Remake of bounty feature

[Noobmic]

Proposal
Remake bounty feature.

Current Workaround
Now everybody can bounty everybody that that has a town.

Details
By remaking the bounty I will give some basic rules:
1) A bounty can be offered only by a player who interacted with another player.
2) After a bounty is cleared the player who put the initial bounty he cannot put it again if no interaction was made between players.

Now some examples what I mean by interaction:
1) Player A duels player B => player B can put a bounty on player A, no matter who won the duel.
2) Player A kicks player B from town => player B can put a bounty on player A.
3) Player A removes town B from fort => everyone from town B can put a bounty on player A;

Abuse Prevention
With this system it isn't. How it is now a player can bounty you until you quit the game just because it can.

Visual Aids
No need, what it is now is ok.

Summary
Remake bounty system so we can remove the abuse that can be done now.

Administration
Does this idea meet the Ideas Guidelines & Criteria? Yes/No
Does this idea appear on any of the Previously Suggested Ideas List? Yes/No

Other:
If you can think of another cases please post so I can update this post. I didn't put market related interactions because now player who interact there are unknown and it's ok to remain this way.

 

[DeletedUser]

Sorry Noobmic, but I love when those who despise me on the forum put a bounty on me. And dueling 24/7 can't ever make me quit as those who believe I can be duelable 24/7 (unless banned) are just ignorant amateurs.
Etc etc... The roadmap, yaddayaddayadda duelsystem change promised...
I'll vote no on this. Sorry again.

 

[DeletedUser9470]

Im against this. I think that the best solution is that you get a message when someone puts bounty on you:
"player X has put Y amount of bounty on your Head for Dead"

this will stop people like the ones you have a problem with noobmic:
if you know who it is you can then sort the problem out by
talking
bountying
dueling

this would stop players anonymously taking advantage in a cowardly manner.

it makes sense, a bounty should be put on someone for a reason.
all bandits and brigands irl know exactly why they are wanted, and who they are wanted by. why its an anonymous feature in game i cant understand.

 

[DeletedUser29831]

You might have reason to put a bount on someone for something else than just being duelled yourself. What about putting bounty on someone for calling multis, for attacking others from your town/alliance/whatever or being a traitor? As for bountying you until you quit, duel someone yourself until you pass out and get the 48-hour break.

 

[DeletedUser22575]

NO.

While you might not have had an interaction with the player who posted the bounty (and under the present system you have no idea who did it) you might well have had an interaction with his town or alliance member.

And no need to quit because of bounty.

 

[DeletedUser]

i don't like limiting the idea of who can place the bounty, but i think getting a notification so you know who did it is a great idea

 

[Noobmic]

Im against this. I think that the best solution is that you get a message when someone puts bounty on you:
"player X has put Y amount of bounty on your Head for Dead"

Yes this also seems a fair solution, at least you know who is puts bounty on you and you can retaliate. but now you are totally without a clue.

You might have reason to put a bount on someone for something else than just being duelled yourself. What about putting bounty on someone for calling multis, for attacking others from your town/alliance/whatever or being a traitor? As for bountying you until you quit, duel someone yourself until you pass out and get the 48-hour break.

As I said in the first topic those ware some cases that I was thinking of and you are right about those cases and they can be taken in consideration.


In the end as a conclusion I see that who posted don't like the limitations (that from my point of view make it a fair game), but at least if what @-Neo- said will be implemented then is a good improvement.

 

[DeletedUser22493]

I dissagree. The whole consept of being able to put a bounty on someone just because you disslike them, is justified.

A dueler can duel just about anyone without restrictions.
A non dueler can't do that, because he's not a dueler. But he can pay someone else to it for him.

So, all in all, the system is fair.

 

[DeletedUser9470]

I dissagree. The whole consept of being able to put a bounty on someone just because you disslike them, is justified.

A dueler can duel just about anyone without restrictions.
A non dueler can't do that, because he's not a dueler. But he can pay someone else to it for him.

So, all in all, the system is fair.

indeed and in this is sense it is fair. the way of the west.
but it is being abused.
people put bounty on others for fun. ive seen bounties over 150k go on peeps heads, for absolutely no reason at all.
so if you got a message to say that someone has put a bounty on your head, then you can question why, and thus avoid the situation in the future.

 

[DeletedUser22493]

The only thing that might be unfair here, is that you can't see who put the bounty on you, and in some sense can't really fight back.

I get your point. I really do. You don't want people you've never talked to, dueled or harmed to be able to put a bounty on your head.

But this idea will never work, because the amount of what you call "Interactions", are endless. Adding some, without adding all are unfair.
Insulting telegrams, fort battles, revenging a townmate, spying, cheating, stealing and so on..

 

[Noobmic]

Insulting telegrams

You have report for that and also ignore player. I don't see a reason why a player who send this kind of messages to play any game (so is admin jobs to ban them and yours to report).

fort battles

Here also I don't see a reason why you should put a bounty on someone (depends on every player location you shot at someone, you don't come in a fort battle just to be there and hide), but still this can be considered interaction and can be added a case for it.

revenging a townmate

As I already said in another topic you can do it your self, why that someone else to put a bounty on another player for you?

spying

This is part of the game and in every game there is it and you can duel those who you catch spying until you get bored...

cheating, stealing and so on..

There is admin reporting!

 

[DeletedUser29831]

As for revenging a townmate, the town mate might not have the funds to put a bounty.
As for spying, why should you have to run around the map to duel, when you just can put a bounty on them? This goes for all reasons listed, in fact.
And what about multis? There should be an automatic bounty for everyone calling a multi.(kidding!!!)
But the idea of getting a message telling you who put the bounty on you is good.

 

[DeletedUser9470]

The only thing that might be unfair here, is that you can't see who put the bounty on you, and in some sense can't really fight back.

But this idea will never work, because the amount of what you call "Interactions", are endless. Adding some, without adding all are unfair.
Insulting telegrams, fort battles, revenging a townmate, spying, cheating, stealing and so on..

agreed

You don't want people you've never talked to, dueled or harmed to be able to put a bounty on your head.

I dont agree. I think anyone should be able to put bounty on someone else.
just all I want is a message to say who and why.

as a dueler i have bounty put on my head quite often, but I cannot solve any issues as I havent got a clue who it is who has an issue with me.

for sure you will get the odd dueler who will threaten a builder for putting bounty on his head, but in all cases bounty will win. builders will always have the upper hand in a bounty war. a dueler doesnt want bounty on his head, no matter how tough he is.

i cannot see any advantage in this being anonymous.

 

[DeletedUser22493]

i cannot see any advantage in this being anonymous.

I can see plenty of advantages, but ill agree that its not fair, or realistic.