open All Channels
seplocked Crime and Punishment
blankseplocked New Ransome Mechanic?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic

Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.08.18 08:30:00 - [31]
 

Edited by: Aralyn Cormallen on 18/08/2010 08:30:53
Originally by: Taedrin

2) The ransom mechanic rewards a pirate for honoring a ransom. For example, an honored ransom will reward the pirate with a sec status reimbursement from aggressive action. Other possible rewards would be to remove the pirates' GCCs so that sentries stop shooting them. Another possible reward would be that a pirate that never dishonors a ransom never goes below a certain sec status (such as -5). In fact you could extend this by having honored ransoms IMPROVE sec status up to this same level. Alternatively, this level could be raised higher, so that a pirate who ransoms can still enter some high sec systems, but a pirate who dishonors ransom can not.

3) The ransom mechanic punishes a pirate for dishonoring a ransom. For example, a dishonored reward will cause the pirate to receive a harsher sec status reduction. The GCC could also be extended for a longer period of time. If this isn't harsh enough, you could have stations/stargates refuse access to pirates who dishonor ransoms for a time - thus trapping the pirates in the solar system.


This solution is easily the best as it keeps things simple, and does not prevent anyone dishonouring if they wish. It pretty much solves all evils of the current system; there is an incentive for the pirate to honour the ransom (beyond 'catch and release' theory to create good will with the targets), if a player wants to dishonour, there is nothing stopping him, and the sec status rewards and penalties will help the target judge whether he's facing a honourable prate or not (only yellow, hmm, he is either new to it, or honourable, solid red, likely an unrepentant murderer). Following on from this, it incentivises -10 pirates to honour a ransom or two in order to bring their sec status back up so that bears see a softer sec status and are tricked into believing its an honourable pirate, win-win.

Sure, the idea has quite a few work-arounds (pirates ransoming each other to lift their sec status, and non-corp alts to kill the ransomed bear instead; but hell, it wouldn't be eve if you couldn't abuse the system Razz




Neo Rainhart
Guerilla Republik
Excuses.
Posted - 2010.08.18 09:05:00 - [32]
 

But that would mean that CCP would support piracy in EVE Shocked

This is blasphemy



ugh

Noir Avlaa
Amarr
Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome
Posted - 2010.08.18 10:19:00 - [33]
 

As intended. If you can't persuade someone to pay a ransom that's your problem, don't fix something that isn't broken.

Daool
Posted - 2010.08.18 12:03:00 - [34]
 

Of course this whole thread could be missing an essential point.

Carebears as a group are (possibly) slowly waking up to the fact that if EVERYONE (or even just enough) stopped paying ransoms EVER then the number of pirates would rapidly drop (or at least turn far more on each other for bounties than carebears for ransoms).

Just don't pay, whether you loose the ship or not.

Imagine an eve where pirates KNOW that income from ransoms will always be effectively NILL? Shocked


Man Barthelme
The Tuskers
Posted - 2010.08.18 12:36:00 - [35]
 

Voting no on the ransom mechanic.

I get ransoms pretty regularly. I am in a corp that makes a point of honoring them, and it's possible that helps us get more than we might otherwise. I can't speak for the experiences of players in other corps, but I'm pretty sure ransoming is alive and well.

I vote no for a couple of reasons:

A captured pilot faces a real dilemma. Will the pirates keep their word? Will I pay and maybe be destroyed anyway? Should I refuse and just die? Self-destruct? Give 'em the finger in local and go out in a blaze of glory? The pilot's decision rests on a complex of his previous experiences, his goals ingame, his RL psychology, his desires, his fears, his wallet balance. A mechanic makes the whole experience too antiseptic, too safe, and decreases the importance of the game's human element. It drains a lot of the emotional charge out of the transaction.

Isk is not the only form of payment. Sometimes we have to get creative with our ransoms. We've had guys with no isk contract ships to us. We've had new players tell jokes. We once got a recipe for schnitzel. We forced a guy to mine xx amount of ore. All of these things were fun, and they created memories for both the pirates and the victims. We've had lengthy conversations with many of our victims, and the overwhelming majority of those convos have ended with everyone in good humor (honoring the ransom and being polite play a big part in that). Interactions like these are part of the fun. A ransom mechanic has the potential to undermine them and make the game less interesting.

If you're not getting ransoms keep trying. Honor them. Be polite even when the target curses you. You may be surprised. A lot of them won't pay, but a lot of them will.

Finally:
Quote:
OP--As a new player and one who may engage in piracy in the future, this is a change Id like to see.

Get out there and try it before suggesting things. Good luck.

Lana Torrin
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2010.08.18 13:26:00 - [36]
 

I WANT MY RISK FREE WAY OF GETTING MY SEC BACK NAOW

Xearal
Minmatar
SOL Industries
Black Thorne Alliance
Posted - 2010.08.18 13:27:00 - [37]
 

Along this thread are several good ideas on implementing a ransom mechanic IMHO.

As an industrialist ( as in, someone who goes for making ISk, any way possible, though generally refraining from ACTIVE piracy, but under no delusions that piracy is thing that shouldn't be in the game or somethign silly like that, and acts accordingly ), these are my thoughs:

1. If such a mechanic is implemented, under no condition should it stop a pirate from dishonouring the ransom if they choose to, this is the whole fun point of ransoms, and their dillema for said caught pirate. It's a calculated risk vs reward. The risk is they won't honour it, the reward is, if they do, you are generally off cheaper than if they blow you to hell. For me, that's really the deciding factor in whether I'd pay a ransom or not. If I'm offered one that is too high, I will negotiate a lower one, or self destruct if I don't think negotiations are worth the time.

2. A mechanic like this should facilitate ransoms, and if possible make it more transparant if you're dealing with an honourable pirate or not. This gives the client, and the pirate both information of wether to enter negotiations or not.
An honourable pirate will have his ransoms paid more often, because of his reputation, and a client will be more willing to pay a ransom, if the chance of it being honoured seems more likely. Also, with such a system, the pirate can gauge the willingness of his client to pay ransoms from said information too. If someone has refused ransoms on a general basis, there is no point in risking time to offer one.

Taking these 2 points into account, having such a mechanic generate some kind of API verifiable ransom mail seems to me the best option. ( yes, this idea has been iterated before, I'm just underlining my point of view as an industrialist ).

The 'offer ransom' button would be a good idea for this. While it should do nothing other than be the same as it is now, when it comes to opening some kind of window to negotiate ransoms, the difference would be in the eventual ransom mail generated, giving the information as in the two points above.

Ofcourse, it can also work in a client's disfavor, when someone is known to pay ransoms, to offer one and then dishonour it, because you know that your current client is generally willing to pay them. ;)


Tadeu718
EXTERMINATUS.
Nulli Secunda
Posted - 2010.08.18 13:37:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Daool
Of course this whole thread could be missing an essential point.

Carebears as a group are (possibly) slowly waking up to the fact that if EVERYONE (or even just enough) stopped paying ransoms EVER then the number of pirates would rapidly drop (or at least turn far more on each other for bounties than carebears for ransoms).

Just don't pay, whether you loose the ship or not.

Imagine an eve where pirates KNOW that income from ransoms will always be effectively NILL? Shocked




Then we all bring out the 3x sensor booster ships, kill your ship an your Pod :) Since we dont have to wait around to see about a ransom.

Kajan Tormen
Minmatar
Blood Money Inc.
The Blood Money Cartel
Posted - 2010.08.19 13:24:00 - [39]
 

Man Barthelme already said most of what I intended to say, but to re-iterate:
I'm a pirate who ransoms regularly and have quite decent success actually receiving ransom payments. The fact that I have to actually convince my customers to pay is half the fun of ransoming (the other half is getting those iskies Twisted Evil)
I enjoy lengthy ransom conversations as well as the attempt of building a corp renowned for honoring it's agreements. Replacing that by a game mechanic? While it might mean I get more cash, it sure does not mean I get more fun out of piracy...

Andrea Griffin
Posted - 2010.08.19 14:21:00 - [40]
 

I disagree for the need of a ransom mechanic. In Eve, you have the right to be as honorable as you wish. You also have the right to be as big a **** as you wish. I don't like those who dishonor ransoms, but I agree with their ability to choose to do so.

Also, dialog boxes remove the real charm of ransom, the essence of the fun - the human interaction.

Doctor Miyage
Posted - 2010.08.19 16:01:00 - [41]
 

There could be a reputation meter of some sort. It may act similarly to the security status meter (-1.0 to +1.0), but would be impermanent and completely player-controlled. A pirate who didn't honor a ransom could receive a negative hit from the players, whereas a pirate who did honor ransoms could receive a positive hit. In order to use another player's reputation meter, the character would be require to enter a short message (visible to anybody who checks the player's reputation meter) explaining why they were giving a negative or a positive hit.

The reputation meter would constantly move back towards neutral at a slow rate, meaning that players who were actively dishonorable would take longer to lose their bad reputation, but still could if they were willing to lay low for a while. To prevent reputation spam, the meters could be restricted to one hit per hour and would be capped at either +1.0 or -1.0.


This sort of system would act similarly to a real reputation system would work. As time goes, people inevitably forget both good and bad deeds, but the more active a man is in building or sinking it, the longer that reputation would persist. Any character who failed to honor ransoms would receive hits on his reputation meter with comments explaining as such. A character who does honor ransoms may still receive hits on his reputation meter, but the comments would speak a slightly different tune. A reputation may be falsely influenced by friends (or enemies) who actively work to boost (lower) his reputation, much in the same way that having a network of contacts in the real world can influence your public appearance.


It's not a perfect idea, but it is a way to let players know who their dealing with without removing "choice."

Barakkus
Posted - 2010.08.19 17:47:00 - [42]
 

Edited by: Barakkus on 19/08/2010 17:50:33
Originally by: Rho Anan
Here is what you do.

1. Pirate right clicks his target where you see 'initiate ransom' . Clicks on it. Menu pops up where he fills in ISK amount. Sets his amount then hits send.
2. Carebear has timed pop up menu (30 secs) that says either "View ransom, Refuse to view ransom." If you click View ransom you see the isk amount and then can either accept or deny. (maybe counter-offer button?)
3. Pirate gets response "Player refused to view ransom" Commence PEW PEW. "Player denied ransom offer" Commense PEW PEW. "Player has accepted ransom offer". Your wallet gets fatter and you can commence to PEW PEW and dishonor the ransom if you want.

I suggest all suggested ransoms be logged to the character. So if your caught and you look at the pirates info and see that he honors 98% of ransoms.... or honors 5% of ransoms it will help you decide what to do. Dont think anything should change except for official ransom menus.

Maybe? Yes? No?


This is probably the best idea on how to handle it.

It would be funny to fly around random highly populated highsec areas and just ransom random people for fun with that mechanic and see how many idiots actually pay though.

Man Barthelme
The Tuskers
Posted - 2010.08.20 12:03:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: Doctor Miyage
There could be a reputation meter of some sort.


There's already a reputation meter of some sort. It's called reputation. There are people in the game with whom I have never interacted in any way but to whom I would freely lend game assets. There are people with whom I have interacted to whom I would freely lend RL assets. I don't need/want a 'meter' to tell me who to trust because I pay attention to what's going on in the game around me. What would happen with a meter would be that a player would build up positive 'reputation' and then rip someone off for a big score. When it becomes a mechanic instead of an actual reputation it just becomes another way to take advantage of the stupid and the kind.

Ceshme
Posted - 2010.08.20 15:53:00 - [44]
 

I wouldn't mind seeing a high slot ransom fitting which opens a trade window showing the requested ransom amount and either a yes or no button to pay. If clicked yes, a 10 second 100km ECM burst is created or something to that effect. If no, well, they die.

Vynel Mortes
Posted - 2010.08.20 16:05:00 - [45]
 

Don't put a mechanic in at all.

Just a number, when someone offers a ransom put a button they can click to record it, if you honor the ransom, you get a +1 don't honor you get a -1. This number effects nothing, not your sec status or anything else, simply gets displayed on your profile.

This way a Pirate can build up a good reputation for honoring ransom's and oh look a ship with ridiculous cargo....sometimes ya just gotta fire right.

The point behind piracy is that pirates don't always keep their word, just put something in place not to protect the Bear but rather to aid the pirate that honors the ransom.

Barakkus
Posted - 2010.08.20 16:47:00 - [46]
 

On second thought, probably is pointless since someone would just ransom their alts, their friend's alts etc to build rep, it would be meaningless.

SFX Bladerunner
Minmatar
Aperture Science inc.
Posted - 2010.08.20 17:30:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Lana Torrin
Originally by: Taedrin
In fact you could extend this by having honored ransoms IMPROVE sec status up to this same level. Alternatively, this level could be raised higher, so that a pirate who ransoms can still enter some high sec systems, but a pirate who dishonors ransom can not.


THIS! THIS NOW!



This sounds so solid, brilliant and evasion-proof it is almost silly...

Oh wait, a 2 man pirate gang could work around this easily.. yeah nvm.Neutral

Alara IonStorm
Caldari
Posted - 2010.08.20 17:39:00 - [48]
 

Originally by: SFX Bladerunner

This sounds so solid, brilliant and evasion-proof it is almost silly...

Oh wait, a 2 man pirate gang could work around this easily.. yeah nvm.Neutral


Don't ruin this in a game all about honor and new idea's, we need this to bring trust back into the business.

Both me and my Alt support you 100%

Tiberizzle
Posted - 2010.08.20 18:06:00 - [49]
 

Edited by: Tiberizzle on 20/08/2010 18:06:49
Why not just have a "trusted third party" create a channel for ransoms and keep this in the sandbox?

It would work something like this:

Ransom ISK is escrowed with employees of the third party named in the channel MOTD (whoever is available). Victim sends with specific subject e.g. "Ransom [pirate] [victim]". A% on the top for the person holding the escrow and B% for the "trusted third party" -- presumably the victim pays the A+B% fee, depending on his negotiation skills :-P

Trusted third party uses (part of) his cut to guarantee ransoms will be paid to the pirate even if the escrow-holding volunteer absconds. API verification is used to confirm transfers from victim to employee and employee to pirate. If victim is subsequently killed, he simply states so and the ransom is put on hold pending API verification of a recent related loss. After some time without providing a lossmail the hold is cancelled and pirate paid, if a lossmail is provided ransom is reverted. If a questionable lossmail is provided arbitration may be required, with the victim or pirate potentially being denied future service based on the findings in arbitration and repeated questionable ransoms.

Alara IonStorm
Caldari
Posted - 2010.08.20 18:17:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Tiberizzle
Edited by: Tiberizzle on 20/08/2010 18:06:49
Why not just have a "trusted third party" create a channel for ransoms and keep this in the sandbox?



A good thought but trusted third parties are rare. Also most people won't know about the channel or won't trust it unless the third party is well known. Also they can not be online 24/7 even Cribba needs food(I hear). Also the time in which this takes to sort this out with the clueless would be iffy. Pirates don't like 20 of the victems corp mates jumpin through the gate cause they did not ransom quick enough.


Tiberizzle
Posted - 2010.08.20 18:54:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: Alara IonStorm
Originally by: Tiberizzle
Edited by: Tiberizzle on 20/08/2010 18:06:49
Why not just have a "trusted third party" create a channel for ransoms and keep this in the sandbox?



A good thought but trusted third parties are rare. Also most people won't know about the channel or won't trust it unless the third party is well known. Also they can not be online 24/7 even Cribba needs food(I hear). Also the time in which this takes to sort this out with the clueless would be iffy. Pirates don't like 20 of the victems corp mates jumpin through the gate cause they did not ransom quick enough.




These are all flaws which I attempted to address in the operational description. If you're going to raise them for discussion then perhaps you would be so kind as to consider them in the context of the proposed process.

The involvement of the trusted third party would be fairly limited as described. Employees/volunteers from different timezones would handle the ISK exchange with only API verification and arbitration falling on the third party. It would take time to build awareness of the service and a decently sized group of employees who were willing and able to respond to a blinky chat from different timezones, but there are certainly other third party services which exhibit the response time and level of activity necessary to support a ransom service (EOH Poker comes to mind).

Acceptance by pirates, awareness in victims, and response time would be the key obstacles, I think. A pirate would almost certainly not propose a third party ransom himself, but if the fee was on top of whatever amount he deemed fair and paid by the victim while the delay was minimal I don't see many having an issue with it unless they intended to dishonor the ransom in the first place or lack of intel / scout intel suggested that it was a delay tactic.

Alara IonStorm
Caldari
Posted - 2010.08.20 19:03:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: Tiberizzle
Stuff



Awsome Idea I look foward to seeing this, when do you plan to start.

Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
Posted - 2010.08.20 19:11:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Noir Avlaa
As intended. If you can't persuade someone to pay a ransom that's your problem, don't fix something that isn't broken.


Pretty much this. There's no wrong with ransom mechanics, it's based on trust and EVE is a sandbox. The problem (if there is one), lies with players and their mentality.

Sjugar
Posted - 2010.08.20 19:24:00 - [54]
 

Pfff, Eve doesn't need a new mechanic.

For all thos concerned about ransoms what you need is: A trusted 3rd party.

You capture and ransom someone and tell him to send ISK to trusted 3rd party. One hour later if vitcim hasn't died in that system by your hands you get 80% from from the ransomed guy. 20% for the trusted 3rd party.

If however the ransomed guy dies by your hands, the victim gets 100% of the money back.

So, Chribba? Want to be ransomholder?

Alara IonStorm
Caldari
Posted - 2010.08.20 19:33:00 - [55]
 

Originally by: Sjugar
So, Chribba? Want to be ransomholder?


Now I wanna ransom Cribba to see his reaction when I suggest he send the ransom to a reputable third party =D

jk's: I will not shoot my God

Razzor Death
Bat Country
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.08.20 19:37:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Belfelmalak
Edited by: Belfelmalak on 18/08/2010 00:16:50
As has been repeated ad nauseum, ransoms are just not being paid with regularity anymore. Many bears seem to feel that they will get destroyed whether or not they pay, so they would just rather lose their ship then risk paying and then losing their ship anyway.

What we need is some kind of game mechanic that allows them to pay, but only transfers the money when and if they get back to a station intact. It would be a fairly simple fix and would take ransoming mainstream in Eve. Yes, there would be some risk for the pirate, the carebear could get popped by someone else, or the bear could just self destruct to avoid paying, but then there never are any sure things in eve any way. Also, how about a ransome mail, something to record the pirates success in the field. Ransome mails might be a fun thing to collect as well.

As a new player and one who may engage in piracy in the future, this is a change Id like to see.




I don't honour ransoms just so you lose money v0v.


Zeta Zhul
Caldari
Preemptive Paranoia
Posted - 2010.08.20 20:02:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Lana Torrin
I will vote for this is we can add a new can flipping mechanic as well..

Once I flip your can you have 2 mins to flip it back or you get concorded..

I'm sick and tired of bears not wanting to fight.


That's ok. I'm hoping they add a new mechanic to allow players to place traps in cans.

That would make can-flipping a lot more amusing.

Barashi Nugan
Gallente
Zero Point Group
Posted - 2010.08.20 21:15:00 - [58]
 

Edited by: Barashi Nugan on 20/08/2010 21:28:40
Edited by: Barashi Nugan on 20/08/2010 21:27:07
When we do ransom we generally request entertainment as a ransom rather than isk. Making money is easy; a good laugh is worth much more.
YARRRR!!

That being said I think the current mechanic is just fine. If you're snagged with your pants down by a pilot/pirate and offered a ransom, you have to make the gamble on trusting that persons intentions or not. Generally, it's not a wise decision unless they are part of a group known for keeping their word. This won't change regardless of game-play mechanics.

Edit: Sleep. I need it.
Second Edit: Bed. Now.

Ildryn
Posted - 2010.08.20 22:09:00 - [59]
 

Paid a ransom once. It was dishonored. Even though i have honored a few dozen this left a bad taste in my mouth. So i pop them now even after i get paid. Might get 100+ mill for the ransom and only 20 mill worth of their mods. At best. So yeah kill them and ransom if you can. No point in honoring ransoms because no one cares that you did but the victim.

ClaritySam
Posted - 2010.08.22 01:05:00 - [60]
 

I will never pay a ransom to any other pilot under any circumstances. I would rather take a financial hit by re buying my implants and ship than give a bunch of lame-asses my hard earned ISK. In fact I just lost a Myrmidon for that very reason :-)


Pages: 1 [2] 3

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only