Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 10 post(s) |
HYPAKILLA
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:20:00 -
[151] - Quote
The more PvE is like PvP the better.
I'm in. |
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
400
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:20:00 -
[152] - Quote
Crazy NPCs like these could be added as bonus "Boss" pockets in regular missions. |
Xer Jin
Ancient Anomaly and Artifacts Recovery Explorators
95
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:25:00 -
[153] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote: also, sig tanking is actually speed tanking. or speed tanking is sig tanking. you cannot separate these things.
They're different when you shoot missiles at them. Ziggy star dust knows all about "speed" tanking Rocket man: She packed my bags last night pre-flight Zero hour nine a.m. And I'm gonna be high as a kite by then I miss the earth so much I miss my wife It's lonely out in space On such a timeless flight And I think it's gonna be a long long time Till touch down brings me round again to find I'm not the man they think I am at home Oh no no no I'm a rocket man Rocket man burning out his fuse up here alone Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids In fact it's cold as hell And there's no one there to raise them if you did And all this science I don't understand It's just my job five days a week A rocket man, a rocket man And I think it's gonna be a long long time... wow as a capsuleer you have made complete and utter fail!!! firstly "rocket man" was written and composed by elton john second "Ziggy stardust" is not a real person but a persona created by David Bowie who wrote "Major Tom" actualy titled "Space Oddity" i think you have them all confused clearly you need to go back and train up "capsuler culture" a few more levels lololol
|
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
94
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:28:00 -
[154] - Quote
So are these things going to be player fitable fits, or are they going to be Sansha 2.0 that can do everything all at the same time, with virtually unlimited slot layout?
That makes a big difference, if your intent is for players to solo a Sansha frigate (in essence) with only a frigate...i feel your new content will go widely unused. However, if they are infact ACTUAL usable fits, this could be really fun. |
David Kir
Tailender
463
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:29:00 -
[155] - Quote
I would suggest making so that these NPCs have to be pointed.
They should be able to try to warp out when in difficulty (structure damage?).
Once the NPC warps off:
a) the mission is failed
b) the site collapses and re-spawns.
You could also implement Warp-Off routines into the AI, like switching to full neuting power and pulling range with webs and scrams in order to warp off.
The true difference between PVE and PVP is that human opponents have a survival instinct, while NPCs don't: make NPCs fear for their lives, for once.
Oh, I almost forgot:
The missioner's dream is to be supreme The bigger, the better The biggest ever SIZE MATTERS! Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die. |
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S Northern Associates.
347
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:39:00 -
[156] - Quote
This part is a little weird, why should these missions be any different from any other mission.
Quote:Burner Missions are 100% optional. There will be no standings penalty for turning down or failing these missions. Your friendly neighborhood security agent knows that not every capsuleer will have the equipment or skills to take on these missions and wonGÇÖt be offended if you decline. If you are running Level 4s you should already have a few ships laying about that you no longer use anymore, or at least be able to pick something up with the amount of ISK that you have from your other level 4s. If you can't do it then you cancel the mission like any other mission that you don't want to do. Just like allot of people currently do with ones that you have to shoot other Empire Faction ships in. |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
28751
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:45:00 -
[157] - Quote
Kraizer793 wrote:As awesome as the idea is, I really don't think they'll be used.
The people who will be attracted to this type of mission are, in my experience, the type who won't want to bother grinding out traditional L4's in all their mind-numbing tedium.
The people who like L4's or run them for ISK's sake will likely just skip them. due to the risk and skill involved, just skipping it and going back to blitzing Dread Pirate Scarlet for the seventh time that day is much easier.
They need to be their own brand of mission, able to be done without having to deal with the existing missions which are an exercise in pressing F1 more than they are anything else. I think a lot of people will try them out initially, but after the new feature smell wears off, they'll fall to the wayside.
Perhaps reserve the Burners as "boss fights" for a new strain of mission, and traditional missions of this strain and pockets leading up to the Burner itself would contain less powerful variants of the Burners. 2-4 per pocket, still powerful, and still capable of causing a player to evaluate each mission and situation from a tactical perspective, and not from a "What damage type?" perspective.
+1. Step in the right direction.
Nalha Saldana wrote:Gain them randomly from doing L4s? No this is a terrible idea, a lot of L4 runners dont want them and most who want burner missions dont want L4s at all.
Best solution is definitely to drop keys or similar in L4s that can be sold on market and turned in to a agent to gain a burner mission. This gives those who does L4s the option between isk or burner while those who want to farm them the ability to do it unlimited while still having it regulated by market cost.
Dave Stark wrote:and you've just made them, useless, and ****** content.
if i'm doing level 4 missions, it ain't in a goddamn frigate. it's in a ship that can't do them, it'll get instantly declined and disregarded.
either make them an alternative, or don't bother. just adding in missions i can't complete in my normal mission boat, to my normal mission agent is just another mission that i instantly disregard just like anything in low sec, more than 3 jumps away, or incurs faction standing losses.
on the bright side, at least you know it's a dumb idea and aren't imposing standing losses for your terrible implementation of what could have been an amazing addition to eve.
Dalilus wrote:Yup, as expected, pvp style mission farms for wholers, lowsequers and of course those beloved nullbears. Not something your normal carebear would be interested in running. This idea ranks right up there with the whole lot of distribution missions some dumb@$$ decide to unleash on us a few years back to great fanfare and look how well that idea turned out. Just out of curiosity, what are the rewards? One million isk and another million isk bonus to risk a 4 billion isk frigate? Are you guys really that interested in creating isk sinks for plex? What will the bad guys be dropping, officer/deadspace loot or tech 1 garbage? Don't forget that in their wisdom the geniuses that come up with this stuff decided to take away pirate faction loot from missions because the nullbear BWAAAAmbulance made the rounds whining to anyone that would listen that carebears made too much isk. If this is the new direction pve is taking then, %$#@) that. I agree 100% with all of these.
As a long time explorer and mission runner (+6 years) in this game, I have to say this type of so called PvE content is nothing more than mock PvP, something which doesn't interest me at all. CCP constantly trying to force PvE players into doing PvP is killing this game. If players want to do PvP action, there's nothing stopping them so why the constant attempts to force those who only want to do PvE content into doing PvP?
What I've seen happening over the past few years is a small but very vocal group of PvP players constantly dictating / meta-gaming CCP via CSM / Null Sec Alliances on how this game should be played. Since CCP is bound and determined to listen to them by slowly removing the PvE aspect of this game, I say just fracking do it already and stop wasting our time with this slowboat action of turning Eve into Vaporware.
Seriously, CCP Devs need to pull their heads out of their Facebooks and stop twittering with themselves.
DMC Faction Standing Repair Plan | California Eve Players | (Proposal) Bring Back 'The Endless Battle' Missions |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
5321
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:46:00 -
[158] - Quote
Finally a use for these Kestrels... Bring back DEEEEP Space! |
David Kir
Tailender
463
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:49:00 -
[159] - Quote
Caldari 5 wrote: If you are running Level 4s you should already have a few ships laying about that you no longer use anymore, or at least be able to pick something up with the amount of ISK that you have from your other level 4s. If you can't do it then you cancel the mission like any other mission that you don't want to do. Just like allot of people currently do with ones that you have to shoot other Empire Faction ships in.
Because not all mission runners have good frigate combat skills, knowledge and ability.
As a matter of fact, I would argue that most of them do not.
Besides, this would unfairly penalize low-SP players. Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die. |
David Kir
Tailender
463
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:54:00 -
[160] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote: CCP constantly trying to force PvE players into doing PvP
"Burner Missions are 100% optional. "
You are a waste of forum space. Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die. |
|
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
8810
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 21:55:00 -
[161] - Quote
It's about time they try to make PvE more like real fighting instead of just farming a thousand red crosses. But this will be interesting, since one would need fairly expensive frigates to kill these things, not to mention boosts.
So it would be interesting to see the level of reward that these provide, since they're invariably more risky than typical PvE.
Oh, and watch the Daredevil's price skyrocket, since it will be a fairly good way to beat about half of these. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
Alphari Vendren
Applied Vendrenics
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 22:03:00 -
[162] - Quote
Will the distribution of these 5 missions be based on the prevalent NPC pirate faction? For example, if I'm in Caldari space, will I get the Guristas burner every time a burner mission is offered, or most of the time? |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
1044
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 22:06:00 -
[163] - Quote
sounds fun as heck |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
1044
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 22:15:00 -
[164] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:Dave Stark wrote: it's not about "not being bothered" or "not affording" anything.
the demographic for l4 missions is a battleship. the demographic for these is a frigate. the two are chalk and cheese. that's why it's a dumb implementation of the idea.
I don't know if you run missions, Dave, but when I do I slowly build a stable of ships in that hub so I can run the specifics (Like a cruiser well tanked for the Recon 3/3 L4 mission) and I also keep a fast ship to commute to other things/places. Adding a good frigate or two to that stable will be just fine with me. Is it an extra expense? Yes, but one I am willing to pay for some variety m i do occasionally run them, in 1 ship because they're so trivial. and that ship sure as hell isn't a frigate. that way i don't have load of ships stuck in the arse end of nowhere. the point is, that you're aiming a mission designed for 1 demographic at a demographic who won't do it. it's not a case of what you'd personally do, nobody cares what you'd personally do. ccp are trying to sell steaks to vegans here, essentially. as a stand alone set of missions from separate agents these will be fun to run, randomly getting them while you're doing things that simply don't fit what these missions are aimed at... it's just nonsensical. although, i guess ccp already know most people will skip them because of the bad implementation, and that's why there's no standing penalty for skipping over them.
I do L4s and I'd do frigate missions any day, (in fact I would rather do them if they earn isk). Demographic doesn't matter, people use BSes out of necessity, not out of "loving using BSes only"
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1867
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 22:37:00 -
[165] - Quote
Requiring a point or they 'bug out' and despawn would be great EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
5321
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 22:44:00 -
[166] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:It's about time they try to make PvE more like real fighting instead of just farming a thousand red crosses. But this will be interesting, since one would need fairly expensive frigates to kill these things, not to mention boosts.
So it would be interesting to see the level of reward that these provide, since they're invariably more risky than typical PvE.
Oh, and watch the Daredevil's price skyrocket, since it will be a fairly good way to beat about half of these.
You see this is why I say in my posts that I think CCP is planning on dimming the lines between highsec and nullsec.
Would this be evidence of that? Will it work?
On the one hand, you had to fleet up to do an Incursion. This got a lot of grinders to do just that. But lo and behold elitism took place. Remember the protest from early 2012?
What's going to happen with these missions?
There's also a little bit of sadness here. When I read the devblog, a though occurred to me, something like "So it's so impossible to get a 1v1 with PVP now thanks to loss aversion, neutral RR, and BLOPS drop that CCP is going to have to provide it". The idea is a good one and these would certainly mix things up a bit, but it might be the nail in the coffin of 1v1 PVP. Bring back DEEEEP Space! |
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
1867
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 22:51:00 -
[167] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote: The idea is a good one and these would certainly mix things up a bit, but it might be the nail in the coffin of 1v1 PVP.
no PvE is ever going to replace actual PvP. this is just more interesting and relevant to today's meta PvE. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided""So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time" |
Gynax Gallenor
Conquering Darkness
6
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:05:00 -
[168] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:These will suit me fine actually, I have standings for level IV missions but don't fly BS because I just don't like them. I'll be skipping the standard missions waiting for the burners. then you won't have the standings for IV missions for very long. (or potentially wait days between missions if you wait for the 4hr timer to expire) then again if ccp were to just implement them separately, that wouldn't be an issue.
You have confused me a bit here. What exactly is your issue with this new mission type? That it can't be run in a battleship?
Why do you think it is a waste of time, and what is it you would have preferred instead?
Fly Reckless, cos flying safe is no damn fun!
http://flyreckless.com/newsite/ |
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
452
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:06:00 -
[169] - Quote
Interesting. A few suggestions:
1) You should never need to tell players how the Burners will be fit and how they will fight. Players will figure that out for themselves quickly enough and post/share the information on how to fight them.
2) Burners will be more challenging if the fit and fighting style are randomly variable, ie. not always the same fit/style each time you do the same mission. Static content becomes boring very, very quickly. Note: except for the purposes of farming LP/ISK or grinding standing, there is very litte reason to ever run any current mission more than once.
3) Added risk should include the possiblity of being podded.
4) Added risk should include the possibility of reinforcements warping in to help the Burner, if it is getting killed too quickly or easily. Perhaps by a remote repping frig? |
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
486
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:10:00 -
[170] - Quote
+1 TO THE MISSIONS.
WELL DONE CCP.
Now, as others have mentioned, put these missions on 1) separate agents, 2) very long cooldowns, 3) cannot use alts/friends to make these trivial 4) very lucrative in loot 5) MORE ENEMY TYPES - CRUISER, BC, BS, CAPITAL (in null)
But, well done. Excellent idea,.
Oh, and this mission to a tutorial. |
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
5425
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:12:00 -
[171] - Quote
CCP Goliath wrote:For those of you who aren't standings-positive enough to get level 4 missions (and for everyone else!) we will be reworking the moveme bot to provide faction standings. This might even stick around if there's enough interest in it, but the missions will be restored following the Hyperion release.
make sure you call it the "burnme" bot :)
Looks interesting, and I'd really like to see mission agents specialising in frigate/cruiser/battleship sized missions. Thus these "burner" missions could be random entries for regular frigate-sized missions, with similar "burner' missions for cruiser and battleship oriented missions.
The only question then becomes: what size do we classify Recon 1GÇô3 as
Thank you, PvE team. I'm looking forward to seeing these Burner missions in-game! Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
486
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:13:00 -
[172] - Quote
NOW GIVE SUPER-CARRIER PILOTS SOMETHING IN NULL TO DO
Give super-caps these missions too. region-wide, only 1 supercap allowed, and cant complete it quickly (and vulnerable to enemy playes of course).
Use a souped-up NPC carrier or a dread as enemy :)_ |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
5425
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:16:00 -
[173] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:TrouserDeagle wrote: also, sig tanking is actually speed tanking. or speed tanking is sig tanking. you cannot separate these things.
They're different when you shoot missiles at them. if you're sitting perfectly still, yes.
If you're travelling faster than the missile, it doesn't matter what your sig radius is.
Speed and sig alter the incoming missile damage in similar ways. That doesn't make them the same thing, unless you want to explain to people how orbit radius and linear velocity are the same thing. Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
3389
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:18:00 -
[174] - Quote
New content. New PVE content. New PVE content that high sec players can get involved in on a solo basis and enjoy.
I am shocked. Very pleasantly shocked.
Maybe there is hope yet.
I just hope the rewards are in line with the ISK / hour of regular L4 missions. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
5425
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:20:00 -
[175] - Quote
Sizeof Void wrote:Interesting. A few suggestions:
1) You should never need to tell players how the Burners will be fit and how they will fight. Players will figure that out for themselves quickly enough and post/share the information on how to fight them.
What if the added risk included the agents giving you the wrong intel? Which part is wrong: flying a dramiel, fusion ammo, mjolnir rockets? What if E has specifically tanked against explosive, expecting you to focus on eir resistance weakness? Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Wizzard117
Viziam Amarr Empire
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:20:00 -
[176] - Quote
Split mission pools ASAP and don't let that mixed approach hit TQ on release
Reasons
- players running usual level 4 missions are facing BS and BC size NPC's. They are specialized on facing and countering large groups of BS's which requires strong tanking and good enough DPS with "big guns" on appropriate ship types. - there was not much reasons for mission runners to specialize in small weapons as an average mission runner will level up to lvl2 and lvl3 missions fast enough so he will have to switch to cruisers/BC's ship size and medium guns and spend skillpoints on that. - burner missions may require completely different set of implants than current lvl4's. This will further separate these missions as one specific implant set may be good against burners but not that good in other level4's ( for example Snake set may be good at burner missions and not that useful at common missions) and vice versa. Players who have already optimized their implant set for current level4's may find that uninspiring. - average lvl4 mission runner have almost 0 SP in EWAR (well maybe aside of Target Painters of those who went for Golem). When facing small and fast burner frigs it will be almost mandatory to have some EWAR (webs, maybe scrams if we let NPC be smart, painters, maybe even jammers or eccm). This further separates required skill set for lvl4's
Proposed solution
Considering
- we don't want these burner missions be easily farmable - but we still want these missions to be easily accessible by those who willing to do them
We may do one of the following
- there's a specialized agent (one per each empire faction in their navy corp) who gives that missions. - these agents may require a certain amount of pirate tags handed to them as a proof u're tough enough for that mission - burner mission location can be in any solar system controlled by that faction (including low-sec) and not closer than N jumps - it is not certain in which solar system this pirate is (hey cmon he's not a usual pirate) but we know a constellation where he operates. Player must explore all systems in the constellation. Like "we do not know exactly where he is but we know where all his outposts are located " so player gets say 5 bookmarks and goes to check every of them - there may be an acceleration gate maze when our pirate is located randomly |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2093
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:22:00 -
[177] - Quote
I for one welcome our new Burner Overlords. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Sabriz Adoudel
Mission BLITZ
3399
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:24:00 -
[178] - Quote
We really need a small number (ten or less) agents in lowsec that *only* offer these missions.
PVE hubs worth fighting over in lowsec that suit small ships.
I also endorse the idea of adding these to level 5 mission agents. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=346564 - a proposal to overhaul the Logistics skill https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=238931 - an idea for a new form of hybrid PVE/PVP content. www.minerbumping.com - ganking miners and causing chaos |
Sabriz Adoudel
Mission BLITZ
3399
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:29:00 -
[179] - Quote
David Kir wrote:I would suggest making so that these NPCs have to be pointed.
They should be able to try to warp out when in difficulty (structure damage?).
Once the NPC warps off:
a) the mission is failed
b) the site collapses and re-spawns.
You could also implement Warp-Off routines into the AI, like switching to full neuting power and pulling range with webs and scrams in order to warp off.
The true difference between PVE and PVP is that human opponents have a survival instinct, while NPCs don't: make NPCs fear for their lives, for once.
This is a really good idea. Whether this means the mission fails, or the NPC returns fully repaired after a minute, it makes sure that players could fit the Burner's ship, and be PVP capable. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=346564 - a proposal to overhaul the Logistics skill https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=238931 - an idea for a new form of hybrid PVE/PVP content. www.minerbumping.com - ganking miners and causing chaos |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2093
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 23:32:00 -
[180] - Quote
If you guys have time, could you let burners loot your ships and taunt you in local? ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |