Addressing the BH TEFs after SF battles.

Addressing the BH TEFs after SF battles.
This idea/suggestion has been flagged as Implemented so it has (or will be) implemented into the game in some capacity. More information can be found in the post from the development team.
Status
Not open for further replies.

poedashi

Proposal
Small 30 minute timer before bountys are placed on terminals
Justification
I dont feel like im the only one in the community who thinks this is a problem. i know its been mentioned in the past by other. maybe we've all gone about addressing the problem in the wrong way. i hope this post clears that up and we can get some dialogue between the players and the Devs on the topic.
Motivation
Gives leeway for SF fights to continue without being mucked around by opposing faction taking their own bounties they've placed against another player who is on the opposing group invading, or SF fighting.
Since release, there's been some debate on whether or not BHs should be able to take the same bounty they placed after losing to an SF fight. Players would die SF, clone in the city that's being fought at, take the bounty placed on the DBr, then 1v1 that player in the middle of a SF fight. There are a few other topics that revolve around the meta of being BH and doing similar things, like grouping with 3 bounty hunters, taking the same bounty placed, singling out that bounty while said bounty is in a group with the same people that were just fighting SF or in general, 3 bounty hunters showing up, and 7 people watching a 1v1, 1v2 or 1v3 and complaining about not being able to help in any way, complaining that its emersion breaking, ruins the fun multiple different activates in game... im really only trying to get some discussion going on how we can combat the first mentioned problem.

i feel like a small timer between having a bounty placed and it showing up on the BH terms could fix the BH TEFs during SF fights... as far as grouping with a person with a bounty and having to watch 3 bh kill someone your grouped with being a problem i feel is another subject.. but could possibly be addressed in the same go as the original problem mentioned.

Hope to hear from the Dev team soon.
~Dobby
Also give us socks. our feet's cold. HOTSOCKS for everyone. you get a sock, i get a sock. maybe designer socks. Czerka Corp. company socks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gunnythok, MajorSethDawg, RoHRemis and 1 other person
Upvote 22 Downvote
This suggestion has been implemented. Votes are no longer accepted.
Yup - 30 minutes even seems too short. Should be long enough to get people through an invasion without having to worry about people grabbing bounties mid-fight. Great idea.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jacksabib
PhilmorALF said:
Yup - 30 minutes even seems too short. Should be long enough to get people through an invasion without having to worry about people grabbing bounties mid-fight. Great idea.
Click to expand...
I agree. An hour or two seems more accurate. After all, it would take the bounty hunter guild some time to file the right forms and such right? So this change is also like, super immersive.

/sign
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJGonk and kalafax
I would say that you should not even be able to claim a bounty that you placed yourself, maybe even the same account.
 
RoHRemis said:
I would say that you should not even be able to claim a bounty that you placed yourself, maybe even the same account.
Click to expand...
I'm inclined to agree consistent with the structure of how we've modified similar systems involving player-to-player transactions to require they not just involve a single account. I also think a delay makes sense. Will watch to see the consensus on what the time should be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gunnythok, PhilmorALF and RoHRemis
RoHRemis said:
I would say that you should not even be able to claim a bounty that you placed yourself, maybe even the same account.
Click to expand...
I like this idea too. But I would assume that restriction would be lifted if another was to add to the bounty? Or after a certain amount of time?
 
jacksabib said:
I like this idea too. But I would assume that restriction would be lifted if another was to add to the bounty? Or after a certain amount of time?
Click to expand...
The 30 minute wait for others combined with not being able to take once placed with your own account
 
I agree with the timer delay, maybe make it 1 hour. Group TEF would solve the problem about bhs coming in the middle of SF fights or someone taking bounties on purpose on these fights, but that would most likely kill the 1vs1 bh scenario as a whole and is even more problematic once we have jedi implemented which is really soon. Jedi is the most important part to keep in mind when changing TEF mechanics because they're already alpha on their own.
 
I'm in favor of this idea and also agree with the above that an hour would probably make the most sense and that you should not be able to hunt a bounty that you placed with your account.

I do not like the idea of having group TEF when the hunter attacks. Conveniently hardly anyone that shows up on the bounty boards would ever be solo again. While I agree that 3 bounty hunters against 1 non-jedi player is usually overkill, depending on who the bounty is, the opposite could pit 8 players against 1 bounty hunter which is equally unfun.
 
I stand behind the idea proposed, but I don't agree with group TEFs on what is essentially designed as a 1v1 encounter. The multiple BH possibility came to fruition due to Jedi, which 1v1 is impossible, and after long talks in Live as to a solution, one of which was making BH as powerful and alpha as a Jedi (which was vehemently downvoted) was to make it so that multiple BHs could hunt the Jedi. Immersion aside, this is a gameplay consideration where gameplay must trump immersion.
 
Frost said:
I'm in favor of this idea and also agree with the above that an hour would probably make the most sense and that you should not be able to hunt a bounty that you placed with your account.

I do not like the idea of having group TEF when the hunter attacks. Conveniently hardly anyone that shows up on the bounty boards would ever be solo again. While I agree that 3 bounty hunters against 1 non-jedi player is usually overkill, depending on who the bounty is, the opposite could pit 8 players against 1 bounty hunter which is equally unfun.
Click to expand...
You mentioned everything I was worried about as well regarding regular group play. It was only mentioned to bring up I'm discussion.
 
I appreciate everyone putting in there two cents, I hope I was able to make everything as clear as possible. Quite a lot of you have had to deal with this, I'm glad it's finally being brought to light in a formal sense.

I only mentioned a timer because, I felt it would be the easiest to work in without over thinking the whole situation.
 
If a timer was to be put into place where factional pvp wouldn't be interrupted by malicious BH from either faction, what is a reasonable limit between being put on BH terminals? We don't want a timer that can be abused to stay off terminals. Let's say you get a DB at the end of an invasion, if I timer was set to for 2 hours, I'm unaware of how long between the 3 cities it is for invasions. I participated an invasion earlier, between the completed invasion to the next was 40 minutes. I'm aware this could differ depending on how fast each invasion is concluded.. if the timer was 2 hours. That's possibly two invasions you could be immune from normal BHs just trying to find an opportunity to complete their hunt.

I feel an hour, is plenty of time to complete your invasion, get to an ENT/medic, rebuff, heal your battle fatigue then going back to your normal activities.

~Dobby
Guys don't forget about the socks. I'm serious 😑
There's bigger issues at hand. Like, who cares if claw sends there BH ch pets and stack you out without a second to react and insta die. Ya know, that chill, just stack me out without me being able to defend myself at all. Red then ded. ={ Womp womp
 
I actually have ideas about neutrals in occupied zones. Autoflag them to enemy since they're not friends. They're either there to bounty the occupying faction's soldiers or they're spies. Neither is neutral to a general defending an occupied zone. Flag anything in the zone that is not the occupying faction, enemy to the occupying faction. Makes sense to me anyway.

Neutrals that flag up with the occupying faction would be the exception, in that case bounty tefs are disabled.

"You're either with us, or against us."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kazhar
maybe BH within a 300m radius around the city and 200m around the defending cloning tank will be rumber banded 100m away from his area? or rubber band 100m around defenders cloning area, they flag inside the city. i think that might take more coding and man power then theyd want to spend on the problem.
 
Now hold on.... A BH putting on a mask to join the party to use deceit to catch his mark off guard has historically and even modernly been a perfectly valid tactic for hunting and assassination. It's perfectly immersive, doesn't break any fourth walls, makes perfect sense in the chaos of a civil galactic war... It makes no sense to prevent that. If you PvP, you get a bounty, you know that, head on a swivel folks. You signed up for this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sidu3217
Did Han Solo get a pass when his "friend", who pretended to be on the same side as him, gave him over to collect his bounty? NO! While he was involved with the GCW, he got GOT because of a bounty on his head while he was with "friends".

Don't take this away from Star Wars.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
SWG Restoration is a fan-made, non-profit, community-driven, project.
Not affiliated with nor endorsed by Daybreak Games, Lucasfilm Entertainment, Electronic Arts or The Walt Disney Company.
Star Wars ™ & © Lucasfilm Ltd. No marks or intellectual property are owned by or licensed to SWG Restoration.
Top Bottom