Samwise Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 Currently, you have to declare war on a nation to collect a bounty. However, if you are declared war by somebody who has a bounty on them, you should still be able to collect if you defeat that nation in your war. Current System Example: Nation A has a 25 mil bounty on them for an attrition war Nation A attacks Nation B with attrition type war Nation B defeats Nation A in attrition type war, but collects no bounty Proposal: Reward nations who beat back their aggressors if there’s an available bounty to be collected. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted October 26, 2018 Share Posted October 26, 2018 That's a good idea really. The bounty is supposed to be given to whoever beats that nation in that particular war type, so why not defensively? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrienne Posted October 26, 2018 Share Posted October 26, 2018 Why though, tbh? I thought the point of putting bounties on someone was to get people to declare on them. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Scarfalot Posted October 28, 2018 Share Posted October 28, 2018 On 10/26/2018 at 10:50 AM, Nizam Adrienne said: Why though, tbh? I thought the point of putting bounties on someone was to get people to declare on them. And it kind of does; but with this, the defender as well as the counters would be incentivized to beige instead of wait for expiration. I think it'd help in that respect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrienne Posted October 28, 2018 Share Posted October 28, 2018 17 minutes ago, Sir Scarfalot said: And it kind of does; but with this, the defender as well as the counters would be incentivized to beige instead of wait for expiration. I think it'd help in that respect. I think it defeats the point of the bounty if you extend it to the person with the bounty's offensive wars. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Storm Posted October 28, 2018 Share Posted October 28, 2018 If a criminal with a bounty attacked you in real life and you killed or captured them in self defense you'd still be entitled to the reward. Quote A bounty (from Latin bonitās, goodness) is a payment or reward often offered by a group as an incentive for the accomplishment of a task by someone usually not associated with the group. I don't see how being the aggressor or defender matters in regards to accomplishing the task the bounty was set for. If you're paying to have someone nuked do you really care who shoots first in the war? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sketchy Posted October 28, 2018 Share Posted October 28, 2018 2 hours ago, Dad said: If a criminal with a bounty attacked you in real life and you killed or captured them in self defense you'd still be entitled to the reward. I don't see how being the aggressor or defender matters in regards to accomplishing the task the bounty was set for. If you're paying to have someone nuked do you really care who shoots first in the war? Except its not real life, its a game, so the priority should be gameplay enhancement and balance, and not realism. Also, the pretty glaring flaw that could be easily abused, is a person who is fully slotted by enemy nations, could now declare on someone else on purpose, then allow that person to take the bounty. Bounty system is abused enough as is without further making it easier to do so. And as Nizam already said, this defeats the entire purpose of the mechanic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.