Bounty Hunter Archive
Thread: If a player could offert a bounty?
Mirthain
Thu Jun 30, 2005 9:01 pm
#14
Having pretty much avoided PvP, I don't know if they still don't enforce Decay on PvP death, but that being said, they could put a game flag in place where you can "sign" up for PvP that is not dependant on the GCW.
If someone tries to put a bounty on someone who hasn't signed up for it, then the terminal would deny the contract, but if the person did sign up for it, then the contract could go through. Make something that the player has to actually go sign up for.
The reason I mentioned the Decay rule is that the only way I can see people agreeing to put themselves in danger like that is if they don't have anything to lose.
Talen.
RC_P_Smooth
Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:43 pm
#15
all these ideas are great but heres another one, how about players get on the boards due to actions they've done, maybe they killed the "wrong" NPC, like another NPC's brother or something and then that NPC would put a bounty on the player, i know this is straying from the idea of players putting other players up but still it would be better than just jedi to say the least.
Agricola1
Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:53 pm
#16
ShedNaved wrote:
I'm prety sure this kind of idea already been on the board at a moment or an other.... but I want to know the general oppinion. Would it be good if a player could offert a bounty for an other player? He go on the terminal, write the name, transfert the money then the name is on the term with the amount. How would it be?
They had been talking about this before I started playing. The simple truth is just forget it, SWG is a PVE/Grinding/Carebear orientated game and this will never happen due to carebears complaining that they're forced to PvP. If you make it an option to be a candidate for a bounty then no-one will opt in. Don't want to believe me? Ask a Dev/CSR/SOE and you'll get silence back, since when were good ideas ever taken up by the devs at SOE?
STLpMpNu
Fri Jul 01, 2005 1:02 am
#17
Why not just make the person calling the mission payfour timesthe bounty. Maybe allow one a month timer before you can issue another bounty. If it would work like that think the person should recieve a email saying such and such issued a bounty on you you now have a option to put a bounty on them at half the price or something along those lines.
IMO this is a mmo you should beable to walk up to a rebel if imperial and kill him vice versa. no inbetweens no on leave none of the bs stuff. PvP is part of the game and i don't think there should be a way around it. Only penality now is maybe some faction or decay if you don't clone right away.
Agricola1
Fri Jul 01, 2005 3:55 am
#18
STLpMpNu wrote:
Why not just make the person calling the mission payfour timesthe bounty. Maybe allow one a month timer before you can issue another bounty. If it would work like that think the person should recieve a email saying such and such issued a bounty on you you now have a option to put a bounty on them at half the price or something along those lines.
IMO this is a mmo you should beable to walk up to a rebel if imperial and kill him vice versa. no inbetweens no on leave none of the bs stuff. PvP is part of the game and i don't think there should be a way around it. Only penality now is maybe some faction or decay if you don't clone right away.
If someone seriously believed that SOE would even consider it I'd advise them to put the crack pipe down. BH is SOE's way of discouraging carebears from grinding jedi nothing more nothing less.
Jargal
Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:27 am
#19
Some good posts here. Some of them more negative than others, but stilla fewgood posts.
I think there should be some kind of timer that prevents the same player issue bounties on some other player repetedly. But if theres a accept that has to be made by the reciver, we shouldnt need it. It's up to the person who wants to get hunted to set the limit of how many he thinks he can survive.
Would be awsome with some kind of reward (badge or something) that proves that the player has been 'most wanted in the galaxy' 
RedVenom400
Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:29 am
#20
one way to implement it but it would be stupid is that the player can only be killed while overt , otherwise people will cry and complain about been "forced to pvp"
edit: i heard about someone suggesting opting in , this would be an interesting choice , they should open a new theme park , or add this to jabbas theme park , once you are done with the regular boring quests there , jabba offers you a permanent job , there would be two kinds of jobs , one low risk (ie: pve only players) and high risk (pvpers) , then jabba would give you different assigments , both in space and on ground , as long as you work for jabba you will level trough his ranks and you will get access to lower cost resources , (crafting) that you could sell to crafters , of course the high risk employees would get it cheaper than the low risk (there has to be a big difference or there is no point, but there is a catch , as long as you work for jabba any player can set a bounty on you , any ,the difference would be that high risk would get players going after them , and low risk would get npcs bounty hunters going after them.
same system could be implemented for jedi , any jedi padawan and below would only get npc bh after them , once the jedi enter the FRS (force ranking system) then they would go to the player bh terminals , at this point there would be plenty of bounties to keep the bh happy ,
in addition give smuggelers bonuses to stay off the terminals over other professions ,
suggestions ?
Message Edited by RedVenom400 on 07-01-2005 08:46 AM
Message Edited by RedVenom400 on 07-01-2005 08:48 AM
Jargal
Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:43 am
#21
With an accept from the reciver (the one that gets an bounty on his head) you cannot be forced into pvp. If you don't want part of player bounties you just simply cancel the bounty being place on you. Just as you cancel a /duel request.
This is no forced pvp...you getting it?
Vlamr
Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:56 am
#22
Its very simple to handle the carebears. When you create the system, you say: "You can either do these player ran missions which will run the chance of you getting killed in PVP and losing XP or whatever or you can opt out and not do these types of missions". It would be an up front understanding much like how being a Jedi is. A player can do it or not do it but by doing it, they would have to realize they are running some risks. If they dont want to participate then thats fine. The only way I see a system like this working is if it is totally player controlled and ran with player money and player items. If you want a mission that pays money and items but dont want to risk your head then go do a regular mission and dont complain. Of course there will always be that lone dork that complains loud enough that SOE will change everything to the way they want!
Agricola1
Fri Jul 01, 2005 6:19 am
#24
That says it all really doesn't it? Trouble is the dork isn't alone, there are a massive amount of them and they whine the loudest. Also if it was opt in or you had to accept the bounty there would be very few players that would accept, the few that would are BH but they want to do the hunting. Face it you're carebear control always have been always will be.
Vlamr wrote:
Of course there will always be that lone dork that complains loud enough that SOE will change everything to the way they want!
Vlamr
Fri Jul 01, 2005 6:33 am
#25
Heres an idea. When a player creates a missions, have some sort of options letting others know that are willing to take it if it is a bountyable mission or not. In other words if its not a bounty mission then they run no risk but if it is then they know they can be hunted. Chances are though players would start creating bountyable missions and would have huge payouts. So I still think there would be complaints but I think this way it would keep it to a minimum.
Just have some sort of checkbox control in the setup screen for the mission spcifying if you want your player created mission to be a bountyable mission if it is failed. I think this sort of system would be very easy to do. I guess we will never know though. SOE is probably never going to implement any good ideas. Havnt seem one good idea implemented in this game. Have seen lots of bad ones though.
Just have some sort of checkbox control in the setup screen for the mission spcifying if you want your player created mission to be a bountyable mission if it is failed. I think this sort of system would be very easy to do. I guess we will never know though. SOE is probably never going to implement any good ideas. Havnt seem one good idea implemented in this game. Have seen lots of bad ones though.
STLpMpNu
Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:15 am
#26
Agricola1 wrote:
STLpMpNu wrote:
Why not just make the person calling the mission payfour timesthe bounty. Maybe allow one a month timer before you can issue another bounty. If it would work like that think the person should recieve a email saying such and such issued a bounty on you you now have a option to put a bounty on them at half the price or something along those lines.
IMO this is a mmo you should beable to walk up to a rebel if imperial and kill him vice versa. no inbetweens no on leave none of the bs stuff. PvP is part of the game and i don't think there should be a way around it. Only penality now is maybe some faction or decay if you don't clone right away.
If someone seriously believed that SOE would even consider it I'd advise them to put the crack pipe down. BH is SOE's way of discouraging carebears from grinding jedi nothing more nothing less.
I find that statement amussing considering most bh's i come across as you put it are "carebears". But anyway thats aside the point. SOE prolly wont but it would be nice to kill or have the people killed who run there mouth to much.