EVE-Search ForumWatch

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Tortun Nahme

Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:10:00 +0000

lulz

I've missed you Mal heh

Originally by: Cecil Montague
They should change that warning on entering low sec to:

"Go read Crime and Punishment for a few days then come back."

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by oilio

Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:05:00 +0000

Edited by: oilio on 12/08/2008 00:07:24

Originally by: Ruze

Adequate reply...

Fair enough.

I am both carebear and PvP'er. I have two characters.

Firstly, as far as getting people out of High Sec and into more dangerous areas goes, there is now FW. If the rewards for FW were attractive enough, then that might work - especially if FW missions were really good, and really rewarding (which they aren't).

Kicking players out of NPC corps and into a militia once they have 10 million skillpoints (as has been mentioned earlier) might be good too.

No matter what, though, you still have your casual PvE players who see Eve as a game where they can build a character (and build things WITH their character), and where they can relax. Sure, there's some danger, and that adds an edge to the game, but overall they are players building something at a leisurely pace.

As far as me being "wrong" about such things as the lofty exploit - are you gonnna say that the lofty was a deliberate mechanic that CCP wanted? The lofty scam basically meant that casual players DIDN'T fleet up with anyone. They could join a nice PvE corp, of course, but then some griefer corp decs them and after a losing a few mission ships, they're back in the NPC corp and soloing because they were simply getting stomped on, and there was nothing they could do about it except to stay docked.

So, we have a style of gameplay that is benign. It doesn't ineterfere with the PvP players, but sometimes the PvP players intrude - that's one of the things that makes Eve exciting.

Problem is, the griefers have had an easy time. No point in argueing that they haven't, because they have. The PvE players represent a significant percentage of the paying customers. Maybe not the majority, but certainly a large minority.

So, CCP say "Hey, PvE people! We've decided that you won't make money doing missions in high sec anymore. You're going to have to either move to low sec, or you're not going to be able to build your character in the manner that you are used to."

The PvE player realises that they are going to get stomped on if they take their nice mission-fit ship into low sec. They suddenly can't make decent money in high sec... THEIR game has suddenly been nerfed, and the griefers FOR SURE have lots of new, easy targets.

You think that the casual player is going to bother renewing their subscription?

Maybe they will, but my guess is that a great many won't.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Ruze

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 23:46:00 +0000

Originally by: oilio
Originally by: Ruze
Originally by: oilio
Stuff

If you hate to play EvE so much, why do you play EvE?

I don't hate to play eve. I really like eve.

I never suggested that I hated eve.

and thanks for pointing out that I am "wrong" twice

Now, why don't you explain why I am wrong? You're clearly certain of it - let's see what you got.

Well, that's probably the worst flame I've ever given somebody. I didn't have time to make an intelligent reply, so I figured I'd go the humerous route instead.

Somewhere in this post, and many others, I argued your point before you posted it. I've been talking up a storm about what I percieve as an imbalance, specifically concerning high reward level 4 missions. About every 10th post, someone new would step into the discussion, claim the exact same thing you did, and then leave.

I'm a carebear. I am not a hardcore PvPer. Trying to debunk this argument on the sole basis of 'just trying to get more targets' is pretty low, but entirely expected on these forums. Well, to be honest, it's the kind of argument tactic that makes debates in Congress funny and legal battles sad.

So someone new pops in, lord knows if they even read anything more than the first two or three replies, and then they try to 'finalize' the discussion by stating their generalized and limited viewpoint.

Again, you were predated by several others. Disagreeing? Nothing bogus about that. We all have a tendency to disagree with each other. But trying to trivilize a solid and forthwright discussion isn't kosher. Some of us feel it's a real issue, and many of 'us' aren't the hardcore PvPers that you seem to expect.

So if you would, please read the entire discussion. If you don't want to, that's fine. But my answers to why I think you are wrong are very clearly stated, many, many times. If you can't be bothered, or aren't interested, that's fine too. But then I'm forced to wonder, why you graced us with your presence to begin with.

To each his own.

So you want security? That's perfectly alright.
But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Siegfried Untreu

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 23:26:00 +0000

Originally by: Malcanis
What I said was this:

"Each player can earn 25M an hour"

I can easily make the same ratting in 0.0. On top of that, I have chance of faction spawn, officer spawn, etc which might all peak my ISK/hour ratio quite nicely. Best I've made is 80m/h, absolutely worst is 15m/h, and that's not even chaining like mad or for very long. That translates to 345m-1.84b/day (23h), which still leaves a statistical average of roughly 1b/day (23h) per ratting player (or system).

Take a small region, for example Tribute, which has about 50 systems.

15m * 50 players (systems) * 23 hours = 17.25b/day => 120b/week => 483b/month

That's ratting only, no loot, no salvage, and worst case scenario for hourly return.
At statistical average of 45m/h (based on my experiences with 15-80m/h), it'll be:

45m * 50 players (systems) * 23 hours = 51.75b/day => 362b/week => 1449b/month

It's less than your calculated 105b/day for lvl4 missions, sure, but any other venture in high-sec (mining, production/sales, loot, salvage, moons etc) will net you less than the same time/resources invested in null-sec, which in the end will tip the scales towards 0.0 again. CBA to dig up and run numbers for all the POS stuff, but I know the net gain is crazy.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by oilio

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 22:53:00 +0000

Originally by: Ruze
Originally by: oilio
Stuff

If you hate to play EvE so much, why do you play EvE?

I don't hate to play eve. I really like eve.

I never suggested that I hated eve.

and thanks for pointing out that I am "wrong" twice

Now, why don't you explain why I am wrong? You're clearly certain of it - let's see what you got.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Ruze

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 22:42:00 +0000

Originally by: oilio
Stuff

First, your wrong.

Secondly, your horribly wrong.

Thirdly, though your entitled to your own opinion, it is, of course, also wrong.

If you hate to play EvE so much, why do you play EvE?

So you want security? That's perfectly alright.
But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by oilio

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 22:38:00 +0000

Whichever way you dress this up, this is a bunch of PvP players who don't like the idea that some people play Eve as a PvE game.

They believe that being able to progress as a PvE player is WRONG - in spite of the fact that it has no effect on them as PvP players. There is plenty of opportunity for PvP in eve. There is always a risk that a PvE player will get ganked. No-one is entirely safe.

Some people like to progress their character on the PvE route. The "PvP" players posting here are generally people who want cheap kills. They don't want to fight - they want to kill. They want PvE players to be forced onto their turf so they can kill them.

Hopefully, CCP aren't stupid enough to listen to this. CCP bring in nerfs and boosts to balance the game. This is very important in PvP, because if there is a particular ship/setup that gives an unbalanced advantage, it inevitably ends up where all PvP relies on that unbalanced setup.

This is not so with PvE. A PvP player is in no-way inconvenienced by whatever a L4 mission does, or doesn't give as a reward to the mission runner.

Of course, the lofty scam (read exploit) gave lots of nice CHEAP kills in high sec, with no risk to the attackers.

The insurance issue gave lots of CHEAP kills in high sec to suicide gankers, with almost no risk to the attackers.

These issues have been addressed, so the CHEAP-KILL "PvP" players now want all the PvE players herded into the killing grounds.

That wouldn't happen though. If CCP did that to PvE players, the PvE players would very quickly realise they were fodder for the CHEAP KILL brigade. Guess what would happen then?

I reckon that if those lamenting the removal of the lofty exploit and those moaning about the new CONCORD rebalancing left the game, it would have very little impact on CCP's income. If CCP shaft the PvE players in order to satisfy the whining of the cheap-kill brigade, it would be very damaging to CCP's income.

This isn't YOUR game. True enough, Eve should always have the risk of non-consensual PvP, but the cheap-kill shit-eaters have had it easy with the lofty and with insurance for suicide ganks. Soon, it's not going to be so easy. Tough luck. Either go for proper PvP against targets that fight back, or accept that your cheap kills will be more costly, or leave the game.

Ideally, leave the game. You will not be missed.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Venkul Mul

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 21:46:00 +0000

Originally by: Malcanis

I'm 100% in agreement that it's time for an "industry" patch. Mining, research, manufacturing, and the game interfaces for them (plus the corp management interface... jesus, I still weep tears of blood at the memory) have accreted in a very ad-hoc way, and there are glaring omissions, imbalances and inadequacies that urgently need addressing far more than we need another T2 Cruiser class or whatever.
I know it seems kind of boring and unglamorous, but a full on PvE patch is just as vital for the game as any PvP patch could be.

A well done industry patch can be the right time to address some of the points raised in this thread. Even if I disagree on the need to remove or limit agent in high sec, a rebalancing, especially if done at the same time of a industrial/mining patch, making them more interesting, would be the right thing, resolving some of the issues while moderating the aftershock of the changes.

For me the beauty of EVE is the balance of the PvE/PvP parts and the balance between solo/group activities.

A lot of the pro PvP post seem to argue for the need to always group up, call friends, form a gang, even for PvE activities or for when you want to do what you like instead of a group activity.

So probably I sometime post too strongly in the opposite direction. Still I think that moving too far from a central point in both axis will damage EVE.

Originally by: Gamesguy

the suicide ganking is merely an isk farming activity.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Venkul Mul

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 21:31:00 +0000

Originally by: Esmenet
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Esmenet
Originally by: Ruze

Personally, I don't think a lot of the devs changes are directed at 'pleasing the playerbase' directly. Specifically those I've seen since coming back, like the upcoming nano nerf and the suicide fix.

Well the 2 biggest whinetopics before these changes was announced was suicide ganking and nanos. Primarily started by high sec missioners.

Failed logic strike again .

You think that high sec mission runners have any interest in nano fit? Those NPC nano ships are terrible, truly.

Ganking, ok, it is a high sec problem as it don't exist in low sec, but again it is mostly a hauler problem, not a mission runner.

Caldari militia.

Caldari militia like in: Caldari militia doing PvP in low sec?

And they are mission runners?

At most they were mission runners, but from most of the whines they simply are new players attracted by FW.

Originally by: Gamesguy

the suicide ganking is merely an isk farming activity.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Malcanis

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 21:28:00 +0000

Originally by: Ruze
Personally, I don't think the number of players using the agents, or the number of agents, is really an issue. I think that the issue is that high-quality agents are an easy way for a player to make lots of isk, risk free.

What's wrong with that, you might wonder?

In my opinion, I think what's wrong is that they are an infinite resource, and one that multiple players can use at the same time, for identical profit margins. I'm talking about two players talking to the same agent, not two players running in fleet together doing the same missions.

What is comparable to that? What else in EvE is so abundant that everyone could use it at the same moment, for the same individual profit?

So, I think that is the post behind the Ops argument, or at least that's how I see it. Missions need to be a resource, like everything else in EvE. Specifically, high-level and high-quality missions. They need to be something you compete for, something that requires you to fight off the competition to get. If you make it difficult enough that it must be fought over (not fought as in ship vs. ship, mind you), it wouldn't matter if it's 25m/hr or 100.

But since there is no limit, and thus no competition for those profits, I think it is contrary to the rest of EvE. I think agents (not mining, trading, or industry) are the prime reason people are believing that they can play EvE completely without interaction with anyone else. And I think they are the sole source of this confusion.

202 posts in, someone gets it exactly right.

You know the funny things is that a few times I've seen mission runners complain about the one thing that does limit hi-sec missioning: lag.

I suggest doing something about it (wardecs, ganking, mercs) and...

...*crickets*

CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Venkul Mul

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 21:25:00 +0000

Originally by: Ruze
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Dzajic
Originally by: Aldee
Hmmm I didnt believe the figures ppl gave for running lvl 4 missions so I had to try myself. Running a lvl 4 qty 6 agent with a t2 tanked domi and t1 drones I made about 35-40 mil per hr and that time included picking up loot but not reprocessing or selling that loot but just mission and bounty isk.

Sorry, but that seams highly unlikely. T2 tanked Domi with T2 drones, I top out at 15 mill/hour. Little worse agent but... not that worse.

Probably a test on 1 mission and got lucky on the draw.

Considering that some have quoted everything from 5mil per hour on a level 4, to 40 mil. Honestly, maybe the op shouldn't have said 'average', but I think it's definitely possible to make 25 on a hisec level 4.

I'm not making it yet, but my skills are minimum and I don't 'rush' missions. So I recognize that the variables include which mission, ship, modues, module skills, social skills, and player knowledge and ability.

Just pointing out that, even if you aren't making it, doesn't mean it can't be mean. 'Average' might not be an appropriate term, but the ops post is still pretty valid on a presentation of what a player can do.

Originally by: Aldee
Well it turns out I was lying. I didn't know I had anything on the market and a 50 mil isk sale happened during those 3 hrs. Well I guess thats a relief at those insane profits I thought I was making from missioning I was trying to figure out how to run them 23/7.

Found this further along the thread. Lot of things to read, after being away for 3 days.

BTW: my average mission running returns, level 4:
First period doing level 4 - about 10 million isk/hour
Currently, not Caldai ships - top 20 millions/hour (I loot salvage and use only 1 account and don't play the refure/accept only high reward missions game, so it is probably lower than the max possible)
Currently, Caldari ships (T2 CNR) - about 25 million isk/hour, maybe accepting only the best missions and never spending time looting it could go to 30 million/hour.

I doubt that without dual boxing it is possible to go above that unless you use a fully faction set up, but that will make you a target for ganking, increasing the risk even in high sec a lot.

Originally by: Gamesguy

the suicide ganking is merely an isk farming activity.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Malcanis

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 21:20:00 +0000

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Malcanis

To be honest, I'm not yet sure. Amazing though it may seem to some, I posted this thread in the hope of getting some ideas. There has actually been some valuable input amongst the flaming, whining, lying, alt-smack and nit-picking.

For the moment it just seems wrong that hi-sec is capable of generating so much ISK compared to 0.0. 0.0 simply cannot support players at anything like the density of hi-sec. Now arguably that's as it should be, but if we want to see the devs vision of people moving into null-sec realised, then we will have to see something change.

For the moment, a solution I favour is a LARGE expansion of 0.0 - 4 regions of NPC sov with especially good access to empire (at least 10 lo-sec gates each), high station density, and mediocre ratting; and 12 regions of non-trash quality 0.0 sov.
I'd also like to see a significant increase in the frequency of 0.0 exploration sites. Most of these aren't much better than level 4 missions, but they're a LOT more difficult and time-consuming to find.
And finally, I really think the time has come to remove reprocessed minerals as a significant reward from missioning. It's about time the miners were thrown a bone. I realise that moving L4s to lo sec is by now politically impossible for CCP, however desirable it may seem, but missions generate rewards in the form of ISK, standing, LP, salvage and named item loot as it is. Removing minerals from the equation will at least stop pure missioners from being completely insulated from the rest of the player base. It's a minor nerf (many missioners don't bother to loot) and could be thought of as balancing the proposed increase in hi-sec safety.

At the moment the above thoughts are merely tentative, and I recognise that they're by no means original or perfect. I'd be happy to see your ideas.

The reprocessing/T1 loot/mining issue should be addressed, but personally I think that addressing it only from 1 direction (i.e. removing meta 0 mission loot) without others changes in production, like: available manufacturing slots, belts accessibility, ease of moving bulk minerls, and so on, can have negative impact.

I think that it should be addressed as a whole package with the promised industrial patch (not holding my breath waiting for that).

CCP is thinking about that:

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
To answer the OP, yes we are looking seriously at removing or radically reducing T1 from loot. But we are looking at this from all angles as there are two ways you create opportunity in our foundation industry, decrease supply from non-industrial sources such as removing completed items from loot or increasing demand by finding more ways for people to die (and ofc having fun doing so and being able to replace their ships) and allowing for natural consumption.

My reading about "increasing demand by finding more ways for people to die", in the reply context, is mostly meant for mission runners, making them lose more ships/gear , but it is only an opninion.

I'm 100% in agreement that it's time for an "industry" patch. Mining, research, manufacturing, and the game interfaces for them (plus the corp management interface... jesus, I still weep tears of blood at the memory) have accreted in a very ad-hoc way, and there are glaring omissions, imbalances and inadequacies that urgently need addressing far more than we need another T2 Cruiser class or whatever.
I know it seems kind of boring and unglamorous, but a full on PvE patch is just as vital for the game as any PvP patch could be.

CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Ruze

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 21:16:00 +0000

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Dzajic
Originally by: Aldee
Hmmm I didnt believe the figures ppl gave for running lvl 4 missions so I had to try myself. Running a lvl 4 qty 6 agent with a t2 tanked domi and t1 drones I made about 35-40 mil per hr and that time included picking up loot but not reprocessing or selling that loot but just mission and bounty isk.

Sorry, but that seams highly unlikely. T2 tanked Domi with T2 drones, I top out at 15 mill/hour. Little worse agent but... not that worse.

Probably a test on 1 mission and got lucky on the draw.

Considering that some have quoted everything from 5mil per hour on a level 4, to 40 mil. Honestly, maybe the op shouldn't have said 'average', but I think it's definitely possible to make 25 on a hisec level 4.

I'm not making it yet, but my skills are minimum and I don't 'rush' missions. So I recognize that the variables include which mission, ship, modues, module skills, social skills, and player knowledge and ability.

Just pointing out that, even if you aren't making it, doesn't mean it can't be mean. 'Average' might not be an appropriate term, but the ops post is still pretty valid on a presentation of what a player can do.

So you want security? That's perfectly alright.
But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Venkul Mul

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 21:11:00 +0000

Originally by: Dzajic
Originally by: Aldee
Hmmm I didnt believe the figures ppl gave for running lvl 4 missions so I had to try myself. Running a lvl 4 qty 6 agent with a t2 tanked domi and t1 drones I made about 35-40 mil per hr and that time included picking up loot but not reprocessing or selling that loot but just mission and bounty isk.

Sorry, but that seams highly unlikely. T2 tanked Domi with T2 drones, I top out at 15 mill/hour. Little worse agent but... not that worse.

Probably a test on 1 mission and got lucky on the draw.

Originally by: Gamesguy

the suicide ganking is merely an isk farming activity.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Ruze

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:51:00 +0000

Originally by: Venkul Mul
You see, this is where it all fail. You see it a unacceptable that missions are a near infinite resource, limited only by server capability. Yours is an unshakable conviction.

Other people think that near infinite missions are needed and useful to the balance of the whole game.

Unless CCP give out a lot of information only they can gather it is impossible to argue about this in a reasonable way, as we are all speaking from our personal, biased, experience and knowledge, not from a unbiased base of informations.

I think that most of the suggestion given here so far will damage EVE as a whole much more of what they will help it.

The only way to know the real effects would be to test them, but then if they are the wrong solution or even the wrong problem, it would be very hard to return to the previous situation or even a semblance of it.

I already suggested it to you, but I repeat it again, try to look what was the effect on low sec missions for the few week of extremely easy scanning. Low sec missioning has never recovered from that, even if now the missioners scanning craze has abated.

What people recall is that a probe in low sec mean that 30 seconds later you will get a visit in a mission and almost certainly lose your ship.

I believe that many of us would consider veldspar an infinite resource, no? I personally image level 2 or 3 missions being the same way ... limited, but to a point that it would take a near impossible amount of activity to deplete considerably.

While you have pointed out a valid fault in why losec missions lost popularity, I wonder if you feel that this can't be overcome? Despite what many on the forums seem to believe, the EvE playerbase is amazingly persitent and adaptive. I mean, players have already witnessed several major nerfs to ship speed and escape capabilities, and yet they adapted to use of current nano hacs, and will adapt again.

I want more to see small adjustments, over time, of CCP rebalancing the player drift from hisec into nulsec. You can't force every player ... it'll never happen. Hell, some will refuse to adjust on principle alone. Others don't care. That's automatic.

But if you start by rebalancing minerals, and slowly shift the WANT of players to use losec resources to gain wealth, you can accomplish this person without giving players the impression of pushing.

We only have the information we have gained and opinion. I present a lot of opinions, because I like to, but have few true convictions where video games are concerned. About my only real conviction is that if I am not enjoying myself, I won't pay for the product. Plain and simple.

I've seem many suggestions on these forums, each good and bad for it's own reasoning. I don't think you can just boost the rewards in losec, though, without upsetting the economy (though admitedly it may be a small upset). But if you raise losec rewards, while at the same type lowering hisec rewards (actually making very minute modifications), you can avoid that.

And losec 'rewards' don't have to be isk related. Moving LP rewards to losec only is one strong adjustment, and it doesn't effect L4 mission payouts, only gross wealth. Another example is to offer players operating in losec further options, like adding more factory/research slots in losec space, increasing refine rate, offering fewer taxes, etc.

Boosting losec, so that it draws, not solo pirate targets, but corporations and industrialists ... that's what I would like to see. Adjusting missions to reflect the resource mechanism and to help initiate competition, are more things that I think *should* be done, but not *have* to be done.

So you want security? That's perfectly alright.
But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Venkul Mul

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:40:00 +0000

Originally by: Malcanis

To be honest, I'm not yet sure. Amazing though it may seem to some, I posted this thread in the hope of getting some ideas. There has actually been some valuable input amongst the flaming, whining, lying, alt-smack and nit-picking.

For the moment it just seems wrong that hi-sec is capable of generating so much ISK compared to 0.0. 0.0 simply cannot support players at anything like the density of hi-sec. Now arguably that's as it should be, but if we want to see the devs vision of people moving into null-sec realised, then we will have to see something change.

For the moment, a solution I favour is a LARGE expansion of 0.0 - 4 regions of NPC sov with especially good access to empire (at least 10 lo-sec gates each), high station density, and mediocre ratting; and 12 regions of non-trash quality 0.0 sov.
I'd also like to see a significant increase in the frequency of 0.0 exploration sites. Most of these aren't much better than level 4 missions, but they're a LOT more difficult and time-consuming to find.
And finally, I really think the time has come to remove reprocessed minerals as a significant reward from missioning. It's about time the miners were thrown a bone. I realise that moving L4s to lo sec is by now politically impossible for CCP, however desirable it may seem, but missions generate rewards in the form of ISK, standing, LP, salvage and named item loot as it is. Removing minerals from the equation will at least stop pure missioners from being completely insulated from the rest of the player base. It's a minor nerf (many missioners don't bother to loot) and could be thought of as balancing the proposed increase in hi-sec safety.

At the moment the above thoughts are merely tentative, and I recognise that they're by no means original or perfect. I'd be happy to see your ideas.

The reprocessing/T1 loot/mining issue should be addressed, but personally I think that addressing it only from 1 direction (i.e. removing meta 0 mission loot) without others changes in production, like: available manufacturing slots, belts accessibility, ease of moving bulk minerls, and so on, can have negative impact.

I think that it should be addressed as a whole package with the promised industrial patch (not holding my breath waiting for that).

CCP is thinking about that:

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
To answer the OP, yes we are looking seriously at removing or radically reducing T1 from loot. But we are looking at this from all angles as there are two ways you create opportunity in our foundation industry, decrease supply from non-industrial sources such as removing completed items from loot or increasing demand by finding more ways for people to die (and ofc having fun doing so and being able to replace their ships) and allowing for natural consumption.

My reading about "increasing demand by finding more ways for people to die", in the reply context, is mostly meant for mission runners, making them lose more ships/gear , but it is only an opninion.

Originally by: Gamesguy

the suicide ganking is merely an isk farming activity.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Venkul Mul

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:23:00 +0000

Originally by: Ruze

The problem, as you asked, is that missions are infinite and reproducable, unlike any other resource in EvE. I do believe that some level 2's, or maybe level 3's, should be 'near-infinite', like veldspar, so that if you need to make money, they are always available in your system or one or two over. But level 4's should have some requirement for competition, be it 'first-come-first-serve' (like asteroids, research and factory slots, trading, etc), or skill based.

You see, this is where it all fail. You see it a unacceptable that missions are a near infinite resource, limited only by server capability. Yours is an unshakable conviction.

Other people think that near infinite missions are needed and useful to the balance of the whole game.

Unless CCP give out a lot of information only they can gather it is impossible to argue about this in a reasonable way, as we are all speaking from our personal, biased, experience and knowledge, not from a unbiased base of informations.

I think that most of the suggestion given here so far will damage EVE as a whole much more of what they will help it.

The only way to know the real effects would be to test them, but then if they are the wrong solution or even the wrong problem, it would be very hard to return to the previous situation or even a semblance of it.

I already suggested it to you, but I repeat it again, try to look what was the effect on low sec missions for the few week of extremely easy scanning. Low sec missioning has never recovered from that, even if now the missioners scanning craze has abated.

What people recall is that a probe in low sec mean that 30 seconds later you will get a visit in a mission and almost certainly lose your ship.

Originally by: Gamesguy

the suicide ganking is merely an isk farming activity.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Black Scorpio

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:18:00 +0000

Originally by: Malcanis
This question came up in another thread, and I started to do a back-of-an-envelope calculation.

Let's say that an agent can serve 175 players at any one time. (Observed in Isinokka recently... a bit laggy, but perfectly managable)

Each player can earn 25M an hour - some more, some less, but lets take that as a kind of average of the figures generally cited on the forum.

175x25x24 = 105 BILLION ISK PER DAY.

That's 3.2 trillion ISK per month.

1 titan every 14 hours.

A fully T2 fitted battleship every 130 seconds.

For a

single

agent.

Malcanis, with all due respect, where did you pull that 25M number from an hour from a high sec agent? your ass (again sorry) but your number is simply a guess at best or what you heard, or read on the trustworthy forums that MAYBE someone gets in a pimped out isk/hour ship.

I can tell you that i can get (and have been getting a lot more) in 0.0 from doing a few Deadspaces, or anomalies. Got a few domination ships 22.5mil each, and so on.. not to mention the value of the faction loot they drop.

So please, when you have another weird argument like that that shows skewed numbers, and inflates the general opinion of mission running interest, please don't post it.

You need to be VERY efficient to pull that 25mil, if at all, IF you get the correct missions, IF your agent give you that.

In 0.0 you can just do a stroll down the belts and do a couple of anomalies to get the same result if not twice, based on faction or mineral spawns...

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Esmenet

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:56:00 +0000

Originally by: McDonALTs

Thats the whole point. NPC trade goods are also the same. Buy NPCgoods and fill NPC buy orders - boom, the npc sell and buy orders instanly replenish.

Try trading NPC goods.
Vote against the nano nerf!

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Esmenet

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:55:00 +0000

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Esmenet
Originally by: Ruze

Personally, I don't think a lot of the devs changes are directed at 'pleasing the playerbase' directly. Specifically those I've seen since coming back, like the upcoming nano nerf and the suicide fix.

Well the 2 biggest whinetopics before these changes was announced was suicide ganking and nanos. Primarily started by high sec missioners.

Failed logic strike again .

You think that high sec mission runners have any interest in nano fit? Those NPC nano ships are terrible, truly.

Ganking, ok, it is a high sec problem as it don't exist in low sec, but again it is mostly a hauler problem, not a mission runner.

Caldari militia.
Vote against the nano nerf!

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Venkul Mul

Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:53:00 +0000

Originally by: Esmenet
Originally by: Ruze

Personally, I don't think a lot of the devs changes are directed at 'pleasing the playerbase' directly. Specifically those I've seen since coming back, like the upcoming nano nerf and the suicide fix.

Well the 2 biggest whinetopics before these changes was announced was suicide ganking and nanos. Primarily started by high sec missioners.

Failed logic strike again .

You think that high sec mission runners have any interest in nano fit? Those NPC nano ships are terrible, truly.

Ganking, ok, it is a high sec problem as it don't exist in low sec, but again it is mostly a hauler problem, not a mission runner.

Originally by: Gamesguy

the suicide ganking is merely an isk farming activity.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by McDonALTs

Sun, 10 Aug 2008 15:27:00 +0000

Edited by: McDonALTs on 10/08/2008 15:30:32

Originally by: Malcanis
I've lost count of the number of times I've explained that this is about the CAPACITY of agents, not about how many 1 agents is serving at one specific time, any more than all 0.0 systems are being ratted to capacity at any one time.

What is the problem with capacity? Agents are meant to be a renewable resource, you can only do 1 mission per agent at a time. If you fail a mision, you might loose access with the agent.

Thats the whole point. NPC trade goods are also the same. Buy NPCgoods and fill NPC buy orders - boom, the npc sell and buy orders instanly replenish.

CCP did this to prevent people competing resources away from poor or newbie players. What part of this do you not uderstand?

Honestly, do you not understnd risk vs reward? This game is not about capacity, it is about risk vs reward. Do you understand this?

99% of agents in high sec give out almost 0isk. So whats your point on that smarty pants?

CCP WANTS AGENTS TO HAVE CAPACITY, SINCE RISK VS REWARD WOULD MAKE IT IMPOSSILE TO COMPETE IF EVERY RESOURCE WAS CAPACITY LIMITED INCOME STREAMS

Eve = Risk Vs Reward. It is not Capacity vs non-capacity.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Ruze

Sun, 10 Aug 2008 14:58:00 +0000

Alright, so players can make between 5mil and 40mil per hour doing level 4 missions in hisec.

Just provide a broad, sweeping average and include the whole range of player production. That way, you don't 'average' and then someone gets ticked because they don't meet your average.

So you want security? That's perfectly alright.
But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Malcanis

Sun, 10 Aug 2008 14:36:00 +0000

Originally by: Veldya
Originally by: Malcanis
This question came up in another thread, and I started to do a back-of-an-envelope calculation.

Let's say that an agent can serve 175 players at any one time. (Observed in Isinokka recently... a bit laggy, but perfectly managable)

Each player can earn 25M an hour - some more, some less, but lets take that as a kind of average of the figures generally cited on the forum.

175x25x24 = 105 BILLION ISK PER DAY.

That's 3.2 trillion ISK per month.

1 titan every 14 hours.

A fully T2 fitted battleship every 130 seconds.

Isinokka is one of the major mission hubs but tends to average about 135 people, tends to fluctuate between 120 and 150 when I an on.

It is not remotely possible to average 25m per hour with level 4s, not even close. Only a handful of missions play anything remotely close to that and those are very long missions. The vast majority of L4s pay significantly less so the base math is way off.

Missions payouts are dynamically calculated, it means the payout of a mission is adjusted based on the average time it takes to complete the mission, there are low and high ceilings. Payouts are then adjusted based on security level and Isinokka is 0.7 so it is not remotely close to a 0.5 system.

Isinokka not only has a very good L4 Spacelan agent but has a very good L1 agent so a chunk of the population aren't even doing L4s.

Probably less than a third of missions have the target in the same system so you have to factor a chunk in Oipo which also has a very good L3 Spacelane agent. Oipo averages 80-100 during my normal time and there are 13 odd agents in that system.

I think overall, on average the agents would be paying similar to mining return. There are a lot of people with sub-par skills that take a long time to churn out the missions, see the number of drakes doing L4s, they would take forever.

CCP would monitor what is earned and the missions are dynamically calculated so the faster people do them, the lower the payouts.

I've lost count of the number of times I've explained that this is about the CAPACITY of agents, not about how many 1 agents is serving at one specific time, any more than all 0.0 systems are being ratted to capacity at any one time.

Oh and Isinokka frequently hits the 150-175 mark.

And what the hell is it with people who think that because THEY only get 10M/hr, that no-one else can do better. If you're AFKing a pure tank drake loaded up with FoFs, I dunno, maybe you do only get 10M/hr. I don't care, because with an easily obtainable CNR you can get 20M+ including the value of LPs, loot and salvage, plus the occasional storyline which often give you a 15-18M implant for no more effort than it takes to buy 8k kernite, or fly a shuttle 5 jumps and back.

CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Astria Tiphareth

Sun, 10 Aug 2008 14:08:00 +0000

Why do we care? Seriously. Are we playing this game to get rich or to have fun blowing each other up? I am trivialising deliberately here as I know the entire game is interlinked and I enjoy making money as much as PvP, but I think it's worth making a point here.

How much ISK you make does not change how well you can PvP. It doesn't change your skillpoints. It doesn't change whether or not someone likes you (unless they bribe easily). It doesn't even change the ability to continue PvP, if you control the entire production line (i.e. from minerals to ship etc.).

If CCP really truly cared about ISK movement in the game, they'd not have the option to use GTCs - I can make a lot of money by buying it and it's even more risk-free than missions. So yes, level 4s produce a lot (the numbers quoted are unrealistic but it is still a lot), but why does it matter?

Short of removing missions and bounties altogether, and thereby ending EVE's inflation (assuming we want that), why should we care?
___
My views may not represent those of my corporation or alliance, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties...

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Veldya

Sun, 10 Aug 2008 10:44:00 +0000

Originally by: Malcanis
This question came up in another thread, and I started to do a back-of-an-envelope calculation.

Let's say that an agent can serve 175 players at any one time. (Observed in Isinokka recently... a bit laggy, but perfectly managable)

Each player can earn 25M an hour - some more, some less, but lets take that as a kind of average of the figures generally cited on the forum.

175x25x24 = 105 BILLION ISK PER DAY.

That's 3.2 trillion ISK per month.

1 titan every 14 hours.

A fully T2 fitted battleship every 130 seconds.

Isinokka is one of the major mission hubs but tends to average about 135 people, tends to fluctuate between 120 and 150 when I an on.

It is not remotely possible to average 25m per hour with level 4s, not even close. Only a handful of missions play anything remotely close to that and those are very long missions. The vast majority of L4s pay significantly less so the base math is way off.

Missions payouts are dynamically calculated, it means the payout of a mission is adjusted based on the average time it takes to complete the mission, there are low and high ceilings. Payouts are then adjusted based on security level and Isinokka is 0.7 so it is not remotely close to a 0.5 system.

Isinokka not only has a very good L4 Spacelan agent but has a very good L1 agent so a chunk of the population aren't even doing L4s.

Probably less than a third of missions have the target in the same system so you have to factor a chunk in Oipo which also has a very good L3 Spacelane agent. Oipo averages 80-100 during my normal time and there are 13 odd agents in that system.

I think overall, on average the agents would be paying similar to mining return. There are a lot of people with sub-par skills that take a long time to churn out the missions, see the number of drakes doing L4s, they would take forever.

CCP would monitor what is earned and the missions are dynamically calculated so the faster people do them, the lower the payouts.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Chainsaw Plankton

Sun, 10 Aug 2008 01:36:00 +0000

Edited by: Chainsaw Plankton on 10/08/2008 01:38:24

Originally by: Ruze
Originally by: thisismyalt
While we are on the topic of fountains of endless isk - lets not forget to mention all the moons which are essentially never ending asteroids and the endless supply of officer mods that are plexes.

Both of which are finite in number and spread out amongst all the stars of nulsec, so that they must be fought and controlled. The number of 'useless' moons far outweighs the good ones.

The chance of getting an officer mod drop is also fairly rare, as is using rats to grind. These are part of that nulsec 'risk' equation, right? The reality is, there are many systems in nulsec that don't give it's owners squat diddly, and there are a spare few that players bank billions from.

Meanwhile, in comparison, Agents are not only stable, infinite, and completely reliable for medium-gross income, with little-to-no risk to the mission runner (besides the mentioned threat of loot and salvage stealing, as one poster pointed out).

not even mentioning the fact that moons don't supply any isk to the game whatsoever, in fact moon mining removes isk from the game.

and that second point, that is not even risk, that is just profit reduction. having someone in your mission. (the parts you didn't mention however are, over aggro and mission loot theft)

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Ruze

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 18:45:00 +0000

Originally by: thisismyalt
While we are on the topic of fountains of endless isk - lets not forget to mention all the moons which are essentially never ending asteroids and the endless supply of officer mods that are plexes.

Both of which are finite in number and spread out amongst all the stars of nulsec, so that they must be fought and controlled. The number of 'useless' moons far outweighs the good ones.

The chance of getting an officer mod drop is also fairly rare, as is using rats to grind. These are part of that nulsec 'risk' equation, right? The reality is, there are many systems in nulsec that don't give it's owners squat diddly, and there are a spare few that players bank billions from.

Meanwhile, in comparison, Agents are not only stable, infinite, and completely reliable for medium-gross income, with little-to-no risk to the mission runner (besides the mentioned threat of loot and salvage stealing, as one poster pointed out).

So you want security? That's perfectly alright.
But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Ruze

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 18:42:00 +0000

Originally by: Dzajic
There far too many pirate corps with Moms and dozens of Carriers for it to be possible for any new character corp to "go there themselves and make it safer" (the lowsec that is). It is simply that its far more profitable and easier for them to either individually or jointly as a corp find a zero zero megabloblag alliance willing to take them in.

Best imaginable way to boost low sec imho would be "NO capital ships in lowsec, period." So that when you do gather enough people to break that sensor boosted HICtor camp (great way to go CCP, make blocade runners and WCS completely obsolete), you dont end up with carriers and moms hotdropped on you.

And CCP, do something about drone region minerals, plz, kthanks.

The old way was to hire that pirate corp for a couple mil or so to allow your carebear corp to operate in that set of systems. You missioned, you mined, and you used taxes to generate the 'payoff' fee.

Pirates seemed to like this, because then other, unaffiliated players would think "Oh, this place is safe", and would fly in and get pirated. If you wanted passage, your entire corp had to pay. Especially if your guys were selling mods from that area's station, drawing in buyers who had to pickup their purchases.

Get a good enough pirate corp, and they would defend you from other pirate outfits, so your group wouldn't abandon their space and take your profit margins with it.

Not all pirates are griefers. Some are actually respectable chaps just looking to enjoy the game as they like to play it. The real pirates know that their reputation carries weight, and these are the ones who maintain high sec stats and honor ransoms.

So you want security? That's perfectly alright.
But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by thisismyalt

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 18:40:00 +0000

While we are on the topic of fountains of endless isk - lets not forget to mention all the moons which are essentially never ending asteroids and the endless supply of officer mods that are plexes.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Dzajic

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 18:36:00 +0000

There far too many pirate corps with Moms and dozens of Carriers for it to be possible for any new character corp to "go there themselves and make it safer" (the lowsec that is). It is simply that its far more profitable and easier for them to either individually or jointly as a corp find a zero zero megabloblag alliance willing to take them in.

Best imaginable way to boost low sec imho would be "NO capital ships in lowsec, period." So that when you do gather enough people to break that sensor boosted HICtor camp (great way to go CCP, make blocade runners and WCS completely obsolete), you dont end up with carriers and moms hotdropped on you.

And CCP, do something about drone region minerals, plz, kthanks.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Ruze

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 18:23:00 +0000

I think less of the money grinding (though that is a solid arguing base) and more of the 'huddling' reaction players are getting. They are overloading hisec nodes (many of which are connected to losec ones), and then when they are hit with lag and cannot operate, complaining about lag and lack of new and exciting things to do ... in hisec.

I don't want to 'force' anyone anywhere, but I do question human persistence and diligent ignorance when players run into tons of lag every day, but can't be bothered to move out of the way.

Losec is too dangerous, and yet it is too dangerous because the player won't go there to make it less so.

I think this comes from a) an imbalance in minerals, where veldspar is the key to removing the value of losec mining, b) the ultimate prosperity of hisec level 4 mission grinding, and c) lack of independent initiatives to move into losec in force.

If the industrialist (ultimately the hardier carebears) want to go into losec, and they can convince/cajole/hire those wanting combat (former pirates notwithstanding), then the mission runners will also go.

So you want security? That's perfectly alright.
But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Malcanis

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 18:23:00 +0000

Originally by: Amateratsu
Edited by: Amateratsu on 09/08/2008 18:15:18

Missions have risk...

You can scan down mission runners and enter their mission...
You can steal their loot...
You can salvage their wrecks...
You can steal the mission key item preventing them from completing the mission...
You can bait them and otherwiase generally harass them...
You can aggro the whole room making it more difficult for them to manage...
And you CAN STILL suicide them if you want to...

Having said that, I actually like the idea of limiting the number of missions you can run per agent per day, 1 mission every 4 hours or so.

This would force runners to move around between agents instead of huggin the best Q agent and reduce the lag in the major mission hubs.

Also if you read the features and ideas forum, there is a thread where the devs are concidering the removal of t1 items from loot drops and replacing them with componants for manurfactoring TI and possibly T2 named meta items.

Which will reduce the reporcessing of loot for minerals boosting their value and mining.

Removing missions from hisec is not the answer and will cause more problems than it solves.

I like that idea too.

ZOMG we agree on something!

CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Amateratsu

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 18:11:00 +0000

Edited by: Amateratsu on 09/08/2008 18:15:18

Missions have risk...

You can scan down mission runners and enter their mission...
You can steal their loot...
You can salvage their wrecks...
You can steal the mission key item preventing them from completing the mission...
You can bait them and otherwiase generally harass them...
You can aggro the whole room making it more difficult for them to manage...
And you CAN STILL suicide them if you want to...

Having said that, I actually like the idea of limiting the number of missions you can run per agent per day, 1 mission every 4 hours or so.

This would force runners to move around between agents instead of huggin the best Q agent and reduce the lag in the major mission hubs.

Also if you read the features and ideas forum, there is a thread where the devs are concidering the removal of t1 items from loot drops and replacing them with componants for manurfactoring TI and possibly T2 named meta items.

Which will reduce the reporcessing of loot for minerals boosting their value and mining.

Removing missions from hisec is not the answer and will cause more problems than it solves.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Somealt Ofmine

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 17:48:00 +0000

Edited by: Somealt Ofmine on 09/08/2008 17:51:15

Originally by: Ruze
I personally consider the vulnerability of traveling in a hauler or in a freighter to be pretty high risk, even in hisec. These guys aren't free from PvP by any means. In fact, they are (by design, at least) prone to be completely on the receiving end of it.

This is a pretty horrible reasoning, I guess, but it's why I personally don't put trading on my list of 'easy money'. That, and trading requires players in order to even work, as the players are the one contributing buy and sell orders. It is complete PvP, meshed at every step with other players.

So yeah, between the billion isk ship with a big target on it and the cuttrhoat nature of trade in hisec, I don't see 'trading' as an issue.

I've said it before and again, I do think missions being used as an isk grind ARE an issue. For a 90-day player, that's one thing. Getting your feet underneath you, I'm right with you. But as a lifetime endeavor, it should not be as profitable - IN HISEC - as any other profession, especially for the lack of risk. Want to make a profession out of missioning? There are losec agents and even 0.0 pirate corporations.

Funny you posted that at the same time I was having a "heart to heart" with my girl about slow-boating one of our freighters full of T2 mats through high-sec while she did her hair.

I dunno. I don't really care that much about missions tbh because I really only do them as a diversion a couple of times a week. I see high-sec missioning in an NPC corp as a self-limiting style of play with no advancement path. So, you can stack up a bunch 'o isk. So? What are you going to do with it that doesn't involve either entering the player v player economy or combat? If tooling around Motsu in your Golem or CNR imagining that you are the envy of all the other mission runners is your "end game" that's to bad. Eve is a great game and you're missing most of it that way, but it's no skin off my nose.

If it were hurting the economy, I could see doing something, but I see no evidence of that. If you're concerned about it being the preferred vehicle for isk farming (as if CCP really aggressively cared about farming) the thing to do would be to put a one hour lockout timer on each agent, I guess. That wouldn't nerf the income of someone just doing one here and there. It would seriously hamper someone who was doing them over and over as an isk grind. You'd have to travel from agent to agent if you wanted to do more than one in a row, and you couldn't just grind the highest quality agent.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Ruze

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 17:34:00 +0000

I personally consider the vulnerability of traveling in a hauler or in a freighter to be pretty high risk, even in hisec. These guys aren't free from PvP by any means. In fact, they are (by design, at least) prone to be completely on the receiving end of it.

This is a pretty horrible reasoning, I guess, but it's why I personally don't put trading on my list of 'easy money'. That, and trading requires players in order to even work, as the players are the one contributing buy and sell orders. It is complete PvP, meshed at every step with other players.

So yeah, between the billion isk ship with a big target on it and the cuttrhoat nature of trade in hisec, I don't see 'trading' as an issue.

I've said it before and again, I do think missions being used as an isk grind ARE an issue. For a 90-day player, that's one thing. Getting your feet underneath you, I'm right with you. But as a lifetime endeavor, it should not be as profitable - IN HISEC - as any other profession, especially for the lack of risk. Want to make a profession out of missioning? There are losec agents and even 0.0 pirate corporations.

So you want security? That's perfectly alright.
But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Morcam

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 17:12:00 +0000

Originally by: Somealt Ofmine

That's wise of you, because you clearly have no clue what you're talking about. I don't mean that as a slight, but you're clearly ignorant of how eve's market works.

Ok, cool, so at the end of the day, your answer comes all the way back to "I don't like it". You don't want anyone in eve to make good money while not risking gettting shot at.

Hate to break it to you bud, but I make far more building stuff and in the market than I do running L4 missions. Should we nerf empire manufacturing and trading too? I mean, afterall, I don't even have to undock to make money trading. Barely even have to undock to make money building. Where does that fall on the Morcam approved risk/reward scale?

Your argument, taken to its logical conclusion, leads all the way back to basically getting rid of Empire altogether, and making it a noob "starter island" like other games have that nobody stays in past their first couple of weeks in the game. You have an interesting game in mind there, but that game isn't Eve. There isn't any point arguing this with you any further. I think we've pretty much hashed it out.

First off, the selective quoting here gets even better. Now you select quoted me to make it seem like I'm saying the exact opposite of what I am saying. Fail. If you can't respond to the whole post, don't respond at all.

Since I'm going to answer your entire post, and not just part of it...

And yes, I don't want anyone to make good isk while not being shot at. However, making money on the market is entirely different from missions. Making money on the market relies on other people being, in a sense, stupid. Other people have to sell lower, and you have to buy your items lower. As a trader, none of your isk comes from NPC's, it all comes from other players. The same with building stuff, unless you mine your own minerals. You get the minerals from other players, manufacture them, then sell them to other players.

The other point I made about the mission runners having nothing to spend their isk on is also much higher when it comes to a trader. He can't fly ships, even though he DOES have the isk.

Highsec IS a "newbie island" but it is a newbie island that no one apparently wants to leave. Why not? It gives more than enough isk to buy everything you need. And I laughed at the part of "taken to its logical conclusion." What convoluted logic are you using there? And I want to play the EvE that the developers wanted to play, not the one the carebears want.

Regardless, since you don't respond to my posts, there is not a point in carrying this further. Thanks for the laughs, though.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Taius Pax

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 16:54:00 +0000

Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Atlas Oracle
dead horse is dead, but hey don't stop beating it at 2 days of whining, go for a 3rd consecutive tomorrow.

best of luck

3 days? Oh I'll be doing this until my account expires. Hope you're ready to "adapt and survive", freshmeat.

Your tears am tasty! And there is no end!

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Ruze

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 16:50:00 +0000

Originally by: Aldee
Well it turns out I was lying. I didn't know I had anything on the market and a 50 mil isk sale happened during those 3 hrs. Well I guess thats a relief at those insane profits I thought I was making from missioning I was trying to figure out how to run them 23/7.

Good on you for admitting the flaw in your original statement. Some of us admire that kind of honesty.

So you want security? That's perfectly alright.
But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Aldee

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 16:46:00 +0000

Well it turns out I was lying. I didn't know I had anything on the market and a 50 mil isk sale happened during those 3 hrs. Well I guess thats a relief at those insane profits I thought I was making from missioning I was trying to figure out how to run them 23/7.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Dzajic

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 15:31:00 +0000

Originally by: Aldee
Originally by: Dzajic

Sorry, but that seams highly unlikely. T2 tanked Domi with T2 drones, I top out at 15 mill/hour. Little worse agent but... not that worse.

Well maybe I just hit a few awesome missions in a row. I ran missions for 3 hrs and made 120 mil so . Maybe my average would go down doing it 23/7 but I'm not willing to risk my sanity to test that. =p

OK, OK, I really dont like accusing people of lying, it just seamed very unlikely to me, with T1 drones braking BS tanks or tanks of 250k bounty cruisers takes way too much time.

Can you please tell, what missions were those exactly? Agent quality, system sec? If its +15Q agent in 0.1 system, then its all right.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Aldee

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 14:41:00 +0000

Originally by: Dzajic

Sorry, but that seams highly unlikely. T2 tanked Domi with T2 drones, I top out at 15 mill/hour. Little worse agent but... not that worse.

Well maybe I just hit a few awesome missions in a row. I ran missions for 3 hrs and made 120 mil so . Maybe my average would go down doing it 23/7 but I'm not willing to risk my sanity to test that. =p

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by McDonALTs

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 12:48:00 +0000

Edited by: McDonALTs on 09/08/2008 12:51:24

Originally by: Ruze
Edited by: Ruze on 08/08/2008 22:10:02
Originally by: McDonALTs
Edited by: McDonALTs on 08/08/2008 22:01:30
AGENTS ARE MEANT TO BE INFINITE RESOURCE BAISED ON TIME- There are resources you can compete for and those you dont.

Agents NEVER were meant to be a compeating resource. Its all part of a risk v reward balance. You want to make a crappy 15-20mil per hour doing lvl4's? Fine. Youi want to make 10 billion/month spending 3 hours managing a POS (thats approx 3,300mil/hour)? Well, you take the risk putting a billion isk putting a pos up then in hostile space and pray RA or bos's 500man capfleet blob do not see it.

Its Risk Vs Reward, not Compete vs non-compete. Eve NEEDS uncompetitive resources otherwise noobs can never progress beyond a noobship since everything can be compeated away from them.

I just came back, and started doing level 2 missions to get back 'in the hang of things'. Level 2 and level 3 missions provide a nice reward. For new players, at least from those I've talked to, earning a few mil per mission, like in level 3's, is damn good profit.

Level 4's seem to be less oriented to new players, and more oriented for older players (over three months) as a cash resource. That is perfectly fine, and I don't think anythings wrong with that. But I don't think a counter argument to changing level 4 missions is that they are a new player resource is a accurate or legit.

Running lvl4's for a average 15mil/hour, you can afford a typically t2 fitted pvp BS in 2-3 hours (after insurance, total loss is approx 30-40mil for respectable fit).

lvl3's are around 4mil/hour. Meaning that the person would have to do around 8-10 hours to pay for a BS.

Sorry, I just do not understand your point? You want people to FARM more missions by moving to lvl3's insted?

The ebay farmers are all in 0.0 selling moon reactions for isk they sell on ebay/RMT websites, or are in cloaking ratting ravens which are in their thousands in 0.0. Or they are mining ice or whatever. 80% of mission runners are people trying to fund pvp.

You need to get a grip of the game. Its Risk vs Reward. There is no risk for cloaking 0.0 isk farmer that you want people to become. Low sec rich moons are already taken over by 0.0 alliances and you can never compete vs 400man capblob should you attack it.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Nabar Phargal

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 11:03:00 +0000

Originally by: Lucy'Lastic
Moving all lvl 4 agents to lo sec is a great idea.

With a few tweaks it could work.

1- Make these losec lvl 4 missions deal significantly less DPs. Reason being if you are going to run lvl 4s in losec you need a PvP fit because if anybody scans you down you have no chance with a mission fitting.(You need to fit Web, scram, injector, ECCM ,neut etc)Raven pilots are especially effected by having to use mids that would otherwise be used for tank.

2-Nerf scanning. Reason is that Drone users are at a disadvantage because Drones are easy to scan.

3-No standings drop for failed missions because if you're scanned down you will have to abandon the mission.

4-NPCs in losec missions auto aggro everybody that comes into the mission area. Reason is because the NPCs will be targetting the mission runner and he will be fighting the NPCs and the people/persons who scanned down his mission.

5-Make them two or three times more profitable because you have less chance of completing them if scanned.

6-Increase the time you are given to complete the mission to 3 days rather than 6 hours because there is every chance you will be disturbed and have to leave.

7- Add 100 more lvl4 Q20 losec agents because players will be probing in the systems with the decent agents.

There. That's a bit more balanced.

You mean the mission runners shouldn't have to deal with the same hazards as the miners and ratters?

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Lucy'Lastic

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 10:26:00 +0000

Moving all lvl 4 agents to lo sec is a great idea.

With a few tweaks it could work.

1- Make these losec lvl 4 missions deal significantly less DPs. Reason being if you are going to run lvl 4s in losec you need a PvP fit because if anybody scans you down you have no chance with a mission fitting.(You need to fit Web, scram, injector, ECCM ,neut etc)Raven pilots are especially effected by having to use mids that would otherwise be used for tank.

2-Nerf scanning. Reason is that Drone users are at a disadvantage because Drones are easy to scan.

3-No standings drop for failed missions because if you're scanned down you will have to abandon the mission.

4-NPCs in losec missions auto aggro everybody that comes into the mission area. Reason is because the NPCs will be targetting the mission runner and he will be fighting the NPCs and the people/persons who scanned down his mission.

5-Make them two or three times more profitable because you have less chance of completing them if scanned.

6-Increase the time you are given to complete the mission to 3 days rather than 6 hours because there is every chance you will be disturbed and have to leave.

7- Add 100 more lvl4 Q20 losec agents because players will be probing in the systems with the decent agents.

There. That's a bit more balanced.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Chainsaw Plankton

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 09:58:00 +0000

and the nitpicking and Well I can't play 23 hours a day responses are classy

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Chainsaw Plankton

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 09:56:00 +0000

Originally by: Soporo
Edited by: Soporo on 09/08/2008 07:53:53

Quote:
- all L4/L5 agents should be moved to low-sec or 0.0.

Won't happen, thankfully CCP has more sense than ****ing off 3/4 of their customers causing a mass exodus. Those that don't leave will just zerg 3's.

They tried that with level 5's, it was a resounding failure, no one hardly went. Nerfing Empire has never and will never bring people into LowSec.

Why not call for a freekin boost for once, instead of nerfing someone elses palystyle?

Btw, I (and most other people) can make a LOT more money (30-60 m) ratting in a halfway decent 0.0 than level 4 missions. The usual nerf-Empire crowd figures are inflated. 20 is hurrying. 15 is about usual.

Quote:
Running a lvl 4 qty 6 agent with a t2 tanked domi and t1 drones I made about 35-40 mil per hr

Simply bs.

But the nerf Empire crowd has never been about the truth, just their crazy agenda.

also initially level 5s had shit rewards. more lp/isk to just run level 4s. and now they give about 10x the lp of level 4s.

there also shockingly has been very little moon mining/mining yeilds materials, where missions and ratting yields isk/loot/salvage. also that I have read most moons cost more isk to fuel the tower than they make mining the moon.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Chainsaw Plankton

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 09:50:00 +0000

Originally by: Straight Chillen
Simplest fix is to have agent levels determined soley on the secruity of their systems

1.0-0.8 Lvl 1 Agents only
07.-0.5 Addition of lvl 2 agents
0.4-0.3 Addition of Lvl 3 agents
0.2-0.1 Addition of lvl 4 agents
0.0 Lvl 5 agents

problem solved

that would require one hell of a remapping of the eve galaxy

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Malcanis

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 09:25:00 +0000

After thinking about it all night, the one fix EvE really needs is for a decent PvE-centric SF MMO to come out.

CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Soporo

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 07:49:00 +0000

Edited by: Soporo on 09/08/2008 07:53:53

Quote:
- all L4/L5 agents should be moved to low-sec or 0.0.

Won't happen, thankfully CCP has more sense than ****ing off 3/4 of their customers causing a mass exodus. Those that don't leave will just zerg 3's.

They tried that with level 5's, it was a resounding failure, no one hardly went. Nerfing Empire has never and will never bring people into LowSec.

Why not call for a freekin boost for once, instead of nerfing someone elses palystyle?

Btw, I (and most other people) can make a LOT more money (30-60 m) ratting in a halfway decent 0.0 than level 4 missions. The usual nerf-Empire crowd figures are inflated. 20 is hurrying. 15 is about usual.

Quote:
Running a lvl 4 qty 6 agent with a t2 tanked domi and t1 drones I made about 35-40 mil per hr

Simply bs.

But the nerf Empire crowd has never been about the truth, just their crazy agenda.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Dzajic

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 07:17:00 +0000

Originally by: Aldee
Hmmm I didnt believe the figures ppl gave for running lvl 4 missions so I had to try myself. Running a lvl 4 qty 6 agent with a t2 tanked domi and t1 drones I made about 35-40 mil per hr and that time included picking up loot but not reprocessing or selling that loot but just mission and bounty isk.

Sorry, but that seams highly unlikely. T2 tanked Domi with T2 drones, I top out at 15 mill/hour. Little worse agent but... not that worse.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Somealt Ofmine

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 05:38:00 +0000

Originally by: Morcam

T1 production is messed up because there are many T1 products you can get for cheaper than they cost to produce, sure. However, that's not because of new players underpricing their modules.

Regardless, I'm not going to argue on this topic.

That's wise of you, because you clearly have no clue what you're talking about. I don't mean that as a slight, but you're clearly ignorant of how eve's market works.

Quote:
It can't be argued that regardless of the specific amount, a LOT of isk comes from L4 missions. For the amount of risk the users take, I think that the amount that comes out is too much. EvE SHOULD be a dangerous game, and it is by design. Risk versus reward should be a part of the game. However, It seems to me that if you theoretically put EvE on a factor of risk/reward, you'll find that L4 missions don't fit.

1/10,000,000
2/20,000,000
10/100,000,000

Missions are more like 0/15,000,000

I am fine with the reward, I just don't like the risk.

So, after that rant... why do I care? I just said it. They don't fit in.

Ok, cool, so at the end of the day, your answer comes all the way back to "I don't like it". You don't want anyone in eve to make good money while not risking gettting shot at.

Hate to break it to you bud, but I make far more building stuff and in the market than I do running L4 missions. Should we nerf empire manufacturing and trading too? I mean, afterall, I don't even have to undock to make money trading. Barely even have to undock to make money building. Where does that fall on the Morcam approved risk/reward scale?

Your argument, taken to its logical conclusion, leads all the way back to basically getting rid of Empire altogether, and making it a noob "starter island" like other games have that nobody stays in past their first couple of weeks in the game. You have an interesting game in mind there, but that game isn't Eve. There isn't any point arguing this with you any further. I think we've pretty much hashed it out.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Aldee

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 05:26:00 +0000

Hmmm I didnt believe the figures ppl gave for running lvl 4 missions so I had to try myself. Running a lvl 4 qty 6 agent with a t2 tanked domi and t1 drones I made about 35-40 mil per hr and that time included picking up loot but not reprocessing or selling that loot but just mission and bounty isk.

.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Morcam

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 01:51:00 +0000

Edited by: Morcam on 09/08/2008 01:54:09

Originally by: Somealt Ofmine

And shortly after people realize that it got more profitable, more people will realize that they don't like how profitable it is, and we'll have a thread titled "The value of a High-Sec Veldspar System". Round and round we go.

Didn't say all mission runners wouldn't mine. Said that many of them would find it boring and probably wouldn't do it just for the isk. Probably why the devs, in their wisdom, put a PvE oriented activity in the game where you can shoot at stuff and generate mats. At any rate, if you remove it, it will have an effect that isn't entirely forseeable, whereas if you leave it alone you'll have what you see now, an economy happily chugging along.

T-1 production is usually unprofitable because new-ish producers price their T-1 products as if the minerals that they mined or looted were "free", or they build things without having done any research into whether there is actually some demand for those things or whether they are profitable to produce. CCP can't fix that through game mechanics, and shouldn't try. I'm curious though, how is it that you think making mins more expensive will fix it?

The market does have a "safety valve" though. If things get too cheap traders will start snapping them up and melting them for the mins. The market is self-balancing like that. You were arguing for taking that safety valve away.

Ok, why, exactly, is it messed up? Is it messed up because these high-sec carebears are in danger of "winning eve" with their ill-gotten fortunes without the threat of PvP holding them back? Is it messed up because they gots a better ship than you and it cheezes you off? Why?

Exactly bud. Doesn't really matter how much isk they pile up, if they're never going to get out and experience the PvP, there's only so far they're going to go in game. If they do decide they want to PvP in the future, they'll suck, and get a lot of their ships blown up, and probably be back where they started until they learn how.

Ok, what, exactly, are you caring about? How are these mission grinders impinging on your game?

I'll go in order.

Yes, the amount of minerals that are produced by L4 missions are not enormous. However, it IS large enough to produce an impact on the highsec market, particularly the high-end section of it. Also, removing T1 loot would not make L4's less profitable than mining. It would move the market towards a bit more pricey minerals, but not extremely so. It would make the mining profession more profitable, sure, but not enough that anyone would have a reason to whine about it. As long as they're not a troll.

T1 production is messed up because there are many T1 products you can get for cheaper than they cost to produce, sure. However, that's not because of new players underpricing their modules.

Regardless, I'm not going to argue on this topic. If you want to whine about that, go to THIS thread.

Also, nice selective quote to save your E-peen. I never said that, you did. Stop trying to put words in my mouth.

On the third part, I'm in danger of going offtrack of the point of this topic. To sum up my thoughts on the topic...

It can't be argued that regardless of the specific amount, a LOT of isk comes from L4 missions. For the amount of risk the users take, I think that the amount that comes out is too much. EvE SHOULD be a dangerous game, and it is by design. Risk versus reward should be a part of the game. However, It seems to me that if you theoretically put EvE on a factor of risk/reward, you'll find that L4 missions don't fit.

1/10,000,000
2/20,000,000
10/100,000,000

Missions are more like 0/15,000,000

I am fine with the reward, I just don't like the risk.

So, after that rant... why do I care? I just said it. They don't fit in. (Oh, and I also agree with the infinite resource bit too.)

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Somealt Ofmine

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 00:38:00 +0000

Edited by: Somealt Ofmine on 09/08/2008 00:43:14
Edited by: Somealt Ofmine on 09/08/2008 00:38:55

Originally by: Morcam

So, people don't like to mine, so you shouldn't have to do it to get minerals? You don't think that's biased? Yes, the market will inflate breifly, before people realize that mining is, suddenly, actually a reasonably profitable profession. Not to mention easier than anything else in the game (Highsec mining, at least). Once again, you are being "obtuse" in saying that ALL mission runners would hate to mine.

And shortly after people realize that it got more profitable, more people will realize that they don't like how profitable it is, and we'll have a thread titled "The value of a High-Sec Veldspar System". Round and round we go.

Didn't say all mission runners wouldn't mine. Said that many of them would find it boring and probably wouldn't do it just for the isk. Probably why the devs, in their wisdom, put a PvE oriented activity in the game where you can shoot at stuff and generate mats. At any rate, if you remove it, it will have an effect that isn't entirely forseeable, whereas if you leave it alone you'll have what you see now, an economy happily chugging along.

Quote:
And yes, the market IS broken. If you think that T1 production being unprofitable 90% of the time isn't broken, please leave now.

T-1 production is usually unprofitable because new-ish producers price their T-1 products as if the minerals that they mined or looted were "free", or they build things without having done any research into whether there is actually some demand for those things or whether they are profitable to produce. CCP can't fix that through game mechanics, and shouldn't try. I'm curious though, how is it that you think making mins more expensive will fix it?

The market does have a "safety valve" though. If things get too cheap traders will start snapping them up and melting them for the mins. The market is self-balancing like that. You were arguing for taking that safety valve away.

Quote:
And yes, there are ways to get more isk than missioning, sure. However, the amounts of isk that you get in 0.0 and especially lowsec are not even close in the risk/reward catagory to level 4 missions. THAT is the complaint that many of the people have here. Quite simply, even 15 million an hour with absoultely NO risk is messed up. People have pointed out that you can make more than that.

Ok, why, exactly, is it messed up? Is it messed up because these high-sec carebears are in danger of "winning eve" with their ill-gotten fortunes without the threat of PvP holding them back? Is it messed up because they gots a better ship than you and it cheezes you off? Why?

Quote:
I can, however, see the point (I'm not sure if you were trying to point it out) that many of the mission runners don't use their isk very effectively. I still don't think that they should have so much isk, since they will probably want to pvp in the future, but I CAN see that they don't have that much to spend the isk on that is related to mission running, once they have their faction fitted CNR.

Exactly bud. Doesn't really matter how much isk they pile up, if they're never going to get out and experience the PvP, there's only so far they're going to go in game. If they do decide they want to PvP in the future, they'll suck, and get a lot of their ships blown up, and probably be back where they started until they learn how.

Quote:
Also, I don't even care about the suicide gank nerf, but nice try.

Ok, what, exactly, are you caring about? How are these mission grinders impinging on your game?

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Morcam

Sat, 9 Aug 2008 00:22:00 +0000

Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
Originally by: Morcam
I don't see why you should get something you are not devoted to getting (minerals) while you are doing something that is not the normal way of getting it (mining).

I understand that you don't understand.

First off, some folks who like to run missions hate to mine. There is no guarantee, or even liklihood that one would offset the other if loot reprocessing were removed. The net effect would likely be inflationary unless the rate at which materials leave the game (PvP, mostly) slowed down. Think about it for a minute. It's not that hard.

Second, the ability to reprocess things provides an important economic check-and-balance. If the price of something gets gets significantly under its it's "melt" value (it has been over-produced relative to demand for it), you buy it and convert it to mins. This has an important balancing effect on the economy and a check against irrational price competition.

If there was something structurally and fundamentally flawed or broken with the eve economy, such as runaway inflation, excessive cartelling and manipulation, deflation, or anything of the kind I'd say yeah, something is busted and needs fixing. Bottom line, we don't have those kinds of problems in Eve.

You can argue this from the point of view of "fairness" or "realism" or it impacting your game-play somehow, but there isn't anything wrong with the economics.

There are already ways to get bigger rewards in the game for taking bigger risks. If the folks running level 4s right now were inclined, they'd be out there gunning for them, instead of running level 4s. They aren't. They are risk-averse.

Moving level 4s out of high-sec isn't going to magically make them risk-takers. We are talking about play-money afterall. It's not like they're ACTUALLY getting rich here, and it's not like they're going to be able to achieve much in game without taking any risks beyond driving around in a pimped out ship that they never PvP in anyhow. So, what's the BFD?.

There isn't anything broken here that needs fixing. As far as I can tell, this thread is just part of the knee-jerk reaction to making suicide ganks harder. That has nothing to do with the economics of the game, and just about everything to do with people in empire not being gank-targets.

So, people don't like to mine, so you shouldn't have to do it to get minerals? You don't think that's biased? Yes, the market will inflate breifly, before people realize that mining is, suddenly, actually a reasonably profitable profession. Not to mention easier than anything else in the game (Highsec mining, at least). Once again, you are being "obtuse" in saying that ALL mission runners would hate to mine.

For your second point, reread my post. Reading comprehension FTW.

And yes, the market IS broken. If you think that T1 production being unprofitable 90% of the time isn't broken, please leave now.

And yes, there are ways to get more isk than missioning, sure. However, the amounts of isk that you get in 0.0 and especially lowsec are not even close in the risk/reward catagory to level 4 missions. THAT is the complaint that many of the people have here. Quite simply, even 15 million an hour with absoultely NO risk is messed up. People have pointed out that you can make more than that.

I can, however, see the point (I'm not sure if you were trying to point it out) that many of the mission runners don't use their isk very effectively. I still don't think that they should have so much isk, since they will probably want to pvp in the future, but I CAN see that they don't have that much to spend the isk on that is related to mission running, once they have their faction fitted CNR.

Also, I don't even care about the suicide gank nerf, but nice try.

What is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth - by Ruze

Fri, 8 Aug 2008 22:10:00 +0000

Edited by: Ruze on 08/08/2008 22:10:02

Originally by: McDonALTs
Edited by: McDonALTs on 08/08/2008 22:01:30
AGENTS ARE MEANT TO BE INFINITE RESOURCE BAISED ON TIME- There are resources you can compete for and those you dont.

Agents NEVER were meant to be a compeating resource. Its all part of a risk v reward balance. You want to make a crappy 15-20mil per hour doing lvl4's? Fine. Youi want to make 10 billion/month spending 3 hours managing a POS (thats approx 3,300mil/hour)? Well, you take the risk putting a billion isk putting a pos up then in hostile space and pray RA or bos's 500man capfleet blob do not see it.

Its Risk Vs Reward, not Compete vs non-compete. Eve NEEDS uncompetitive resources otherwise noobs can never progress beyond a noobship since everything can be compeated away from them.

I just came back, and started doing level 2 missions to get back 'in the hang of things'. Level 2 and level 3 missions provide a nice reward. For new players, at least from those I've talked to, earning a few mil per mission, like in level 3's, is damn good profit.

Level 4's seem to be less oriented to new players, and more oriented for older players (over three months) as a cash resource. That is perfectly fine, and I don't think anythings wrong with that. But I don't think a counter argument to changing level 4 missions is that they are a new player resource is a accurate or legit.

So you want security? That's perfectly alright.
But you should be willing to trade freedom and profit for that security.