Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] [12]:: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Gabriel Theodoulos
Amarr 1st Praetorian Guard
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 01:46:00 -
[331]
Originally by: Max Tux from what i can see, people want level 4's moved to low sec mainly so they can have more people to kill, they will not be good fights they will mainly be ganks.
this is a poor excuse to want to change the main income on many players, maybe reduce the loot drops, yes,but the idea of forcing people into low sec won't work.
I have to agree.
People, if a carebear makes his income on Hi Sec Level 4 Missions, let him. He's hauling battleships and t2 BCs into these type of missions and the only thing that will happen by moving Lvl 4 Missions into Lo Sec is that the pirates get more to chew on.
Leave them alone and let them have their fun too.
Gabe's Blog: http://housetheodoulos.blogspot.com |
Plexxy
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 02:17:00 -
[332]
Originally by: TraininVain http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=656
Ship losses are up. EVEconomy is working.
But notice the downward trend in ship losses per player.
|
TraininVain
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 02:26:00 -
[333]
Newbies that don't PVP according to the blurb underneath.
Hmmm. Ship losses by character age per month would be nice or possibly per class.
|
Ademaro Imre
Caldari Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 03:03:00 -
[334]
Originally by: Karentaki
Originally by: Valandril Your abilit to read fails, ppl want them moved to lowsec because they are biggest income available in eve and they come without any risk.
This! They can give as much ISK per hour as 0.0 ratting with none of the risk.
No it doesn't. You us your single account in the drones region, kill your rats, leave, come back with another account, try to get the minerals, then try to leave low sec - do it all with out any security status gain, and be completely dependent on market prices which keep falling for high ends, and without getting ganked.
|
Ademaro Imre
Caldari Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 03:05:00 -
[335]
Originally by: Valandril Your abilit to read fails, ppl want them moved to lowsec because they are biggest income available in eve and they come without any risk.
Do the same people want all manufacturing slots moved to low sec? From my experience, I have been exposed to zero risk when starting a manufacturing job for the modules I sell - for profit.
|
Th0rG0d
Pilots From Honour Aeternus.
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 03:48:00 -
[336]
Originally by: Shaun Klaroh
Originally by: T***G0d I think the first step would be to up the AI of all known space rats. Since we already have the more "advanced" Sleeper AI, that would be a good start.
You would need to do that down the chain entirely. Level 1's, Level 2's, and Level 3's in order to not make such a shock to a newer player.
Yes, I put the key word in bold. Even belt rats too, would be nice...
At TraininVain, I don't necessarily see the problem with lo-sec being a barren wasteland either, but I do have to agree with others that pew pew is really the only available option currently out there. Sure there are lvl 5's, isolated systems that get little traffic to rat in, even mine if you are feeling adventurous, but in general null sec is better for all of those things. The only thing lo-sec has over null I feel is no bubbles.
Will moving lvl 4s to lo-sec solve the problem? I don't think so. Will changing loot drops/refining help curb the isk/mineral inflation? Maybe, or maybe those macro miners will just pull in more isk....
I personally don't have any better solutions, and I still consider myself rather noobish, being in game only a few months.
Originally by: Clementina I regard recommending WoW to be a grave matter. That game somehow causes brain damage, and therefore should only be recommended to those who have brain damage already.[/qu |
Arec Bardwin
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 06:57:00 -
[337]
Originally by: ZW Dewitt Dev blog out about new lvl 4 agents. They are all in high sec. Comedy gold.
This probably shows that CCP don't see the current L4 situation as a problem
|
Rordan D'Kherr
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 08:23:00 -
[338]
I think they are aware of the problem, but there is a big carebear lobby out there. So it's politics. Many empire carebears without any risk buy more GTC than lowsec / nullsec inhabitants with much risk. Easy to figure out unfortunately.
|
Nomore Telindus
Gallente Pangalactic Punks n' Playboys HUN Reloaded
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 08:47:00 -
[339]
Originally by: Hyveres And nomatter what you interrupt his income.
It's just a side effect. My primary goal is to force the locals to some pvp. If the missionrunner is a lonely type, then sorry.
Originally by: Hyveres in a lowsec system with multiple people going back and forth you might not have that luxury.
I HAVE this luxury, because we quickly transporting these wandering people back to empire. You can mission in lowsec semi-afk if you have friends. (and if somebody is trying hard to camp you, then you can JC somewhere else)
Originally by: Hyveres Especially if you are a casual player with just an hour or 2 of playtime. For these players a single set of 4 combat scanprobes = log off and try again tomorrow situation. But then in your world people like this shouldnt be playing eve right?
I repeat myself: i don't want lvl4s lowsec/0.0 only. My only problem is their ISK printing nature.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 09:01:00 -
[340]
Originally by: Arec Bardwin
Originally by: ZW Dewitt Dev blog out about new lvl 4 agents. They are all in high sec. Comedy gold.
This probably shows that CCP don't see the current L4 situation as a problem
Look the number of high quality agents in low sec.
You really need another 3 L 4 q +20 agents in the same station?
Low sec could use some pirate agent, generally low level and quality, to make easier to access the pirate agents in 0.0 without taking away the reasons to run missions in 0.0.
Maybe even some epic arc in low sec.
What it don't need is some more empire corporation agent.
|
|
Kiltharas Makaar
Amarr New Eden Research and Development Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 09:10:00 -
[341]
The reason low-sec is a deathtrap today is the fact that you usually have just a few people in local, thus becoming easier to track down.
With proper lvl4-hubs in lowsec, you'd have more people there, meaning:
1. Istead of being the only target, you're one of say 200. The chance of it being YOU going pop is a lot smaller. Safety in numbers.
2. With a hornets nest of angry missionrunners, it's far more dangerous for Pirates aswell to attack in those systems. Camping gates to the system would take massive numbers on the pirates part, at least provided missionrunners have the brains to co-operate with eachother to stop them. New Eden Research & Development Syndicate is recruiting! |
Hyveres
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 09:23:00 -
[342]
Edited by: Hyveres on 29/05/2009 09:24:22 Edited by: Hyveres on 29/05/2009 09:23:21
Originally by: Kiltharas Makaar The reason low-sec is a deathtrap today is the fact that you usually have just a few people in local, thus becoming easier to track down.
With proper lvl4-hubs in lowsec, you'd have more people there, meaning:
1. Istead of being the only target, you're one of say 200. The chance of it being YOU going pop is a lot smaller. Safety in numbers.
2. With a hornets nest of angry missionrunners, it's far more dangerous for Pirates aswell to attack in those systems. Camping gates to the system would take massive numbers on the pirates part, at least provided missionrunners have the brains to co-operate with eachother to stop them.
Ehh with a target rich enviroment people woudnt know they are being targetted untill the rapier got em scrambled & webbed which is when the killsquad moves in.. a small group of pirates could wipe out a missionrunner and warp off long before his backup has a chance to show up then continue doing that for some hours to net a lot of kills with no chance of stopping them and no risk.
But then thats what pirates like yourself are dreaming about isnt it? "Subtlety is a thing for philosophy, not combat. If you're going to kill someone, you might as well kill them a whole lot." - Vulcan Raven, The Last Days Of Foxhound |
Durzel
The Xenodus Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 09:25:00 -
[343]
Originally by: Kiltharas Makaar The reason low-sec is a deathtrap today is the fact that you usually have just a few people in local, thus becoming easier to track down.
With proper lvl4-hubs in lowsec, you'd have more people there, meaning:
1. Istead of being the only target, you're one of say 200. The chance of it being YOU going pop is a lot smaller. Safety in numbers.
2. With a hornets nest of angry missionrunners, it's far more dangerous for Pirates aswell to attack in those systems. Camping gates to the system would take massive numbers on the pirates part, at least provided missionrunners have the brains to co-operate with eachother to stop them.
That logic is completely and utterly flawed.
Where do you think the wolves go when the sheep move someplace else? Do you think they sit around in the same place hoping they'll come back?
Why do you think Rancer, Tama, Aeschee et al are such hotspots - I'll give you a clue, it's not by chance.
Wolves go where the sheep go until such time as there are little/no sheep left, besides the ones that turn up in shuttles and rookie ships and get omgwtfbbq'd on the gate because it was the first time they'd ever used autopilot and/or didn't realise what the fuss was about with low-sec.
A low-sec system equivalent to Dodixie would be a feeding frenzy, you'd get at least that number of pirates descending on it. Saying "safety in numbers" when people are flying around in PVE fit ships is just ridiculous.
|
Dramaan
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 10:07:00 -
[344]
I think this tread shows how how coruped the lvl 4 system is.
ccp did realy bad decision outing more agents in hi sec when is obius low sec need a boost of agents ect.
No carbear like to coprate whit another palyer all mission shoud be able to solo in , I think ccp shoud make lvl 4 harder so no lvl 4 can be a solo mission.
Bost low sec more ccp.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 10:07:00 -
[345]
Originally by: Kiltharas Makaar The reason low-sec is a deathtrap today is the fact that you usually have just a few people in local, thus becoming easier to track down.
With proper lvl4-hubs in lowsec, you'd have more people there, meaning:
1. Istead of being the only target, you're one of say 200. The chance of it being YOU going pop is a lot smaller. Safety in numbers.
2. With a hornets nest of angry missionrunners, it's far more dangerous for Pirates aswell to attack in those systems. Camping gates to the system would take massive numbers on the pirates part, at least provided missionrunners have the brains to co-operate with eachother to stop them.
Half of those 200 people will be pirates, so you would get angrypirates as half of the time they would be scanning each other and pirating a pirate is not fun and angry mission runners as they will get scanned in half of the missions, making them infeasible
|
AncientLord
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 10:39:00 -
[346]
For ****ers, stupid pirates and mostly wannabe pirates:
You lost your battle, check new developer blog.
/fail
|
Indiference
Republic University
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 10:39:00 -
[347]
Edited by: Indiference on 29/05/2009 10:40:14
Originally by: lollerwaffle
...... Your answer still fails to address the question of competition with his fellow mission runners, which the would be more in line of competition between traders.......
Explain to me how you suggest competition would be generated between mission runners, and how this would not negatively impact on the social player that is not hardcore PVE or PVP
Somewhere in your previous posts you suggested that there is no way to remove the isk from LVL 4 agents, well i suggest you look lower down in the chain as well, you can't remove the isk from ANY agent. So lets please yourself end Tippia then lets remove all agents from the game because no matter how you look at it, you should be complaining about ALL agents if you want to use the "i can not remove the ISK" argument. O and heaven forbid your someone that invents and farm their own datacore from agents, that is totally unfair. He should be buying it of the market.
|
Indiference
Republic University
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 11:13:00 -
[348]
Originally by: Ms Delerium imo it should be like this...
lvl 1,2 -> highsec lvl 3,4 -> lowsec lvl 5 -> 0.0
now this makes sense. Which is ridiculous is lvl 1,2,3,4 in highsec... wtf!!!! The center of galaxy is too crowded. A time for a cleaning has come.
Just thought i would add that if you implement that you'll be cleaning EVE not high sec, as much as you hate the lvl 4 runners you have to admit that it is them who are driving the market. Unless you want to pay 1 bil for a tech 1 rig, just saying.
|
Indiference
Republic University
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 11:19:00 -
[349]
Originally by: Mikayla Grey
Originally by: Essence Praetor
Originally by: RedSplat
Originally by: Max Tux from what i can see, people want level 4's moved to low sec mainly so they can have more people to kill, they will not be good fights they will mainly be ganks.
this is a poor excuse to want to change the main income on many players, maybe reduce the loot drops, yes,but the idea of forcing people into low sec won't work.
People want Level 4's moved to Lowsec 'cause of imbalanced risk vs reward.
Personally, i want only the Lowest quality lvl 4's to be in Highsec- if you want complete safety then you should have a vastly reduced income to what lvl 4's currently churn out.
Oh here is a question?
What does a Carebear do with 1B ISK that he earned in one week that he cant do with 1B ISK it took him two 2 or 3 weeks to earn? What have you achieved besides futzing up the market?
You have given people a reason to risk a ship to spend less time doing a boring isk generating activity.
Your making a mistake by believing you speak for everyone. |
Indiference
Republic University
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 11:29:00 -
[350]
Originally by: lollerwaffle ...... Unfortunately, throwing insults about or screaming fail all the time doesn't really lend strength to your argument, not does it give your post any meaningful content. Your first post that I replied to was fairly OK-ish but it has degenerated into meaningless drivel by now. You need to pick up the pace son.
Also, irony is calling someone else fail and failing at spelling and punctuation (Oh wait I forgot you don't understand what irony/subtlety/sarcasm are). Bolded so you know what i mean. Does that imply the smilie after or before buds for me? And how does it do it? I wasn't aware it was a flower. Does it also bloom after?
Bolding fail ??? just asking.. |
|
Indiference
Republic University
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 11:34:00 -
[351]
Originally by: lollerwaffle
In short, I have no real idea since I don't really know what carebears do with all the isk they make anyway besides hoarding it and feeling happy everything some internet spaceship game number goes up.
Much like your killboard efficiency ? I means it's about PVP right? o snap there's the epeen you have been waving around damn son i didn't see it there. The fact that you have no idea is not lost in your reply..
|
Indiference
Republic University
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 11:46:00 -
[352]
Originally by: lollerwaffle
Originally by: Mr DXV )*snip*
Well said. That is where the crux of the problem lies. Missions are and always have been a form of income. However, they have no competitive element to them making them stick out like a sore thumb. Moving them to lowsec would not solve this problem, and the only possible implementation would be making mission pools a commonly shared finite resource. But then again there lies the problem of making it (sort of) fair to everyone, otherwise people in different timezones like the US would not have any missions left to them when they logged on in their primetime. An alternative would be more mission pool reseeding, but too much of this would create exactly the same situation as we have now.
Now that i can agree with, the only possible solution thus to stop the whining PVP'ers would be to remove missions from EVE completely, just think what will be gained by that, higher prices on modules ships etc as the demand will go down from all the PVE players leaving, that would make losses more tangible in PVP but the PVP would be flawless as there would be so much more processing power available on the EVE servers since there wont be any more PVE players left to clog up the servers with their useless (sorry, unfair) ISK making. Yes that would be awesome because I'll have a bigger epeen to wave around in the faces of the other MMO's where competition does not exists. At least i can do that until CCP switches the game off because no-one wants to join a game where all you can do is PVP and loose stuff at great cost.
I want to enjoy my game that i pay for and so do you. At the moment your not having fun PVP'ing and i'm having fun PVE'ing. There for the way I play the game must be wrong. |
Ryoji Tanakama
Caldari Firestar Drive Yards
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 11:59:00 -
[353]
Edited by: Ryoji Tanakama on 29/05/2009 12:04:11
Originally by: Valandril Your abilit to read fails, ppl want them moved to lowsec because they are biggest income available in eve and they come without any risk.
Actually he's 100% correct. It is all about fat targets that can't fight back.
Risk is not the only defining factor. Unless you factor in time and effort required the risk vs reward argument is flawed.
BTW I can make vastly more money in perfectly safe high-sec invention than I can running level 4s in a golem. There is a tiny little chance that I could lose a ship in a mission - the only danger with invention is feeling too lazy to go pick up more materials.
|
Papita
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 18:18:00 -
[354]
If lvl 4s going to be in low sec, EVE will die hard!!!
|
Niclas Solo
Amarr The Space BorderLine
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 20:26:00 -
[355]
What is the problem? Sure L4 pay very good but they also are very boring so if they didn't pay so good we would have to do even more of them missions to support our PVP fleet. Don't care so much how other play this game, instead play it the way you like it.
|
Arfvedson
|
Posted - 2009.05.29 21:33:00 -
[356]
I have said repeatedly that since you cant do level 4's in a pvp fit ship, that they wouldnt ever move them to lowsec. It seems CCP does agree with me.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] [12]:: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |