|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.04 22:42:00 -
[1]
Greetings fellow pilots,
Lately I've been noticing an increasing trend where I am being probed down without me ever seing combat probes on my on-board scanner (overview settings unchecked, 360 degrees, max scanning range, objects rearranged by type, etc). I haven't been "caught" yet as I am always aligned. I am also extremely paranoid in low security space. I hit the scan button every 30 to 60 seconds, more or less. I always search for combat, sisters combat, and deep space probes. This week alone I was scanned down by two different groups of pirates on two different missions both of which managed to intrude without me ever detecting a single probe!
My concern is probing players as it is has become extremely easy after the last major patch. Add this new "feature" (new at least to me) and probing down mission runners in low security space has become a golden egg which can/will quickly be 'exploited' to a point that will negatively impact low security space and all its inhabitants, including pirates themselves. IÆve had to revoke missions once they become compromised. My efficiency and profits are quickly declining and high security is becoming more and more lucrative, even though the rewards are less.
I think I have figured out on why the probes are being missed by my on-board scanner but would like someone to post the exact procedures, if it isnÆt too much to ask, on how it is done. Also, I would like to ask CCP if this is an unforeseen consequence due to the changes made to the probing system. If it is not an oversight (it is intended), would this not further desolate low security space from ôpreyö? Opinions, flames, facts, and trolls all welcome.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 01:31:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Exlegion on 05/07/2009 01:32:31 Orb Lati,
No, these were level 4 (agent assigned) missions, not anomalies. And the last time I was invaded (tonight) I didn't see core probes either. I can't know for sure on the other times because 1, too many objects were picked up by my onboard, and 2, I was not specifically looking for core probes, only the ones I listed on the OP. Is it even possible to scan mission deadspace using core probes?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 01:43:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Thernys Edited by: Thernys on 05/07/2009 01:27:53 Another protip, smart scouts locate their prey using directional, launch probes outside of directional range where possible, arrange them, run a scan, recall, the probes are visible to the victim for perhaps 10 seconds.
Edit, spleling.
See bold. This is exactly my concern. Is it reasonable to expect a player to spam the scan button every 10 seconds when a neutral enters system? Or will he have to dock every time a neutral enters system? These scenarios are the reasons low security space is becoming less profitable and less desirable. In my opinion it won't help anyone in the long run.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 13:09:00 -
[4]
I'd say having to spam your scan button every 10 seconds or less is more than just a trade-off. It's simply madness and quite unreasonable. I suspect this was a simple oversight from CCP's part. But it would be nice to get an official comment.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 13:12:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Grarr Dexx By any chance you were in a shield-rigged, invuln-blaring capital ship that was shieldboosting and had fighters out?
No. All times I've been probed down has been on a battleship hull. I'd like to add that I'm pretty alert in low sec and it is not a question of me being half asleep or such. As I said before, I am extremely paranoid in low sec. And my concern is that spamming a button for my own security now fails me because I am not spamming it enough.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 13:14:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Spurty oh and as someone already mentioned, its not a single player game.
Why aren't you running in a gang with pvp support? Seems your mission running will always bring pvp to to you (It doesn't get much better than that), so get people that want to pvp in gang and second you get guests, warp em in to whoop em.
More wrecks make more prizes. These rats might even drop faction loot / t2 gear. Its WELL WORTH IT.
Are you suggesting I should have players donate their time to protect me while I run my missions? Will your own corporation do me the honor?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 15:09:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Exlegion on 05/07/2009 15:10:21 Agreed. PVE vs. PVP arguments aside, combat probes seem to be unbalanced at the moment. to start off they could use an increase to around 30 to 60 seconds in scan time with max skills. That would force them to remain in space for at least that long. One would still need to spam the scan button every thirty secons or so, but it would be realistically doable, unlike every 5 to 10 seconds as it is now! I personally would prefer to only have to spam every minute or so, but that idea probably wouldn't go too well with the hunters.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 16:09:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Exlegion on 05/07/2009 16:12:50 Caelum Dominus,
You don't find that having to spam the scan button every 5 seconds in order to find out if you're being probed unrealistic? Try running a mission while spamming a button every 5 seconds to see how long it takes you to go insane. Don't forget to go over the results each and every time looking for the probes. If you have run even one mission in low sec you will know exactly what I'm talking about.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 18:00:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Exlegion on 05/07/2009 18:06:00
Originally by: Sorted OR he could get his lazy ass back to hi sec. If he doesnt know by now to jet can on the mission entry point and move 50k away, staying alinged then i'm sure theres a handful of tricks he missing which will result in more "exploit" complaints... BACK TO HI SEC NUBBER
Relax, take a deep breath. I'm merely pointing out that having to press a button every 5 seconds is not realistic. You're going on a tangent and you seem to be losing your temper on the way. Re-read the OP and feel free to give your opinions on the subject. But just to clear some misconceptions from your behalf, I'm not a "nubber"; been running missions in low sec space for a long time now. My issue isn't with staying aligned or moving 50,000 meters away from the warp-in point. The only other thing I can suggest you to do to better understand the issue is run missions yourself. Give it a try. Do it in low sec. Spam the button every 5 seconds, go through the results, and then come share your findings with us.
By the way, try to add more substance besides calling me "lazy", a "monkey", or "nubber". That's all fine and dandy, but some substance would be nice as well :).
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 18:17:00 -
[10]
I want low sec to be worthwhile running missions in. Having to dock every time a neutral jumps in because I now cannot be sure if he'll be probing me brings low security's profitability down to the ground. That is my problem with this.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
|
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 18:21:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Exlegion on 05/07/2009 18:24:00
Originally by: Sorted I Do this all the time in low sec, on my main and my scouts when unknown neutrals in local. Every 3 Secs actually, but thats splitting hairs.
You spam the button every 3 seconds and also have time to sort through the results? All this while concentrating on something else (ie, mission-running)? How long do you spend accomplishing all this at the same time? 30 minutes? 45 minutes?
I have to admit, you are ungodly good at this, assuming you're not exaggerating.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 18:31:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Great Artista
Originally by: Exlegion I hit the scan button every 30 to 60 seconds, more or less.
Spotted the problem.
Indeed . So my question is: Should I be realistically expected to spam every 5-10 seconds and sort through the results? Is it even humanly possible? According to Sorted, itthe answer is yes. But is this reasonable?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 18:39:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Exlegion on 05/07/2009 18:41:10 To put this a little more in perspective I'll give you the following example. If I'm running a mission near a moon for 30 minutes with a neutral in the system, I would need to hit the scan button 30*12 = 360 times! AND go through the results each and every time to spot a combat probe . This is a bit insane, don't you think?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 18:51:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Exlegion on 05/07/2009 18:52:57
Originally by: Caelum Dominus You don't understand. You are not meant to press the button every 3 seconds, because you are not meant to be entirely safe in EVE.
And how is a cloaked cov ops probing for mission runners not 100% safe?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 23:17:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Exlegion on 05/07/2009 23:23:07 Again, aligning and moving 50,000 meters away from warp-in point is almost a moot point once my mission location has been compromised. I have no problems jetting a can at warp-in and drifting away. But once my mission location has been pinpointed my profits drop to zero as it now becomes a waiting game on who gets bored first, predator or prey. And my mission's on the clock. They're not. I've had to default on a couple of missions already because the pirates weren't even willing to accept "ransom" to let me complete it, even after I warned them I'd be defaulting.
All I ask CCP is to check this out as it's just plain insanity. If it's something they knew would happen or they're happy with the way it's turned out then end of story, plain and simple. Could CCP atleast comment whether they're aware of this?
And what's with all the hate from ex-Privateers? Come on guys. 2006 has long passed, yet the hate still fills your hearts. Let it go. It feel like an ex-Privateer Convention in here .
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 23:35:00 -
[16]
Sorted,
You honestly expect someone to smash the scan button every 5 seconds for 30 minutes, 60 minutes, or however long the mission is just to mission in low sec? Are you being sarcastic or are you serious? Seriously, have you ever attempted in running a mission in low sec at all?
By the way, are you and Le Skunk the same player?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.05 23:37:00 -
[17]
So I'm lazy because I think smashing a button every 5 seconds and having to sort through the results is insane? Just. Wow.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.06 12:18:00 -
[18]
I think we're all in agreement that low sec is not to become 100% safe. I have not read of anyone advocating for such a change. Low sec should remain being about only the strongest, fittest, and smartest thriving in such hostile environment. And I think we all agree there needs to be a fair balance between predator and prey. My concern is that prey has recently lost a valuable tool, probably the most valuable, which has shifted this balance greatly toward the predator's end. We have to face the fact that prey is mostly driven into low sec for the riches to be found there. But if profits are compromised below a certain point it no longer becomes a driving force binding the prey to low sec.
I can no longer take a chance at continuing a mission when even just one neutral sits in my system because my onboard scanner has the greater probability of failing me. IÆm tempted in taking OlleybearÆs advice and begin the plan to move to 0.0. I shall see what CCPÆs stance is on the issue.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.06 13:29:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Megan Maynard
Originally by: Exlegion Greetings fellow pilots,
Lately I've been noticing an increasing trend where I am being probed down without me ever seing combat probes on my on-board scanner (overview settings unchecked, 360 degrees, max scanning range, objects rearranged by type, etc). I haven't been "caught" yet as I am always aligned. I am also extremely paranoid in low security space. I hit the scan button every 30 to 60 seconds, more or less. I always search for combat, sisters combat, and deep space probes. This week alone I was scanned down by two different groups of pirates on two different missions both of which managed to intrude without me ever detecting a single probe!
My concern is probing players as it is has become extremely easy after the last major patch. Add this new "feature" (new at least to me) and probing down mission runners in low security space has become a golden egg which can/will quickly be 'exploited' to a point that will negatively impact low security space and all its inhabitants, including pirates themselves. IÆve had to revoke missions once they become compromised. My efficiency and profits are quickly declining and high security is becoming more and more lucrative, even though the rewards are less.
I think I have figured out on why the probes are being missed by my on-board scanner but would like someone to post the exact procedures, if it isnÆt too much to ask, on how it is done. Also, I would like to ask CCP if this is an unforeseen consequence due to the changes made to the probing system. If it is not an oversight (it is intended), would this not further desolate low security space from ôpreyö? Opinions, flames, facts, and trolls all welcome.
LOL, ever heard of SISTERS probes?
Best trick in the book, no one ever looks under "S" for combat probes.
See bold :)
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.06 15:49:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Exlegion on 06/07/2009 15:54:31
Originally by: Nareg Maxence People who say sort by Type, don't know what they are doing.
The reason I rather sort by type is so that I can keep an eye out on ships zooming near my mission location. And some tricksters like to name their ships "Small Guristas Wreck" and such . Sorting by type allows me to find things quicker. This is, of course, my preference and YMMV. I've become quite efficient at quickly going through pages of useless finds and is not a deal breaking issue (although it could use an overhaul). It's rather the having to go through it every 5 seconds or so that is the problem, at least to me.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
|
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.06 16:10:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Le Skunk To be fair if a probably afk neutral pilot in system is enough to keep someone docked...
This philosophy is what got me killed in low sec numerous times during my noob years. If it's "probably" just an AFK neutral pilot, it's most likely probing me down to kill me. Unfortunately for me now I can no longer rely on my onboard scanner to give me useful information.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.06 22:04:00 -
[22]
Come on, man. Why can't you see that smashing a button and going through results every 5 seconds for 45 minutes is way over the top!?
To those applauding this change, how would you feel if all of a sudden to catch anything you have to spam a button 540 times and go through the displayed results 540 times every 45 minutes just to guarantee you a fight? And considering that you wouldn't be micro-managing your ship against NPC's this scenario would still be easier than having to do all of the above and mission in low sec.
This isn't laziness from our part, folks. This is insanity. And I'm willing to bet it's an oversight from CCP's part.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.06 22:29:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Sorted
Originally by: Exlegion button 540 times and go through the displayed results 540 times every 45 minutes just to guarantee you a fight?
if it guaranteed a fight i would jump at the chance!
I'm sorry, but I think you are being disengenuous. Or you simply just aren't thinking about what you are asking for.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.06 22:45:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Sorted I think you have delibertaly ignored more than 1 very valid points about balance made on multiple occasions. I have suggested balanced alternatives to the 540 clicks yet your still being evasive in commenting on them.
540 clicks and correct precatuions stops you getting ganked. I'd click 600 times to ensure I gank you (or whoever) given the chance, and you clearly have no idea how frsutraing and awkward it is to catch an attentive (read: not lazy) pilot.
Sorted,
With neutral pilots entering and leaving low sec mission systems the onboard scanner is the most useful tool a low sec mission runner has. This tool allowed me to somewhat reliably filter immediate threats from non-immediate threats. This most valuable tool now requires me to smash it every 5 seconds for as long there is even just 1 neutral in the system. I don't know how to better explain that is is just nuts.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.07 11:30:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Karlemgne I could have done this pre-apocrypha. So what. I actually think the new system gives mission runners a better opportunity to get away.
Despite what's been said here, you see more probes, and if you're doing a longer range scan you'll see these probes far before someone pulls them in.
The difference is that pre-Apocrypha your probes would have remained in space for the entirety of that time (2-3 minutes), giving an alert mission runner reasonable time to detect them. On your second comment, you could launch 20, 100 probes if you like, but if they only remain 5 seconds in space chances are an alert player will not detect them. This isnÆt about me wanting to be 100% safe, or being lazy, or me provoking a carebear vs. pirate dispute. This is about a game mechanic thatÆs broken. And the fact that some of you are here even defending this mechanic is leading me to believe that you are benefitting from this stupidity and ridiculousness. This is broken game mechanics, plain and simple. I suspect itÆs an oversight that the new probing mechanics have brought along.
And to the person that asked why it has taken me 6 months to bring this up (I think it was Le Skunk), as time goes by more and more probers are catching on to. ItÆs becoming more and more common, as it has happened to me. And I suspect that there will be more players asking the same questions in the months to come: Why are probes not showing up in onboard scanners? The reason being because we now have to press the button and sort through results every 5 seconds while at the same time micromanaging our ships!
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.07 12:09:00 -
[26]
Rawr Cristina,
There is a technique in where you do not need to narrow down and decrease your probesÆ radius. You use the onboard scanner to pinpoint the location of your target to about an AU. Then you align your probes accordingly and launch. You will get a hit in less than 10 seconds and then retrieve probes. That is the issue here. If it wasnÆt for the above the matter wouldnÆt be so grave.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.07 12:13:00 -
[27]
I think some of you are still unaware of the 'technique' that is being discussed here. I don't have a problem with the way probes are intended to work. However, at the moment there is a workaround that allows you to bypass having to use your probes up until the very end and only for about 5 seconds in space. <== That is my problem.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.07 12:17:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Caelum Dominus You. Are. Not. Supposed. To. Be. Safe. In. Low-sec.
Yes, I know.
Did you know you're not supposed to use your probes for only just 5 seconds to scan someone down?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.07 15:02:00 -
[29]
Originally by: fmercury You have little to no idea what you're talking about.
Actually, Space Wanderer is spot on. You can "probe" anyone down with the directional (onbaord) scanner. You only need actual probes to give you a warpable point, and for that you only need 5 seconds. This needs to be fixed.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.07 22:54:00 -
[30]
There needs to be a balance. Onboard scanning doesn't need to be automated, IMHO. I just want a fair chance at actually seeing the combat probes. This was probably the most valuable tool that an alert mission runner had in low sec. If we're going to have to smash a button and go through pages of data all I ask is enough time to actually press the button and go through the data. The directional scanner is, in a sense, better than combat probes because using the D-scanner sends no wanings out and it is extremely accurate. As it stands, combat probes are good for one thing: Providing you with a warpable point. I don't think this is how it was supposed to be.
Could a dev be so kind as to comment on this?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
|
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 11:02:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Sorted
Originally by: Ghoest
They favor the hunter over the prey completely.
You have never hunted.
If they put the effort in they can escape 99 times out of 100
Ghoest is right. Onboard scanner + probes is horribly overpowered and skewed towards the hunter. You refuse to admit it because you're benefiting from this nonsense. You've even gone as far as saying that not smashing the button and going over results every 5 seconds and micromanaging the ship all at the same time is just me being "lazy". To be honest your statements show how far you're willing to go to gain an advantage in the game. You're willing to horribly handicap your prey to win over them. It's quite sad, TBH.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.08 22:38:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Dav Varan You have a 100% chance of seeing any probe if you scan often enough !!
Sound to me like you just missed them on this occasion, not scanning often enough or missed them in the clutter of the results list.
Nothing is broken.
My friend, I know that by spamming the button often enough I will see the probes. My question is how much should ôoften enoughö be? 60 seconds? 5 seconds? 1 second? As it stands 5 seconds is just too low a number to be able to press ôscanö and review results. When I said scanning doesnÆt need to be automated I meant it doesnÆt have to be. There needs to be a balance. I donÆt want things to swing easy on the other direction either. Eventually this is something CCP will have to decide.
My point is that right this moment as things stand there is no reason to use combat probes to probe someone because not only could you pinpoint someoneÆs location to less than 1 A.U. but the D-scanner will not send out ôalertsö that someone is being probed down. Once you pinpoint someone down with your onboard scanner you only need probes to give you a warpable point. Yes, there will be exceptions in where the prey will be far from any celestial object or the proberÆs own bookmarks. But considering most mission are near celestial objects this is quite trivial.
How does this affect me? I will first say that I have learned to be quite careful in low sec. Yes, I align. Yes, I drop a can to decloak any cloaker. Yes, I move away from the gate. These steps are great in case I am abushed and will increase my chances of survival. My issue is with profitability in low sec. Low sec IS more profitable than high sec. IÆm not here to argue against that fact. But by my mission being found, and it WILL be found, since I will most likely not see the probes (letÆs face it, in a mission of 45 minutes I will have a window of 5 seconds to detect darn probes), my profitability will go to the floor. Yes, I can dock. Yes, I can fight them . Yes, I could hire a bigger blob to come gank them. But it doesnÆt take away the fact that profitability is rolling down the stairs.
LetÆs face it. Mission runners go to low sec to increase their bottom line over high sec. Pirates are there to kill the mission runners. ItÆs how the food chain is set up in Eve. But there will still need to be a reason for me, as a mission runner, to be there. The additional adrenalin is nice and all, but IÆm there mostly for profits. And if my PVE ship is docked, then IÆm not making ISK, which is fine since IÆm expecting this to happen often. However, now I must dock my PVE ship EVERY SINGLE TIME a neutral enters a low sec system because I have no idea if heÆs probing me or not. I will now spend a hell of a lot more time wondering, docking, checking stations, etc rather than completing my mission.
My other option would be to mission ætill IÆm busted. Hopefully IÆm aligned and I warp out on time. But once I dock might as well go kill some time doing something else.
IÆm not asking for ô100% safetyö. IÆm asking CCP to keep low sec productive so that I still have a reason to stay there. But the new probing mechanics have tipped off the scale too far into the side of the hunter. Again, probes are no longer needed to probe down players other than to provide a hunter with a warpable point. ôProbingö can be accomplished exclusively, accurately, and in complete stealth by the built-in directional scanner. Once probes are launched theyÆre out for a whole 5 seconds. And as a mission runner I have that much time to spot them on my scanner. Does that seem balanced? That is the question I want CCP to answer.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.10 11:23:00 -
[33]
CCP, could you confirm that you know the situation with the directional scanner and combat probes? Are they working as intended?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.11 20:17:00 -
[34]
Updated topic to better reflect issue with combat probes + onboard scanner. Also added a TL;DR.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.12 04:47:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Exlegion on 12/07/2009 04:53:50
Originally by: SK Rooster if you dont like being probed down, do missions in hisec. you obviously have never heard of risk vs reward
I think you have missed the entire point of this thread. I don't mind being probed down at all. I have been probed down several times during my stay in low sec. I have years living in low sec. I understand the risks. I will suggest that you re-read the OP. My concern is with me having to spam the scan button every 5 seconds while pirates now can probe me down with almost 0% risk of detection. When the combat probes are launched I will have approximately a 5-second window to detect them.
Do you believe that spamming a button and going through the results every 5 seconds for hours on end is a good and sound implementation?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.12 05:17:00 -
[36]
Originally by: SK Rooster The tools have been in place for 6 years now to avoid this situation. If you do not like getting ganked in a mission, do not run missions in lowsec; or better yet actually become part of the eve world and join a corp than can help you trap and kill the players that are probing you down.
Again, and with all due respect I will suggest you re-read the OP so you can better understand what loophole is being discussed here. Or read this post.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.12 17:07:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri Good probers have always relied on the directional scanner. This is nothing new and it's working as intended.
Santiago,
Even though what you say is correct, pre-Apocrypha there was a need to use probes. A prober needed to actually warp to different locations and drop probes. This allowed the prey enough time to detect them, assuming the prey was paying attention. Now there is absolutely no need to drop probes. So yes, before you could still "probe" someone with the D-scanner, but probes still had a significant role to play. Now you only need 5 seconds to drop a probe and get a result. This is broken, IMO.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.13 22:19:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri Nah, in the old days you could still use the directional scanner first to get close to your target and then drop the shortest range probe (snoop or spook, don't remember). You also only needed one probe, not the 4 probe layout needed these days, which takes some time to put together.
And it also took more than 5 seconds for a probe to yield results. That is my point. There could be 100 combat probes out there but if my window to detect them is only 5 seconds out of my entire mission time it doesn't matter. Probing players down is too easy. I know lots of pirates rejoice and applaud the fact that our best tool for detecting predators has now become a button-spamming chore but in the long run it will hurt everyone's bottom line.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.14 16:39:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Exlegion on 14/07/2009 16:39:48
For anyone interested, I have written a petition-style thread under the Assembly Hall to build support to change the system to one requiring less spamming and one that is actually more effective. Please feel free to visit my petition here.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 12:07:00 -
[40]
Ok, after a conversation with Myra2007 and a good nightÆs rest I realized I have not really done a good job explaining on how the new probing mechanics have lowered the profits of low sec. And for that I sincerely apologize.
In a nutshell: Pre-Apocrypha. Even with the system teeming with pirates and neutrals, as long as there werenÆt probes in sight meant I could continue my mission. I had a decent time to detect probes. They had to be placed manually which meant a better time for detection (certainly not the 5-second window we have now). This translates to extra time to profit.
Post-Apocrypha. 5-second window to detect combat probes is ridiculously improbable to accomplish. Even one neutral in the system means I have to dock my PVE (ie, profit earner) ship because I have no idea whether IÆm being probed with the d-scanner or not. EVEN if I go fight, go twiddle my thumbs, go blob, go grow some balls, my profit is still 0 isk!
Basically, pre-Apocrypha I could still operate in low sec even with pirates and neutrals in the area because my directional scanner was still somewhat reliable in relaying information.
Now, no other precaution I take will help this situation. Yes, dropping a can at warp-in and aligning is all good, but remember, if my mission is busted, even if I manage to get away, my profits hit the floor. So I want to try and keep my deadspace from being probed out. I hope this somewhat clears things a bit to those readers that are genuinely making an attempt to better understand the situation.
|
|
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 15:29:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Gartel Reiman [àsnipped for brevityà]
My assumption, and I admit it could be wrong, is that an alert low sec mission runner should have a reasonable and fair chance at knowing when he is being probed out. IÆm not asking for 100% safety or a 100% guarantee that I will see the probes. But what I am saying is a 5-second window is TOTALLY UNREASONABLE and UNACCEPTABLE to me, at least. I keep reading that I want to be in complete safety in low sec and I just donÆt know how to put it any clearer.
IÆM NOT LOOKING TO BE SAFE IN LOW SEC. I want a fair chance at keeping my deadspace mission from being known. Again, I donÆt want a 100% CHANCE THAT my space remains unknown. I WANT A FAIR chance for the ACTIVE, SMART, ALERT player paying attention to their surroundings in low sec. I WANT A FAIR, again, **FAIR** (IÆm emphasizing FAIR) chance. Again, a 5-second window is NOT A FAIR CHANCE. Before Apocrypha I had a fair chance at detecting probes. It wasnÆt 100% safe, but atleast the odds were fair.
So to summarize, I donÆt want 100% safety. I donÆt want to be able to ALWAYS detect probes. I just want a FAIR CHANCE at detecting probes IF I am alert in order to save my mission deadspace so it doesnÆt go to waste.
Pre-Apocrypha I could mission in system even with pirates and neutrals in the system because as long as there werenÆt probes being picked up by my scanner I knew that there was a reasonable probability that I wasnÆt being scanned.
Post-Apocrypha I can no longer take that chance because the odds are OVERWHELMINGLY against me.
I just donÆt know how to put it any clearer. Perhaps someone that does understand what IÆm trying to say could help me out here, as I donÆt think IÆm doing a good job and for the life of me donÆt know how to .
|
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.15 21:46:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Exlegion on 15/07/2009 21:48:16
Originally by: Gypsio III
Originally by: Exlegion Basically, pre-Apocrypha I could still operate in low sec even with pirates and neutrals in the area because my directional scanner was still somewhat reliable in relaying information.
Why would you think that you have the right to run a mission in hostile space? The system is claimed; it's absurd to think that you should easily be able to go in and steal their resources.
My friend, low sec isn't alliance space. Low space cannot be "claimed". Albeit hostile, very hostile, it is designed to allow the most capable of players to thrive in it even. Whether it's through solo-piracy or solo mission-running. It is possible to survive in low sec as long as you are extremely careful. I'm not here to debate that. The D-scanner is supposed to be a useful tool for the mission runner along with other tools. At the moment it is broken for us mission runners. I think in the end CCP will review it and tune it to fix the current problem.
What I would like from this thread is ideas on going about a reasonable fix. I don't want things to swing too easy in the direction of the mission runner because that would be game-breaking as well. I think that most readers understand that spamming a button every 5 seconds is not the right implementation. So, where do we go from here? What do you think would be a fair interval to press a button? If CCP does decides to go the 'automated' route, I'd cautious but it might turn out to swing things in the other direction, but meh, I just don't know. Anyway, there have been some good ideas already proposed and I appreciate that. Keep them coming.
|
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.16 11:14:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Omara Otawan Combat probes + directional scanner = fine.
This game caters to carebears way too much already, and now you want to be safe mission running in lowsec?
They're not fine. Read more than just the title to understand what's going on.
|
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.16 12:04:00 -
[44]
Pytria Le'Danness,
Good post. I enjoyed reading it. It's pretty much the dilemma I'm going through right now. And it's a shame this is the current state we're in. I love Eve. And this is probably my greatest pet peeve about it.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.16 23:14:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Kaylan Jahlar
Originally by: Omara Otawan Combat probes + directional scanner = fine.
This game caters to carebears way too much already, and now you want to be safe mission running in lowsec?
There's a difference between wanting lowsec missions to be safe, and wanting to have at least a chance to detect incoming probes.
Exactly. Before Apocrypha mission runners had a chance, albeit slim, to protect their deadspace from being known *if* they paid attention. Now it's it's pretty much impossible.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.17 00:08:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Omara Otawan
Originally by: Exlegion
They're not fine. Read more than just the title to understand what's going on.
They are fine. Read more about how to use ECCM
I already use an ECCM on my ship, the best named for a Caldari ship as a matter of fact. I know what I'm talking about here. I've been running missions pretty much since I started playing in 2005. I've also been living in low sec for over a year. And I also know that an ECCM on a battleship is pretty crap. Nonetheless, I try and take advantage of the little bit it offers.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.17 14:23:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Exlegion on 17/07/2009 14:26:09
Originally by: Sorted New system: They bust your mission in under a min, you spot them as they get into your mission, but you are 50k awat and alinged, you dock and stay docked while they are in system (or anyone you dont know - as they could be a cloaker on the entry gate). Isk per hour suffers.
Old System: They try to bust your mission, you spot the probes during the few mins it usualy takes, you warp off and dock so they dont get your mission site (very clever, well done). You dock and stay docked while they are in system (or anyone you dont know - as they could be a cloaker on the entry gate). Isk per hour suffers.
See bolds. You pointed the difference yourself. With the old system I could still protect my mission site. With the new system the only way to protect my mission site is by docking. The difference is that if there were neutrals or pirates in the system and they were NOT scanning me I could still remain profitable. Under the new system if there is a neutral or pirate in the system, EVEN IF THEY ARE NOT PROBING ME, and this is the important part, I HAVE NO WAY IN KNOWING IF IÆM BEING PROBED, I HAVE TO DOCK MY SHIP. EVEN if theyÆre NOT probing me. Why? Because I cannot take that chance. Why? Because if they WERE probing me THEY BUST MY SITE. <== Pirates busting my site is EXACTLY what IÆm trying to avoid. Why? Because once my mission is busted my profits hit the floor.
Originally by: Sorted Differneces please? You have to hit the scanner every 5 to TRY and stop them getting your site in instance 1, you have to do it every 30 secs in instance 2. Both end in the same result and your isk/hour suffers. WHICH seems to be the issue. Levy for an isk/mission boost to low sec, you would probably get more support than whining about the scanner
Both do not end on the same result because if it happens to be that I was not being probed in the first place I remain profitable in one scenario but not the other. I know itÆs a little difficult to understand. I donÆt blame you, Sorted. But trust me, it makes a difference. IÆm not trying to be an ass here, believe me. I know what you are saying and I understand it 100%. But you are not making the connection between profits and how the new scanning system has screwed with it in low sec.
Quote: EDIT: Probing does not equal scannig...
I know this. And itÆs why players should scan with their scanners and probe with their probers. As it is you can ôprobeö (I use quotations because of technicality) with your D-scanner.
Quote: NB: You seemed to be complaing about the 5 sec button bash in the OP, but switched to the isk/hour mission busting, can you clarify what the current complaint is please.
The reason I emphasized on the 5-second smashing issue is so that people can understand that using the D-scanner is no longer a reliable tool for the mission runner. If I didnÆt stress that there would be people telling me ôUse the D-scanner to detect probes!ö. So before getting into why my profits have been affected by the broken D-Scanner I needed people to understand WHY the D-scanner is broken. In my arguments my goal was to get you to C. But before getting you to C I needed you to go through A, and then to B. Think of A as ôScanner is broken. Why? Because 5-second isnÆtàö. Think of B as ôBecause the scanner is broken I can no longer take this chanceàö. Think of C as ôBecause I can no longer that chance my profits have hit the floorö. I think you pretty much have arguments A, B, and C figured out but youÆre still not making the connection that A leads to B leads to C. Does this clear things up a bit?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.17 19:33:00 -
[48]
Example:
Pre-Apocrypha 1. Event: Neutral enters system. I donÆt know if heÆs a pirate or not. 2. Action: Keep doing missions until probes are spotted on my scanner (i.e., profit). 3. Result: Mission deadspace remains unknown.
Post-Apocrypha 1. Event: Neutral enters system. I donÆt know if heÆs a pirate or not. 2. Action: Dock (i.e., NO PROFIT FOR U!) 3. Result: Mission deadspace remains unknown.
Event is the same. The result is the same. The action, however, is NOT the same. I canÆt put it any simpler than that.
Anyway, weÆre going in circles. Your next reply will be for me to stay aligned to which IÆll reply I want a way to keep my mission location unknown. Then you will reply I should use the scanner, to which IÆll reply the scanner is no longer a reliable tool. To which youÆll say it was the same way before Apocrypha. Then I will tell you before Apocrypha I had a better chance at detecting probes. And then youÆll, again, tell me to just stay aligned and IÆll be fine, and weÆll be right back where we started.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.18 02:12:00 -
[49]
Originally by: DasNara Aethelwulf I feel for you ExLegion, i do. But you are first, operating under a false impression. Pre Apoc, most, if not all, the mission runners i was asked to probe down i used the sys/multi to find the deadspace, not the combat. Second, the idea that your mission will not be found. What you are asking will NEVER happen. We do not have instances, thats what you are asking for. I'm sorry, they wont do that...if it's in the sys, they can find it. I'm sorry that this was the point that you were trying to make. So, the only thing that i can say to you is read my post at the top of page 9 about what to do so you stay alive. At least other missioners can read that. good luck with that, i dont thin that you will get resolution on it that you are lookinng for.
I have never asked for my mission not to be found. What I have asked for is a reasonable chance at being able to protect it other than me having to dock every time a neutral passes by my system. I want probes to last longer than just 5 seconds in space. This alone fixes the mess that probing is now. All CCP has to do is increase the time combat probes spend in space so that an alert mission runner paying attention has a reasonable chance at detecting them. Notice how I have NOT said I should be able to detect them ALWAYS. What I am merely asking for is a reasonable chance at detecting them. Again, a 5-second window is bull**** and I think you and everyone else knows this. But you insist in claiming that I am asking for complete safety or that IÆm lazy, or other elite player mantra.
Those of you supporting this nonsense know it. The system is broken. Most likely this is an oversight from CCPÆs part and it will be corrected. If it isnÆt fixed, it will further desolate low sec. And even if some of you refuse to think of the long term consequences that this brings to low sec it doesnÆt mean it wonÆt impact your bottom line in the long run.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 01:08:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Bongo Debbie You could always warp out at the sign of a ship entering your mission, esp if you have jumpgate entry points.
---
Once the mission location has been compromised it becomes a loss to the mission runner. I have even offered pirates ransom isk to allow me to finish compromised missions to which they all have flatly rejected, leaving me no choice but to default on them and take the standings hit. They were more concerned about having me take a standings hit than accepting isk .
Anyway, I've been receiving some war-dec threats via evemail from what I can only assume are "hardcore pirates" mainly because of my stance on the issue and for bringing this whole matter into light. At first it was amusing in a cute childish kind of way. Feel free to follow up; no need for more eve-mails.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
|
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 11:57:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Exlegion on 22/07/2009 11:58:35 Benco97,
Oh I have no doubt that those on the other side of the fence find this mechanic working wonderfully. But would you feel the same if *your* profession required you to smash a button every 5 seconds in order to do it properly? Would it still be working lovely and as intended?
Or Le Skunk,
To put it a way you could better understand, how would you feel if camping gates required you to spam the button every 5 seconds nonstop hours on end in order to do it right?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 21:43:00 -
[52]
Ignore Le Skunk, he's one of those guys in the forum that hates people. No real reason. He just hates people. Period.
He calls me a greedy isk farmer because I have my fun in collecting isk. He has his fun in collecting killboard kills. Mind you, in the end they're both pixels, but for some reason which I really could care less my style of play boils his veins.
Anyway, we're derailing a bit. What I would like to see is solutions to the problem. I think most of us agree that there needs to be a balance which doesn't require smashing the scan button every 5 seconds. I want to continue missioning in low sec. I really do. The dangers there are fine except they're so often and now so against my style that my isk-making has crept almost to a hault. This just isn't good for low sec.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 22:26:00 -
[53]
Edited by: Exlegion on 22/07/2009 22:28:38
Originally by: Ephemeron I think what "boils his veins" is the fact that a no-name carebear like you coming here and demanding game changes that effect PvP and try change HIS ability to play the game the way he wants to. You, who openly declares you want nothing to do with pvp, want to change pvp for others.
Do you even know what is being discussed here? Have you even bothered reading the thread? Or are you just going to save your time and tell me to stop being lazy and greedy like the rest of the elite players that abound these forums?
Hell, you can say it as many times as you like that having to smash a button and go over results every 5 seconds is good game mechanics, after all I'm willing to bet you're benefitting from this nonsense. But I have my right to come bring it to the attention of the community. If it isn't so then feel free to report me. Or feel free to hate me. Either way I'm not concerned. If you don't like it, too bad. I'm here to ask for opinions to those that DO CARE about balance and do care about fixing the problem.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.22 22:56:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Doctor Penguin Obviously it should be totally impossible to make money in Lowsec. That's what Highsec is for, right?
Right?
Exactly! I don't think I'm out of line for questioning a mechanic that pretty much has killed profit-making via missioning in low sec. I expect people to come troll me and insult me. I expect people like Le Skunk to hate me in real life and use ad hominems to attack me personally. Bring it. You're free to do so. But I have just as much right to question this technique as Le Skunk has a right to insult me personally all he wants. I respect your right and I ask you repect mine.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.23 16:46:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Exlegion on 23/07/2009 16:50:12
Le Skunk,
Be honest. YouÆre not fooling anyone. I ignore most of your posts, not only on this thread but on many others that I may not even post in, because you usually have nothing productive to say. And also, forgive me for saying this so bluntly, you tend to lie. A lot.
IÆm in low sec to make a profit. Low sec is supposed to be about higher risk AND higher rewards. Well, I definitely see the higher risk but I'm not seeing the rewards much less higher rewards. And for the umpteenth time I am not asking for 100% protection or 100% safety. So I will ask you something that I know and quite frankly expect you not to do. Stop lying. I want a system that is fair to mission running. I also want a system that is fair to pirating. As it is the system is not reasonable.
With that said, I would like to address two issues you brought up. First, my concern is with combat probes, not core probes. Core probes and even deep space probes have no bearing in this thread and therefore are inconsequential. Any changes made to combat probes will not in any way affect the exploration profession. I am not saying that exploration doesnÆt have its own short-comings and issues. And itÆs not that I donÆt care about exploration as you have accused me of. I happen to enjoy exploration myself. But I cannot speak of exploration like I am an expert on it because quite frankly I am not. I rather let an expert in exploration write a thread on how exploration could be better-tweaked.
As to your comment on log-offs during comba. First, if someone logged off I donÆt think this person cares on whether combat probes are showing up in the scanner or not. They logged off. ItÆs not like theyÆll be keeping an eye on them. Also, from what I understand, if a person logs off un-aggressed they warp to a random spot 1 AU away. YouÆll still be able to probe them down exactly the same way and in the same time. The problem is when someone is probing me with their scanner from 14 AUs away and only using the probe launcher for 5 seconds to get a hit on me. What I am asking is for CCP to review this current process (scanner versus combat probes). In other words, it would be nice if people scanned with their scanner and probed with their probes. In no significant way would this affect ôlogoffskiesö.
People have put forth some good ideas so far. Right now there is a problem with the mechanics and I have brought it to light. And I feel that most people understand the problem and for that I am thankful. If I have missed something feel free to bring it up and point out. What I do not appreciate is you personally attacking me and accusing me of things that just arenÆt true. And I will say this again, not for you but to the avid reader: I am not asking for complete safety or even a fail-safe way to detect probes. What I ask for is a reasonable chance at detecting them before my mission is busted. What I am asking for to be able to make a profit in low sec.
|
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.24 10:58:00 -
[56]
There are some very angry people playing this game. IÆm skipping your personal attacks as they add nothing to this conversation.
Originally by: Dez Affinity You and I both know that Level 4's in Low Sec are not giving out enough ISK for the element of danger. That's a whole different whine.
Except that due to the new probing mechanics profit-earning in low sec has become worse than pre-Apocrypha. And that is why I created this thread.
Originally by: Dez Affinity You are asking for CCP to make it easier for you to stay safe and harder for people to kill you. Right now it's pretty damn easy to stay safe in Low Sec, even in PvE fits.
I am asking CCP to review the probing mechanics because it is currently making it impossible to profit in low sec, more so than before. I havenÆt asked to be safer. I keep my eye on local and I stay aligned. And even by taking precautions like this I have lost ships in low sec and I accept that as part of the risk of operating there. What I have a problem with is spamming a button and having to review results every 5 seconds. That is unacceptable game play.
Originally by: Dez Affinity There is certainly a reasonable chance now of detecting probes.
I am all ears. Please do tell.
Originally by: Dez Affinity The only solution I see you offering is to increase scan time on combat probes. Which really is just making it much harder and more boring for those probing and much easier for you. AKA CCP MAKE IT E ASIER FOR ME
I have also suggested a clearer definition between the scanner and the probing mechanics. In fact, I would love CCP to re-invent the onboard scanner. Give it a much clearer use and something that doesnÆt overlap the functionality of the probe launcher. Another suggestion might be to take away the degrees adjusting functionality of the onboard scanner. You would still know how close something is but the direction remains unknown. These are just suggestions. And a discussion on these suggestions is more than welcome. In fact, I encourage them! LetÆs give ideas to solve the problem.
Quote: Replacing the directional scanner will completely change PVP. Depending on what it is replaced by it will have dire consequences. Right now, the scanner is used for much more than finding out if a pirate is trying to kill you.
LetÆs talk about what these changes are. Lay them on the floor and letÆs discuss a reasonable fix. Remember that the goal is to make it so that running missions in low sec is profitable. This, in turn, means that you will have to give up certain benefits in order to balance things up a little. LetÆs face it, probes not being detectable for longer than 5 seconds in space is causing a problem.
Quote: The click/scan system is actually useful, such as, hitting scan, results staying. You can then get to a safe place and take time to notice what was on scan. If it auto-refreshed it would make cycling down long lists a pain in the ass.
Come on, my friend. Are you suggesting that pressing a button then warping out every 5 seconds to a safe spot so that I can read the results is a benefit? I donÆt even think thatÆs possible! :\ Listen, I donÆt doubt that you have run some missions in low sec. But I donÆt think you do it as a main profession. I could be wrong. But the only thing I can suggest, besides asking you to try it for a few weeks, is take my word for it. There is a problem with the way the mechanics are set up right now. I know it is difficult for mission probers to admit this but in the end I think it will make low sec a little better for everyone, including pirates.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.24 10:59:00 -
[57]
Quote: As a mission runner or explorer, you aren't required to stay aligned, but it makes you invulnerable if you do... so why not do it?
ItÆs not just about staying aligned. ItÆs about making a profit as well. Having missions busted is very bad for business. I already align but IÆm still not making profits. I have even offered ransom to pirates to let me finish the mission. Their response? ôNoö. So IÆve had to default missions. Lose isk, LP, and standings.
Quote: It's unreasonable for you to have to pay attention and have to actually do something to be safe?
Paying attention is all fine and dandy. In fact, because I can no longer tell when IÆm being probed I have to be safe and dock my isk-earner, even if no one happens to be probing me. Why? Because I wouldnÆt know until my mission is busted whether I was being probed or not.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.25 13:46:00 -
[58]
Quote: 2) Jump in - NO RISK
3) Cloak-MWD-Trick through low sec to your destiantion system - NO RISK
Wrong. There is risk even when using cloak + MWD I have lost ships in low sec. Last ship I lost was a about a week ago.
Quote: N.B- As a side note ive personaly seen you happily take advantage of this "broken game mechanic". Could you comment on why your professed hatred of broken things seems in this case not to extend to those which benfit you?
My problem is with balance. Again, BALANCE. WeÆre getting off the subject but IÆll answer your question anyway, even though itÆs pointless and useless doing so with you. Besides meta-gaming (using alts) and having a group of players following me around holding my hand every time I make a jump into low sec what other technique is there into surviving a gate camp? Unfortunately there is nothing else that brings balance to gate camps other than MWD + cloak.
Quote: i. alternatively carrier jump your ship and fittings across low sec avoiding all systems in between - NO RISK
First, are you suggesting that low sec mission runners should have a carrier in order to have a chance at moving their battleships around low sec? Second, there is risk in cyno-ing capitals around. They donÆt always jump where they should, as I learned the hard way. Sometimes you end up 10 Km away from target and have to slow-boat your way to safety. And I donÆt always have a cyno-ship available to jump me in.
Quote: Move away from warp in gate, drop can, align out, use scanner for probes - Practicaly NO RISK
First, you cannot always afford to move away from the gate in a mission, as the next gate is nearby. Second, even pre-Apocrypha I lost battleships during missions in low sec.
Quote: N.B - As you have pointed out - you have never been killed in a busted mission as you take the measures to enable yourself to escape.
This is not true. I have never said that I havenÆt lost ships due to my missions being busted because the truth is I have lost my fair share, even before Apocrypha. ItÆs part of the risk of running missions in low sec. I am extremely safe in low sec, but the chance of losing a ship was still great, and again, itÆs part of being in low sec. I accept that risk. The problem is that after Apocrypha there is MORE risk and LESS reward.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.25 13:46:00 -
[59]
Quote: Thats my risk analysis of an alert mission runner in lowsec. The risk is for all intents Zero.
Le Skunk, itÆs quite ridiculous for you to even assume this statement. You are not a mission runner so to say that mission runners have zero risk in low sec is completely unfounded. ItÆs like me saying that pirates have no risk in low sec even though IÆm not a pirate nor understand what itÆs like to be one.
Quote: 2) Assuming ccp did give you an autoscanner - scanning every 5 seconds in a small window on your screen - then from what I can gather this is the scenario that you would suggest would occur
a) Mission runner can run mission safe in knowledge nobody is probing him b) Probes would be dropped by prospective ganker c) Probes would appear on autoscanner window d) Mission runner would immediatly hit dock
I havenÆt asked for an auto scanner per se. It has been suggested in this thread, as many other ideas as well. As I said before, whatever changes are made it needs to balance the prey-predator relationship without swaying in either direction too much. The key word here is balance. There needs to be balance. A reasonable rate at detecting probes is fair enough. As it is this isnÆt the case.
Quote: Given that it is already incredibly difficult to catch an alert mission runner - Could you comment on how with the addition of an autoscanner how would there be ANY possibililty of a succesful gank. As far as i see it, You would safely run your mission, PING! a probe appears on a small box in the corner of your screen, CLICK you hit dock.
It is not incredible difficult to catch an alert mission runner, even so before Apocrypha. I consider myself an avid mission runner and from time to time I still get caught and I still lose ships! ItÆs part of the job. But I didnÆt mind this before Apocrypha because I could still make enough profits to overturn the losses. But now I cannot do that.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.25 17:30:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Paul Grant If CCP is reading, my vote amongst the forumers is to leave the system the way it is. The arguments, which I have been reading, indicate that the system is quite balanced for low sec. Increase rewards in low sec to bring more people there.
That is my vote, nothing more to say.
Yes, spamming a button every 5 seconds is very well balanced mechanics. And this coming from an alt must only mean it's true. So CCP, please don't listen to those that know what they're talking about because pirates and alts know more about mission running. Now, if you want to know about piracy, then that you should ask mission runners. That's why when I want the best Italian pizza I go to Mexico. If I want Mexican tacos then China is the place for that.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
|
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.25 20:30:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Clarion Abbot Edited by: Clarion Abbot on 25/07/2009 20:14:54
Originally by: Exlegion please don't listen to those that know what they're talking about because pirates and alts know more about mission running. Now, if you want to know about piracy, then that you should ask mission runners.
I think in a discussion about how difficult it is to probe down a mission runner and gank him - the FIRST person you should talk to is a pirate - NOT a poster (ie you) who has never probed out and killed anyone in your life - just wants an easy life whoring no risk missions
TIP: Move away from your mission warp in slightly and align to warp out.
Never killed anyone. Probing I'm quite proficient at.
And since we're on the subject of knowing what we're talking about, have you bothered trying to spam a button and reading results every 5 seconds while doing a mission in low sec yet?
And any particular reason why you're posting with an alt, assuming you're just not out to troll?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.26 03:55:00 -
[62]
Edited by: Exlegion on 26/07/2009 04:03:15
Originally by: SK Rooster Using the cloak in such a way as to make a battleship able to run lowsec gate camps IS META-GAMING, wake up call here.
This is where you are horribly horribly wrong. Balance is important in EVE, but there is nothing balanced about what you are doing. the fact that you can carefree run about 95% of all lowsec gatecamps in a battleship is horribly overpowered. There is no balance in that.
The fact of the matter is that if there is a camp, YOU SHOULD have to use an alt to scout, or YOU SHOULD bring a gang with you to clear the camp, or YOU SHOULD not be passing through that gate in the first place.
When I move my ships about in low sec I fit them for flight, not fight. I stuff the lows with nanos, i-stabs, warp core stabilizers, whatever will make my ships give flight, even ECM Bursts to break locks. I do all this in conjunction with MWD + cloak and I have STILL lost ships in gate camps. I never stay and fight in a gate camp because I know I will be outnumbered and I will never win that battle. And using a second account to meta game should not be a requirement to properly play a game either. And I will say this quite frankly, the reason low sec is such a waste of space at the moment is because of the perpetual elitist mentality that you, Le Skunk, and a few others bring to the forums where anything that makes low sec more of a death trap to all but you is good and anything else is completely out of line.
BTW, if you feel that gatecamps are underpowered and need a boost feel free to start your own thread on that and stay on topic in mine. But I suspect your intentions are to derail and troll this thread so, meh.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.26 13:27:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Sweet Laylah Whats so hard about aligning and hitting scan constantly looking for incoming ships?
Remember that thing about isk v reward?
Low sec is supposed to be dangerous, plexing or missioning semi-afk is not how you should be operating. The pirates aren't semi-afk, they are concentrating hard on fnding ya afk ass.
:)
Aligning and dropping a can at warp-in is all fine and dandy to help save my ship (does nothing to protect my mission deadspace). Constantly hitting scan (i.e., every 5 seconds) is not and should not be acceptable to anyone. And yes, I remember risk versus reward. Unfortunately itÆs a phrase that doesnÆt have a meaning in low sec because æriskÆ is so inflated and ærewardÆ so nonexistent that you bringing it up is more like a punch line to a joke. æRisk vs. RewardsÆ has become one of the elitistsÆ favorite phrases to use against play styles they hate, such as carebearing, without even realizing that it no longer carries weight in low sec. Honestly, youÆre better off calling me ælazyÆ, ægreedyÆ, or even æantisocialÆ rather than keep throwing the phrase ærisk vs. rewardÆ around.
And why all the alt posting all of a sudden? If anyone should be posting with an alt it should be me with all the hate mails and all the war-dec threats IÆve received :P. Anyway, I wonÆt bite. I promise. IÆm just a cute cuddly bear.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.26 15:11:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Susan Kennedy Forgive me but we are playing a massive MULTIPLAYER online game. CCP have made it clear in the past that they encourageà
Just out of mere curiosity, do you feel that your statement also applies to solo-piracy (predator) as well? Or just solo-carebears (prey)? IÆm just wondering if solo-piracy is OK in your eyes.
Quote: One scout, (paid for by your countless billions of isk) would solve all your problems. Sit him on the entrance gate of your mission (which of course will uncloak anyone using it) then you will have plenty of time to escape.
And how does this help me protect my mission site? How does this improve my chances of detecting combat probes? How does this alleviate me having to press the scan button every 5 seconds?
Quote: You talk about balance, yet you cloak mwd past 30 man gate camps and think this is all dandy. One loan pilot having no chance of being tackled by 30 pilots who are specificaly set up to catch him. Balance? No - but this particular "broken game loophole" is to your benefit so you vainly try to defend it. So your arguments are hypocritical to the extreme. You dont want balance - you want to make the game as easy as possible for yourself, to the detriment of other players.
You also claim to have lost ships recently, i would ask you to prove this or stfu.
There are players that could care less about [gulp, brace for it] killboard kills/losses. I happen to be one of those players. I donÆt care on how many ships I lose and I donÆt keep track on my losses and kills as long as IÆm making enough to cover my losses. However, I am sure I have appeared on more than a few killboards out there. Look me up. I donÆt give away my fittings willingly and I donÆt give away what ships I like to fly. These are just invitations to get ganked. And what makes you think I have escaped 30-man gate camps? I managed to fly off Le SkunkÆs 3-man gate camp and all of a sudden heÆs in my thread raging about me being able to æcheatÆ my way out when I specifically fit my ship for flight. I have lost ships to gate camps. ItÆs inevitable in low sec.
Off topic, but there are ways to somewhat increase your chances of surviving a gate camp. But what about a way to somewhat protect your deadspace? And before you accuse me of wanting 100% safety, IÆm asking for a reasonable chance at protecting my deadspace. IÆm not asking CCP to make me invulnerable or safe. IÆm asking CCP to give me a tool that allows me the opportunity to fairly protect my mission deadspace. The onboard scanner WAS this tool. Again, if you have a problem with gate camps being underpowered why donÆt you start a thread on it?
Quote: Low Sec isnt supposed to be eldorado, where isk grows on trees, and rats drop implants like lost children drop breadcrumbs. Its supposed to be dangerous. If you cant handle the danger - theres a nice place called high sec.
So, what IÆm reading here is: Low sec = BIG RISK vs. itty little reward But you donÆt see a problem with this?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.26 17:10:00 -
[65]
IÆm not going to give you my losses, even if I knew where they were posted. Period. WhatÆs funny is I just looked you up in Battleclinic and your name doesnÆt even appear. Going by your own assumptions gate-camping is risk-free, right? But again, if you have a problem with not being able to catch everything on a gate camp why donÆt you start a thread about it? I even promise not to troll it as youÆre doing here with mine.
And the day I æcheatedÆ Le Skunk by escaping his 3-man gatecamp I was fit specifically for flight, not fight. By your own standards it wasnÆt even a properly set-up gate camp. But if Le Skunk and all his corpsÆ and ex-corpsÆ bitterness is due to this one incident all I can ask is that you look past that.
It seems you have a personal problem with people that play certain aspects of the game alone. That in itself is another topic as well. Feel free to start a thread on this and IÆll be happy to defend my position there.
Anyway, I just realized your style of writing is similar to Le SkunkÆs. Are you the same person? If so, would it be too much to ask to only use one of your characters to post? Try and discredit me by using quality posts, not quantity. I wonÆt even ask you anymore to stop derailing the thread because, really, what are the chances of that?
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.26 18:10:00 -
[66]
Susan Kennedy (or Le Skunk),
Why do you post with an alt? What is it you're hiding? Why do you have the need to even post with an alt? Why can't you post with your main? Why can't you post a well-thought-out paragraph and back it up with quality instead of using 2+ alts to post your same ideas? Why the need to derail and troll my thread? Why is it when you post something it has to be with anger, deception, lies, and alts? You let it cloud your perception and then go off on a tangent that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. The more you write the more I realize you must be a very sad and angry person. Let it go, my friend. We're all playing to have fun, whether it be it you collecting kill mails or me collecting isk. In the end it's the same, brother.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.26 19:38:00 -
[67]
Edited by: Exlegion on 26/07/2009 19:38:50
Originally by: Susan Kennedy Exlegion. You yourself asked for a rational discussion and decried the usage of personal attacks. Yet your last post was full or personal attacks, and low on rational discussion. Let us pass over your insults, and stick to the matter at hand. Please, i beseech you - try to restrain yourself.
The risk in low sec to a mission runner is vitally important to this discussion. If it is seen to be very difficult to run missions safely in low sec, then CCP should perhaps take some consideration to making it easier, including perhaps some change to the probing system.
I however maintain that currently there is little-to-no risk to an active mission runner in low sec,both in the travel to the destination and the mission running itself. I believe the small danger (and as has been pointed out it is a very small danger) there is from the current probing system is proportionate to the large rewards the mission runner can achieve.
You have said many times in this thread (and other ones you have spawned on the same subject)that the opposite is true. You claim there is significant risk to the mission runner. Risk so significant that low sec mission running has caused you to die multiple times to gatecamps (despite cloak mwd) and in busted missions.
I simply ask you to consult your log, and show us where and when these losses took place as some evidence of the large risks you maintain you have suffered.
I simply ask you to PROVE your assertions that there is currently risk enough for the low sec mission runner for CCP to grant you a boon.
At the moment we are looking for a solution to a problem which has not been proven to exist. Namely the huge risk to low sec mission runners.
Show us the mails you are telling us you have. Your refusal to do so, and personal attacks when pushed on the issue speak volumes.
Le Skunk,
There is risk to running missions. You know this. And quite frankly IÆm not going to argue this with you. The fact that you are spamming this thread with your main AND your alts show that not even you yourself think your arguments hold any merit. You trolled. I bit. Congratulations. Honestly, if I would have realized that it was you all along just using your alts to cheerlead your own opinions I would have not held this long discussing in circles with you.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 02:27:00 -
[68]
Edited by: Exlegion on 27/07/2009 02:32:54
Originally by: SK Rooster if you have an alt sitting on the entrance to the mission any ship that comes through will be seen by your alt, esp if he has drones out. you wont even need to look at the scanner just keep an eye on the alt screen.
It still does nothing for the profit downtime after a mission has been busted.
Quote: people that mine or rat in belts have no protection, and in many cases make less ISK per hour than you do in your deadspace, and they dont have to be probed out.
This is true. But IÆd like to add a couple of comments to this, and I wonÆt go too much into detail because, again, these arenÆt my main professions.
First, the fact that mining and ratting in low sec are extinct professions should be leading you to conclude that there is something horribly broken in low sec. To use mining and ratting in low sec as a measuring yard stick against other professions in low sec is just wrong. All these professions are broken in low sec. But me personally, as a low sec mission runner can only speak of my profession. I rather let a miner or ratter discuss exactly what their shortcomings are; and I know they have their own issues.
Second, and what IÆm about to say IÆm sure will come with some heat and for that IÆll apologize before hand, especially if IÆm completely out of line, but mission runners are bound to their deadspace location. I cannot choose what location in space it will be in. Once I accept the mission I am bound to that spot until I either default the mission or complete it, while mining and ratting doesnÆt necessarily bind you to a specific point in space.
Quote: [Low sec = BIG RISK vs. itty little reward] this is exactly right, exactly correct. do i personally have a problem with this? no, i dont make my money in lowsec. does lowsec gains need to be boosted? very yes, but having your invulerable missions like you ask is not the solution (think more bounties in lowsec missions, etc)
I usually stop short from asking for a boost to low sec because in order to make up for the ædowntimeÆ a low sec mission runner is subjected to would require quite a substantial rise to the reward. I havenÆt done the math, but it wouldnÆt surprise me if it would need to be four times or more as the standard. And in my opinion, that is a little out of line. But, I certainly see how this could solve the problem.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.27 11:53:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Benco97 How about we remove the ability to find ships from the deep space probe and add a SLIGHT scan time penalty to the combat probe but increase it's sensor strength?
I think this could work and is probably the easiest workaround. Exploration probes need not to be touched even.
Someone earlier in the thread had suggested that probes take time traveling to their locations (as they somewhat do already) and for this time to count as being in space, giving the prey additional time at detection. So for example, once the "analyze" button is pressed, probes warp to their locations perhaps at slower speeds, and while getting there they become scannable by anyone within the scanning range. I thought this was a neat idea and does not brake RP immersion.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 11:53:00 -
[70]
Just thought of another solution that might work. ECCM could provide a small deviation to a prober using the D-scanner. In other words, fitting an ECCM to a ship not only would be harder to probe using probes (as it currently is), but anyone scanning for an ECCM-fit ship with the onboard scanner would also suffer a small deviation. This deviation on the onboard scanner would be chance-based, meaning if the prober pinpoints a ship 'accurately' enough by using the onboard scanner he will still be able to acquire a 100% warpable hit on the first try. The only change CCP would make is boost ECCM by allowing it to 'mask' the exact location of a mission zone. And again, this would be chance-based. A mission runner now has additional windows of opportunities to detect probes if the prober doesn't get a 100% hit on the first try.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
|
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 15:41:00 -
[71]
Le Skunk,
IÆm going to only say this one more time, and after that you can feel free to bump and troll my thread as much as you like, as you arenÆt the type of person I particularly enjoy conversing with.
I have lost my fair share of ships in low sec. I donÆt lose ships often as I am very careful and paranoid in low sec. I am not going to post my losses to prove you anything. If you think low sec isnÆt dangerous enough I respect your opinion. I disagree, but I respect it. With that said, IÆm not in low sec to just ônot lose shipsö. I donÆt go to low sec just to be paranoid and avoid your gate camps. I want to actually make a profit there as well. I play the game to build my riches. ItÆs how I have my fun, as you have yours perhaps gate camping. And from what I have been lead to believe low sec is supposed to have better rewards along with more danger. Unfortunately, because of the extra time I spend protecting myself from the threats of low sec, I have a greater downtime of loss profits. More time spent being careful = Less time making profit. And itÆs why I created this thread; to bring this to the attention of those that might care in knowing, including CCP.
I escaped your 3-man gate camp two weeks ago. I swear, if I would have known it bothered you that much I would have even let you pod me that day. YouÆre so engorged in misery and hate and so focused in projecting your negativity unto others that youÆve lost sight and perspective on whatÆs important. Using over-sized fonts, spamming, and trolling? Come on, my man. I know youÆre a grown man.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 21:53:00 -
[72]
Iece Quaan,
Great post. I appreciate your objective view. And your assessment on the D-scanner I thought was spot-on. Which is actually why I propose (itÆs just a suggestion, folks!) that ECCM not only increase sensor strength but also distort the actual position readout of a ship. That way, the D-scanner no longer guarantees 100% accuracy when reading the position on an ECCM-fit ship. It gives a prober an additional incentive to use the probe launcher. In turn, one would not need to spam the scan button as often. And this could actually give the ECCM module a nice little boost hopefully without overpowering it. Anyway, itÆs just an idea running through my head. IÆd like to hear what you guys think.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.28 22:54:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Iece Quaan Edited by: Iece Quaan on 28/07/2009 21:54:44 After some thought, I have hit on a solution:
Retracting one or more probes causes an instant recalculation of your current hits, with no scan delay.
If you retract your probes, you lose all of your current hits. If you retract one or more probes and leave some out, the remaining probes instantly recalculate their hits, probably lowering hit strength.
Edit: to make this perfect, you'd have to remove the ability to retract probes during warp.
Simple, elegant. PVPrs still catch the nappers, and the vigilant get some warning. I support this change for Combat AND Core probes, to make it even for everyone.
This actually sounds reasonable. I like it. And probably wouldn't require a whole lot of coding.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 00:01:00 -
[74]
Originally by: SK Rooster No. The whole point of this thread is that lowsec missions are too dangerous now, as per the new probing system. Plenty of tools exist to combat the danger.
No. The whole point of this thread is that low sec missions have become less profitable because of the new probing system. I've said this numerous times but you keep ignoring it. Staying aligned does not help you earn the isk a mission runner loses due to downtime. But you've already said that low sec isn't about better profits for the greater risk, so we disagree on the premise to begin with and we'll never get anywhere anyway.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 00:13:00 -
[75]
Originally by: SK Rooster Yet people such as yourself would like to know with absolute certainty when someone is probing them. Heaven help if you were to experience actual danger; the fear of not knowing what might happen should you continue to run the mission.
I have made it clear that I am not after absolute certainty (or 100% detection rate). But you know what does have a 100% detection rate? The D-scanner. And it just so happens that the prober need not to spam it every 5 seconds to get a result .
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 21:48:00 -
[76]
Edited by: Exlegion on 29/07/2009 21:57:19
Originally by: Jaroslav Hasek Not sure if anyone is interested in what this 4 month old player thinks but here goes:
I explore solo in lowsec in my rupture. I scan every 10 seconds looking for probes, it can take me any where from 5 minutes to 30 minutes to complete a site. Yes it is tedious to keep hitting the scan button but I continue to do it because the rewards are worth it. I also do it because I actually enjoy the risk.
I can't PVP properly yet, I don't have the skills, so this is my PVP - playing cat and mouse. It is fun to be half way through a radar site when a group of pirates show up in local, I get an adrenaline rush trying to complete and make it out in one piece.
If this is nerfed to make lowsec safer then I for one wont be happy. Lowsec is supposed to be dangerous,I don't want it made safer so thousands of highsec players come flooding in making competition in exploration unbearable. I'm not good enough to go to WH space or nullsec.
If you dont like the risk of losing your precious ship or losing your agent standing you should stay out of lowsec.
Jaroslav,
Firstly, IÆll say that I totally agree with you in that low sec is supposed to be dangerous; very dangerous. And as unlikely as this may sound to you my intentions are not to make it safer. IÆve lived in low sec for quite some time now and have learned to survive low sec quite well. Unfortunately, and from my experience, low sec danger has become increasingly and indirectly proportional to profit, at least in the mission-running profession. In other words, the more danger the mission runner is exposed to the less profit there is to be made. ItÆs not to say that profit cannot be made.
When a system is devoid of neutrals and pirates missions can be easily completed. With the presence of even one neutral the proper course of action is to dock the mission-running ship and do something else. This is what I refer to as profit downtime, because no matter what I do after docking my profit-earner I wonÆt be making isk. Before Apocrypha this wasnÆt a big deal because my profit downtime wasnÆt so bad. I could still profit even with neutrals and pirates in the area. As long as I didnÆt pick up probes on my onboard scanner I could assume there was a decent chance I was not being probed. After Apocrypha it would be rash for me to take that chance. My only reasonable option has become to ground my isk-earning ship, therefore adding more downtime to profit-earning.
Your experience in low sec is different and I think thatÆs a very good sign for your profession. It means exploration may not be suffering from this extra ôdowntimeö problem that I am experiencing. And there could be a couple of reasons for this. First, an explorer isnÆt necessarily bound to a location in space, meaning, if your site is busted you can choose to leave the site without repercussions other than a lost opportunity along with lost ammo and time (assuming you were aligned and were not pointed). A mission runner has to be a little more protective of his mission site because there are negative implications for not finishing a mission. Pre-Apocrypha, the onboard scanner offered a reasonable opportunity to protect that site.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.07.29 21:50:00 -
[77]
I would also like to agree that knowing that I am being hunted produces quite an enjoyable adrenaline rush. But I think that rush is quickly becoming monotonous due to the constant in-and-out of neutrals and pirates and as a consequence, having to dock because my onboard scanner is pretty much blind post-Apocrypha. If I only had to spam the scan button every 30 seconds a few minutes at a time that wouldnÆt be so bad either. I think I could actually live with that. But ultimately I think that our different experiences are due to some not-so-obvious differences between our professions. Additionally, because of the current nature of mission-running there is a very æwackyÆ relationship between risk and reward in low sec. The more risk I am exposed to in low sec, the lower the rewards.
I am not necessarily asking for safety, but rather less profit downtime. So the question is how do we improve that downtime without affecting low sec safety? In other words, how do we increase rewards without affecting the risk? The obvious answer is increase rewards. But the obvious answer may not necessarily be the correct one in this case, as increasing the low sec rewards in such a way as to balance the downtime may have a negative impact in the future. And that is the dilemma weÆre having here. I think Iece Quaan thought of a solution that actually minimizes this effect (improves profit while minimizing the negative impact on PVP).
Originally by: Faife holy crap, that guy is trolling the crap out of a serious who's who of EVE's pirate clique
well done.
Seriously? I feel like itÆs me being trolled on .
And if Le Skunk is considered to be a serious WhoÆs Who within the pirate community, the pirate community is in trouble.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Exlegion
Caldari Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.08.04 12:03:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Roemy Schneider i'd run low-sec missions if a 4/20 agent yielded ~200k LP for one of the biggies, including con skills
or allow low sec mission buggers to the new FW LP store
I'd actually agree to something like this. But the rewards would need to be high enough to offset the downtime a mission runner is subjected to in low sec, which is quite significant. But *my* ideal solution would be to fix the broken mechanics that cause excessive downtime (ie, overlapping in function of the probing system with the scanning system). It just seems more sensible then skyrocketing profits.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
|
|
|