tw2000 wrote:

v3xt wrote:I think this could be interesting, but anyone who thought that negative medals affected other games too much will think this is just as bad. Instead of people potentially not trusting you, you'll just have massive target on your head.

^ It will turn the game more into a 'pay to win' situation

How do you see it as a pay to win?

I don't like this idea at all. It almost guarantees the person with the bounty an early exit in a future game, with the potential to tank their rating just because someone paid a couple bucks to put a bounty on their head.

Keep in mind that if this was only a couple bucks, some people may always have a bounty in their head because of a personal vendetta. If you are a very vengeful person you could easily just keep refreshing a bounty...that could eventually cause that person to quit the game. It's pretty unfun when you are the target of early game pile ons and this will just encourage more of that.

connor3491 wrote:I don't like this idea at all. It almost guarantees the person with the bounty an early exit in a future game, with the potential to tank their rating just because someone paid a couple bucks to put a bounty on their head.

Keep in mind that if this was only a couple bucks, some people may always have a bounty in their head because of a personal vendetta. If you are a very vengeful person you could easily just keep refreshing a bounty...that could eventually cause that person to quit the game. It's pretty unfun when you are the target of early game pile ons and this will just encourage more of that.

If only the person with the deathblow collecting the bounty it would oblige them to ensure their partners are compensated as well. If not, they might find themselves with a bounty of their own.

I appreciate the concern for personal vendettas but perhaps a cap of one per person at a time?

oz0n3 wrote:How do you see it as a pay to win?

In a 8 player game, pay 7 bucks to put an anonymous target on the heads of all other players, and have them kill each other.
Will work better if an alliance has been made and 2 people are both willing to fork over $5, you'll have some people with two targets.

I don't think you should be able to pay to influence a running game.

Definitely shouldn't have an effect in games you're both in.

oz0n3 wrote:

connor3491 wrote:I don't like this idea at all. It almost guarantees the person with the bounty an early exit in a future game, with the potential to tank their rating just because someone paid a couple bucks to put a bounty on their head.

Keep in mind that if this was only a couple bucks, some people may always have a bounty in their head because of a personal vendetta. If you are a very vengeful person you could easily just keep refreshing a bounty...that could eventually cause that person to quit the game. It's pretty unfun when you are the target of early game pile ons and this will just encourage more of that.

If only the person with the deathblow collecting the bounty it would oblige them to ensure their partners are compensated as well. If not, they might find themselves with a bounty of their own.

I appreciate the concern for personal vendettas but perhaps a cap of one per person at a time?

You have a point about compensation./fighting over who gets the medal. However, if I was in a game against someone with a bounty and found myself in a situation where several players wanted to gank him to collect the medal, I would join in. I wouldn't even care about getting the medal. If I got it, that's great. If an ally wanted it I would have no problem letting him get it. If he did really covet the medal then I would just use this as a bargaining chip to get an extra outpost or something. Furthermore, the guy who goes for the kill would probably spend more resources on the deathblow than me, further putting me at an advantage. Who really games about a medal when you can win

In the end, the guy with the bounty in his head is screwed, and probably had a really unfun game.

connor3491 wrote:

oz0n3 wrote:

connor3491 wrote:I don't like this idea at all. It almost guarantees the person with the bounty an early exit in a future game, with the potential to tank their rating just because someone paid a couple bucks to put a bounty on their head.

Keep in mind that if this was only a couple bucks, some people may always have a bounty in their head because of a personal vendetta. If you are a very vengeful person you could easily just keep refreshing a bounty...that could eventually cause that person to quit the game. It's pretty unfun when you are the target of early game pile ons and this will just encourage more of that.

If only the person with the deathblow collecting the bounty it would oblige them to ensure their partners are compensated as well. If not, they might find themselves with a bounty of their own.

I appreciate the concern for personal vendettas but perhaps a cap of one per person at a time?

You have a point about compensation./fighting over who gets the medal. However, if I was in a game against someone with a bounty and found myself in a situation where several players wanted to gank him to collect the medal, I would join in. I wouldn't even care about getting the medal. If I got it, that's great. If an ally wanted it I would have no problem letting him get it. If he did really covet the medal then I would just use this as a bargaining chip to get an extra outpost or something. Furthermore, the guy who goes for the kill would probably spend more resources on the deathblow than me, further putting me at an advantage. Who really games about a medal when you can win

In the end, the guy with the bounty in his head is screwed, and probably had a really unfun game.

I know, having a bounty on your head can seem to make you a target, however, it can also create advantages. Personally, if everyone is focused on the guy/gal with the bounty and I can not reach the target, why not ally with him and target those targeting the bounty? I understand that it may be frustrating for the game but 5 backstabber/toxic medals make for more frustrating games and they don't get erased after one elimination.

This might be fun for unranked games, but in ranked games... just... no.