed I wasn't even a fighter at the time. But that's just it. The difference is......I asked and I kept going and learning. If they aren't willing to adapt they won't survive a fight. No matter what level they are and what level is attacking them.

But as mentioned. So you die. Big whoop. At the levels that it is a problem of being chained the xp is out of this world.

So quite honestly, we as higher levels should bully them more to even out the xp they receive versus what we can attain versus what we need.

I'm afraid I'm not making it clear.

If one of my little guys comes to me and says hey this one won't leave me alone. I'm likely to list for it. Giving it the chance to make some cash in the process to afford the traps.

Already as it is I can't help anything under level 300 at all really. Their bosses give garbage xp. So that really just leaves challenge helps. The 1 click per day isn't even worth squading for. If I can't help them in fights why bother?
As it is they will level up to be integral to the game but if I'm limited to a certain range most of em will never reach it. Therefore it would be wise for me to squad 30 active folks in the higher ranks and just be able to catch.

So not only would you be affecting their squad strength. you'd be killing the game at level oh 900 or so. Because the FL dies out.

Quite frankly ALL of these bully arguments have the same fatal flaw.

It's an individual effort in a group setting. Without the group there is very little draw to the game. Might as well click the mouse on the wallpaper on your desktop once you get above shoot probably lower than 900.

Take away the ability for squad to mix it up together and you take away a main component of the game.

Here is another tidbit. Most of the folks that quit over it.....will quit shortly anyway.

You have no idea the number of truces i've worked out for folks that have complained only to have them quit a month later anyway.

Sorry this is convoluted. It's been a very long day.

My suggestion for those that are having trouble......Find that huge slayer that will back you up and let them at it. They are easy to spot. Just look at the hits placed.

Limiting the entire game because a few levels haven't gotten the hang of the style of game is not going to be the answer.

 

As someone who has been around longer than many - LCN: 5.45 years, VC: 6.07 years, & PC: 5.64 years (to date), bringing about topics to debate is every bit worth the effort by those who participate. I formerly worked as a special consultant for Clipwire Games on their Nitrous Racing game when it was still active, so it's not like I'm bringing a viewpoint strictly from a player only point of view - I've actually worked hand in hand with app developers in the past to improve or fix problems in actual games. This is why I bring up these topics to discuss & debate. What it may start out as may not be what it ends up as - if it ends being anything at all. However, the process is worth the effort even if the outcome isn't.

 

That says it all

 

I have no opinion on the debate above, but I think the honourable listing, as it currently is, has one big failure in its logic. Kano thinks that hitlisting a player ABOVE your honourable hitlist boundaries somehow isn't honourable anymore. I find it VERY honourable for example that a lvl 1000 hitlists a lvl 5000 player So... does Kano think that is somehow cowardish? Suicide missions are that very seldom.

 

Do not get stuck on the word honorable, it is just another achievement in all out fighting game. IMO anything goes as long as it is within the TOS.