| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
SurrenderMonkey
    |
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:18:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
In it's present form it's practically a no-lose. As long as you can figure out how to use a cargo scanner and do some arithmatic, YOU WIN!!. Where's the "risk/reward" in that?
Only true if someone first puts themselves in a situation where the math comes out favorably for would-be gankers. That's something that's very easy to avoid. It's sad that they're diminishing the player's obligation to defend their wealth.
|
Somealt Ofmine
|
Posted - 2008.08.07 18:31:00 -
[32]
Originally by: SurrenderMonkey
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
In it's present form it's practically a no-lose. As long as you can figure out how to use a cargo scanner and do some arithmatic, YOU WIN!!. Where's the "risk/reward" in that?
Only true if someone first puts themselves in a situation where the math comes out favorably for would-be gankers. That's something that's very easy to avoid. It's sad that they're diminishing the player's obligation to defend their wealth.
That's still true after this change. The target will just have to be a lot juicier for it to make sense, which is probably as it should be. A solo mission runner or carebear should be relatively safe in high-sec. An alliance moving freighters full of goodies using NPC corp alts probably shouldn't be.
In the interest of full disclosure I'll say right up front that I'm one of those "solo mission runner / carebears" right now. I haven't always been, but I'll be damned if I'm going to put up with 15 minute module activation in fleet fights. Until that part of the game stops being essentially broken, I'll live in high-sec, and I'm not all that interested in feeding PheerM311!!! while I do.
|
Dura'Lorth
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 00:27:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Edited by: Crumplecorn on 07/08/2008 18:12:58
Originally by: Deej Montana
I don't get why you "nerf missions" guys care so much about how much people can potentially make in high sec. So there are people who have more stuff than you? Too bad, deal with it. You don't hear the high sec crowd complaining about not having moons to mine or million isk rats to kill or rare ore to mine do you? No. We go about our business and play the game the way we like, as is our right as a paying CCP customer. We understand that there are (in theory) lots of isk to be made in low and null sec, but for our own reasons, we choose to remain in Empire.
Why the hell do you care?
Don't tell me it's because you want to maintain the "integrity of the developers vision" or any of that crap. At least be honest; you either want a bunch of what you see as soft targets to gank risk free, or, you're petulant children who can't stand that someone else has gotten more than you and had fun while doing it.
How about we make a deal? You play Eve the way you like and so will I.
Perhaps we recognise that this is MMORPG and as such everyone everywhere needs to be playing by the same basic rules - like Risk/Reward.
I know that since mission running is basically a single player game that it is easy to forget this, but you are part of the game, and do have an effect, and thus need to be regulated like everyone else.
Right here is a perfect example, the missioners bring in loads of isk, that affects all other players in the game. If you had carebear currency CCP
(Complete Crap Puchasizers) where you could by leet stuff from agents and nothing else then it would be fine, but the massive amounts of isk the missioners bring in is ruining the economy.
You cant spell risk with out isk. |
Cpt Branko
Surge.
NIght's Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 00:29:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Dura'Lorth
Move lv 3 missions to 0.5-0.3 sec space, and lv 4 missions to 0.3-0.0 sec space. No one should be able to make that much isk off these mission in high sec systems, it causes lag. And makes sense RPwise since how hard it would be for pirate faction battle ships to use jump gates into 0.9-0.7 mission hubs.
This.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com ~Saint |
Verx Interis
Amarr
Aurora Security
Cosmic Anomalies
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 00:44:00 -
[35]
Edited by: Verx Interis on 08/08/2008 00:44:51
I concur.
Even industrials won't be able to get money in hisec as much. Where do they get all their high end minerals from? Reprocess level 4 mission loot. Even trading will be less because there isn't as much of a hisec capital. The lack of minerals in hisec will help make lowsec and 0.0 worth mining in because they're the only place to get high end ores aside from drone compounds.
I'm planning on making my alt (who mainly does trades) do industry as extra money and I support this. A lot. Because I prefer eve to be fun, not just what helps me.
As for it being impossible to do missions without being a member of x alliance, it's worth mentioning that about half the people lagging up hisec are tied to lowsec/0.0 inhabiting characters. And it's really not so hard to get in a t1 frigate and go on an op with the rest of the alliance. Seriously.
Originally by: Rawr Cristina
(dreadnoughts are also possibly the most boring ship you could fly. It's like mining, without the part where you make money)
|
Scathain
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 05:52:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Scathain on 08/08/2008 05:54:51
Originally by: Verx Interis
Edited by: Verx Interis on 08/08/2008 00:44:51
I concur.
Even industrials won't be able to get money in hisec as much. Where do they get all their high end minerals from? Reprocess level 4 mission loot. Even trading will be less because there isn't as much of a hisec capital. The lack of minerals in hisec will help make lowsec and 0.0 worth mining in because they're the only place to get high end ores aside from drone compounds.
I'm planning on making my alt (who mainly does trades) do industry as extra money and I support this. A lot. Because I prefer eve to be fun, not just what helps me.
As for it being impossible to do missions without being a member of x alliance, it's worth mentioning that about half the people lagging up hisec are tied to lowsec/0.0 inhabiting characters. And it's really not so hard to get in a t1 frigate and go on an op with the rest of the alliance. Seriously.
But then they might ruin their Isk/Hr.
This would be the best change ccp could implement, they wont do it though.
Becasue CCP have great ideas such as:
adding 110% mass to the vaga was running salt into the vaga pilots wounds.
GARMON FORBID THAT PLAYERS HAVE TO INTERACT IN A MMO.
Not only would this force players to move to low sec, it would also prevent them from being unkillable in the NPC corps. The should put all 4mil+ sp players into the FW corps, like so many people have suggested. Give us a chance to take out the macro miners.
Ps. Anyone who says they want to play solo should go cancel their account.
===============================================
Oh Noes!!1!oNe |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 05:56:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Amateratsu
Never going to happen, keep dreaming....
Nerfing missions to low-sec so you piewats can have your wicked way would cause a s**t storm on a scale never before seen in eve and would prove seriously damaging to ccp's subscriptions revenue.
You will just have to go find targets to pew pew elsewhere.
carebears need to adapt or die 
they been yelling that at the nanoers/gankers time for them
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 05:58:00 -
[38]
Originally by: SurrenderMonkey
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
In it's present form it's practically a no-lose. As long as you can figure out how to use a cargo scanner and do some arithmatic, YOU WIN!!. Where's the "risk/reward" in that?
Only true if someone first puts themselves in a situation where the math comes out favorably for would-be gankers. That's something that's very easy to avoid. It's sad that they're diminishing the player's obligation to defend their wealth.
I just went about 30 jumps with over 100mil in the cargo of a frigate, NERF!!!!!!!
|
Hieronimus Rex
Minmatar
Infinitus Sapientia
New Eden Research
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 06:01:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Dura'Lorth
Move lv 3 missions to 0.5-0.3 sec space, and lv 4 missions to 0.3-0.0 sec space. No one should be able to make that much isk off these mission in high sec systems, it causes lag. And makes sense RPwise since how hard it would be for pirate faction battle ships to use jump gates into 0.9-0.7 mission hubs.
I think they should just make quality a bigger factor, so while L4s would be everywhere, rewards would only be good in lowsec. In hisec you'd just get to fight battleships and a minimal amount of ISK and LP.
|
Veldya
Caldari
Guristari Freedom Fighters
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 06:05:00 -
[40]
Level 1-4 missions are fine, they need to remove T1 module drops because have an impact on resource prices but that is another topic...
The problem with moving L3 or L4 to low-sec is the missions need to be done by very one-dimensional builds with a big tank for specific damage types. It creates massive holes in your defense.
L1 & L2s can be done in small ships and you only really need a very basic tank to do them, they are ideal for low-sec space where slow moving bricks in PvE build have the survivability of a snowflake in hell. Create L6 & L7s which are high payout versions of L1 & L2s so taking the risk with smaller and cheaper ships is on par or better than just taking a brick to do L4 highsec missions.
If you lose a frigate or cruise in low-sec, who gives a crap? Losing battleships with expensive modules is more of an issue. Podding is also an issue, they should probably make it easier to get into jump clones so people can get into low-sec easier.
|
|
Tippia
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 06:13:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
In it's present form it's practically a no-lose. As long as you can figure out how to use a cargo scanner and do some arithmatic, YOU WIN!!. Where's the "risk/reward" in that?
The risk:reward is fairly low, yes, but no worse than, say, an L4 mission. The "risk" part is mostly in the form of bad random numbers that make the entire cargo go poof, in much the same was as random numbers can make your mission fairly unprofitable by giving deciding that those angel BS:es only carry T1 mining lasers and that the only salvagable part is 300m3 of scap metal.
Mostly though, the risk comes in the form of opportunity: you risk sitting around a whole day and not finding a single worth-while target.
|
TrulyKosh
Gallente
Solo for UNCLE
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 07:07:00 -
[42]
Edited by: TrulyKosh on 08/08/2008 07:07:19
Originally by: Dura'Lorth
Move lv 3 missions to 0.5-0.3 sec space, and lv 4 missions to 0.3-0.0 sec space. No one should be able to make that much isk off these mission in high sec systems, it causes lag. And makes sense RPwise since how hard it would be for pirate faction battle ships to use jump gates into 0.9-0.7 mission hubs.
And what would that accomplish?
Let's assume the average income of running lvl2 missions is 2m/hour. So any high sec player would have to run these missions for 40-60 hours to afford a single battleship. Make it 90 hours since he may have to buy the skillbooks along the way. Make it 150 hours to buy the necessary guns and equipment.
But that is a secondary concern. If the player is not absolutely daft, he will try to obtain a clone before going into low sec (and potential "death" there). In order to gain the necessary standings to get a clone with lvl2 missions that is another 400 hours of lvl2 mission running.
Let's further assume that this is a casual player, who spends 10 hours/week in this game. So, with your changes in game, a new player has to spend an enire year in high sec before he could venture out to low sec and try his first lvl4 mission. (and please consider that secondary costs of buying ammo, insurance, etc. are not even taken into account). Of course, if he loses it, it would only be another 6 weeks until he could get a new one, but that would also require to assume that he/she never lost a ship along the way to obtain the first battleship.
With stats like that i would assume selling this game to subscribers would be a pretty tough sale. 
|
eliminator2
Gallente
Black Water.
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 07:18:00 -
[43]
/signed
|
Andrue
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 07:18:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
First of all, they aren't changing "PvP". They're addressing suicide ganking, which, IMO, barely qualifies as PvP at all.
In it's present form it's practically a no-lose. As long as you can figure out how to use a cargo scanner and do some arithmatic, YOU WIN!!. Where's the "risk/reward" in that?
Sad to say, but the people whining here don't want "PvP", they want helpless victims, which isn't the same thing.
/this.
These people are basically schoolyard bullies. There's little or no reasoning with them. You just have to avoid them and wait. Eventually most of them will grow out of it and might even learn to respect other people.
Quote:
I'd be all for moving level 4s to low-sec with the following changes to them:
1) Re-configure them so that optimal mission running setups are very similar to optimal PvP setups (i.e. you need to be able to deal/take burst damage, web, scram, etc).
2) Make them not soloable, and requiring a good mixed fleet of damage dealers, tacklers, etc. This is the norm in other MMOs, where you cant run most worthwhile dungeons solo, or with a group consisting only of damage dealers or tanks.
This is what L5s should have been.
I also think L5s should have used a dynamic missioning system and offered chained mission sequences. Leave L4s as predictable and boring and offer low-sec L5s as exciting, rewarding and with the runners ready for PvP.
Unfortunately simply ruining L4s will not help. A lot of people living in high-sec simply don't view low-sec as an alternative. For those people the choice is "High-sec" or "leave".
--
(Sarcastic mission running veteran, 4+ years)
[Brackley, UK]
My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned. |
Dura'Lorth
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 08:20:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Andrue
Originally by: Somealt Ofmine
First of all, they aren't changing "PvP". They're addressing suicide ganking, which, IMO, barely qualifies as PvP at all.
In it's present form it's practically a no-lose. As long as you can figure out how to use a cargo scanner and do some arithmatic, YOU WIN!!. Where's the "risk/reward" in that?
Sad to say, but the people whining here don't want "PvP", they want helpless victims, which isn't the same thing.
/this.
These people are basically schoolyard bullies. There's little or no reasoning with them. You just have to avoid them and wait. Eventually most of them will grow out of it and might even learn to respect other people.
Quote:
I'd be all for moving level 4s to low-sec with the following changes to them:
1) Re-configure them so that optimal mission running setups are very similar to optimal PvP setups (i.e. you need to be able to deal/take burst damage, web, scram, etc).
2) Make them not soloable, and requiring a good mixed fleet of damage dealers, tacklers, etc. This is the norm in other MMOs, where you cant run most worthwhile dungeons solo, or with a group consisting only of damage dealers or tanks.
This is what L5s should have been.
I also think L5s should have used a dynamic missioning system and offered chained mission sequences. Leave L4s as predictable and boring and offer low-sec L5s as exciting, rewarding and with the runners ready for PvP.
Unfortunately simply ruining L4s will not help. A lot of people living in high-sec simply don't view low-sec as an alternative. For those people the choice is "High-sec" or "leave".
School Yard Bullies eh? If i wanted that i would have sugested a stupid change.
Guess what, if you cant solo the mission becuase of your fit, get a corp mate or a friend.
Currently there is no reason to head to lowsec, missions where you make massive amounts of isk in mods/loot/rewards need to be down there, These missions should have needed a gang to do. You should have had to bring a friend in a cruiser or frig to take out the rat cruisers and frigs.
People want a solo game, but that ruins it for everyone else who wants interaction, They can fit WCS they can use scouts they can mission in groups to protect them selves.
They could Form an alliance, where corps of missioners help produce and support a PVP wing. A swarm of frigs can take out a BS, or other gangs, t1 frigs with t1 fits can do massive dmg.
I dont want helpless targets, i want LOW SEC have more rewards then high sec. I want corps to move back to low sec. Back in the start of eve corps banded together to hold their system, they worked as a team to kick the pirates out, they protected the minging ops, with frigs and cruisers.
EVE is a MMO it makes no sense the most profitable things are in the safest space in a PVP centred game, people shouldnt beable to do everything solo.
You cant spell risk with out isk. |
Wet Ferret
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 08:46:00 -
[46]
You don't seem to understand missions at all. They aren't there to to challenge the player, they are there as a means to make money and grind up faction standings. You could say that mining isn't dangerous either, and so they should nerf it? Hell most people do it AFK... that is the definition of "getting something for nothing". And it's not risk free.. give me a break. The first thing I learned in EVE is that hitting the undock button is agreeing to non-consentual PvP, and that's no different for a mission runner. The more efficient their mission running ship is, the more they are putting on the line.
All your suggestion would do is limit non-pvpers to level 2 and some lvl 3 missions (0.5 with good lvl 3s would be the new "highsec mission hubs"). Because they wouldn't be moving to low-sec, as has already been proven time and time again.
BTW, pirate factions use smuggling and pirate stargates to get into high-sec territories. Clearly you have never run a mission in your life if you don't know this.
But, yeah. These forums seriously need some indicator that the post has ended and the sig has started.
 |
Havohej
The Defias Brotherhood
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 08:47:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Pithecanthropus
How much isk are these missioners making? More than carebears ratting in 0.0? I doubt it.
These missioners put in time... in return they make isk. Seems like you pvpers need to realize their time is just as valuable as your time. Perhaps you should use YOUR time more wisely.
You doubt it and you're wrong.
In 0.0, true sec under -0.7 (that is, the rats with the 1.8M bounties which is pretty good) I made 25-30M per hour depending on luck with the spawns in a relatively un-crowded system with 12 belts (more miners there than ratters).
Since spending some time in lowsec with a Q-18 L4 agent, I've found myself making 25-40M per hour, depending on luck with mission assignments (sometimes he has me killing faction NPCs or drones which don't have bounties, but usually it's been nice missions like Angel Extravaganza or The Blockade or Mordus Headhunters, with lots of crap to shoot at).
That's a Q-18. I know of highsec mission hubs with Q-20 agents! Higher quality = higher mission rewards, higher standings increases...
The rat bounties and mission rewards alone add up to equal or greater than 0.0 ratting, depending on the quality of the 0.0 ratting space, then you add the salvage, loot and Loyalty Point store merchandise that mission runners earn (Faction ammo is still a goldmine) and yeah... High sec missions ARE making more ISK than carebears in 0.0 ratting.
Originally by: CCP Explorer
You can still steal their stuff.
|
TrulyKosh
Gallente
Solo for UNCLE
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 08:54:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Havohej
Originally by: Pithecanthropus
How much isk are these missioners making? More than carebears ratting in 0.0? I doubt it.
These missioners put in time... in return they make isk. Seems like you pvpers need to realize their time is just as valuable as your time. Perhaps you should use YOUR time more wisely.
You doubt it and you're wrong.
In 0.0, true sec under -0.7 (that is, the rats with the 1.8M bounties which is pretty good) I made 25-30M per hour depending on luck with the spawns in a relatively un-crowded system with 12 belts (more miners there than ratters).
Since spending some time in lowsec with a Q-18 L4 agent, I've found myself making 25-40M per hour, depending on luck with mission assignments (sometimes he has me killing faction NPCs or drones which don't have bounties, but usually it's been nice missions like Angel Extravaganza or The Blockade or Mordus Headhunters, with lots of crap to shoot at).
That's a Q-18. I know of highsec mission hubs with Q-20 agents! Higher quality = higher mission rewards, higher standings increases...
The rat bounties and mission rewards alone add up to equal or greater than 0.0 ratting, depending on the quality of the 0.0 ratting space, then you add the salvage, loot and Loyalty Point store merchandise that mission runners earn (Faction ammo is still a goldmine) and yeah... High sec missions ARE making more ISK than carebears in 0.0 ratting.
You are casually ignoring the income of possible faction/officer spawns, hauler spawns, exploration sites, encounter sites and the mining towers humming in the background (even if it's not dysprosium). If you add LP store merchandise to the empire income, let's just be fair and include everything 0.0 has to offer as well, thx 
|
Tippia
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 08:55:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Tippia on 08/08/2008 08:56:00
Originally by: Wet Ferret
They aren't there to to challenge the player, they are there as a means to make money and grind up faction standings. You could say that mining isn't dangerous either, and so they should nerf it?
Exactly, so there should be some risk to balance out those earnings. Reducing the likelyhood of being ganked reduces that risk, which means that the earnings need to come down as well.
|
Thule Cult
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 09:04:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Dura'Lorth
Move lv 3 missions to 0.5-0.3 sec space, and lv 4 missions to 0.3-0.0 sec space. No one should be able to make that much isk off these mission in high sec systems, it causes lag. And makes sense RPwise since how hard it would be for pirate faction battle ships to use jump gates into 0.9-0.7 mission hubs.
aw pirate cry? poor little man.... |
|
csebal
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 09:13:00 -
[51]
Edited by: csebal on 08/08/2008 09:13:12
Originally by: Joey Meow
Now, as far as your proposal to remove L4 agents from High Security - this will never happen, CCP is here to make money, and forcing those who do not wish to PVP into certain PVP is not a way to keep up subscription numbers. Also, there are L5 agents in low security, they do need to be fixed, or rather the missions need to be fixed somewhat.
Since when is removing level 4 missions from high sec forcing people to move to low sec? They could just as well stay in high sec grind away lvl3 missions.
Thats the whole point of risk vs reward.. You cant mine crockite in high sec.. Do you see people moan about it? No.. why? Becasue its a risk vs reward thing. The whole point of crockite not being in high sec is to reward those who take the risk. I dont see why it shouldnt be the same in every aspect of the game.
As it stands now.. people in high sec just have no incentive to move out of high sec, as they can make the most money there.
Originally by: Joey Meow
Originally by: SurrenderMonkey
At present, I can make more money in high sec missions than I can in 0.0 sec, with a risk level that approaches 0% of what I'd have in null sec.
Really? Wow, damn, I do not believe you. If you are part of a well organized Alliance or a Corporation with access to 0.0, and you are making less than mission runners, you are obviously doing it wrong - or you are ninja ratting in systems frequented by the neutrals who operate on NBSI, so you have to pause, and run, and cloack. In a well defended, well organized 0.0, you should not have an issue ratting none-stop and making crap load of ISK, way more than even the best mission runner in Empire. You also have access to the expensive ores and minerals which can be jumped back to Empire and sold. So, forgive me if I call bullshit on your whine.
Actually, get your fact straight, cuz even the best NPCing areas only offer an income that can be compared to that of high sec mission running, but is by no chance that much higher as you would expect from the fact that you live in 0.0 - lawless space.
0.0 mission running is a different issue, lvl4 missions down there are obviously a lot more valuable than lvl4 missions in high sec, but still.. why move your ass out of safety and risk your ships for a mere 30-50% increase in mission revenue? Not to mention. Would there be no lvl4 in high sec, you would see quite a lot of people moving into low sec to do missions and obviously quite a lot of people staying in high sec grinding away lvl 3 ones.
Anyway.. this is not about 0.0 vs high sec. This is about low sec vs high sec.. As it stands now, low sec is more dangerous than 0.0 yet the rewards are lower there. So why exactly are we wondering that noone wants to go there?
Bring balance to the world FFS.
My post does not represent the general or official opinion of anyone else besides me. No matter what YOU believe.
Phear the arrows of the HUNs >>----> |
KISOGOKU
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 09:16:00 -
[52]
if you are making 25-30m with 1.8m Bs spawns you are doing it wrong ,i was making 25m easliy with 1.3m Bs spawns(no loot or salvage) with siege raven and dont forget faction spawns i made 600m from faction loot at 45 days and it was from crappy angels 
Originally by: Havohej
In 0.0, true sec under -0.7 (that is, the rats with the 1.8M bounties which is pretty good) I made 25-30M per hour
|
Eldar Boon
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 09:19:00 -
[53]
I do think that level 4 missions need some adjustment because I believe that the risk/reward balance is a bit off.
I agree that moving all level 4 mission agents to low-sec is an option, but I feel it's a little crude. Sometimes it's fun to do a level 4 missions just to blow stuff up; and I wouldn't like to see that removed from hi-sec.
I'm more in favour of adjusting the reward so that hi-sec mission running is more for fun than profit. If you want to become a hardcore mission runner, then I think you should be encouraged to move in to low-sec for the rich rewards (with the obvious risk that entails).
Ideally I would like to see mission reward based on the number of people using an agent. The more people using an agent, the lower the reward. The longer nobody accesses an agent the greater the reward. In addition to making low-sec level 4 missions more appealing, this could lead to remote level 1, 2 and 3 agents being a viable way to make money in low-sec.
|
Kano Sekor
Amarr
The Movement
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 09:22:00 -
[54]
/signed stamped approved and applauded this is the solution to everything
The biggest imbalance in eve atm is the risk/reward in high-sec lvl 3 and lvl 4 agents. It needs balancing
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Thule Cult
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 09:22:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Eldar Boon
I do think that level 4 missions need some adjustment because I believe that the risk/reward balance is a bit off.
I agree that moving all level 4 mission agents to low-sec is an option, but I feel it's a little crude. Sometimes it's fun to do a level 4 missions just to blow stuff up; and I wouldn't like to see that removed from hi-sec.
I'm more in favour of adjusting the reward so that hi-sec mission running is more for fun than profit. If you want to become a hardcore mission runner, then I think you should be encouraged to move in to low-sec for the rich rewards (with the obvious risk that entails).
Ideally I would like to see mission reward based on the number of people using an agent. The more people using an agent, the lower the reward. The longer nobody accesses an agent the greater the reward. In addition to making low-sec level 4 missions more appealing, this could lead to remote level 1, 2 and 3 agents being a viable way to make money in low-sec.
problem with moving agents into low sec is that the reward is too low. pirates will camp that system 23/7 probe you out daily since you will be tanking specific rats they will burst your bubble. Thats why so many are doing missions in high sec because pirates camp the low sec systems, even an idiot can figure that out. |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 09:24:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Sinker1345
Coming from a misson runner, I believe that they should nerf high sec lvl 3 and lvl 4 misson payouts while at the same time addning better paying lvl 3 and 4 agents to low sec.
Better than the 4 +20 already present there and absent from high sec?
Level 5 missions have been buffed up in the last big patch and those are available only in low sec, it seem that they finally are giving good returns. Add level 5 agents to all the 0.0 faction and you have your low sec /0.0 buffing.
Originally by: Gamesguy
the suicide ganking is merely an isk farming activity.
|
csebal
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 09:26:00 -
[57]
Originally by: TrulyKosh
Originally by: Havohej
Originally by: Pithecanthropus
How much isk are these missioners making? More than carebears ratting in 0.0? I doubt it.
These missioners put in time... in return they make isk. Seems like you pvpers need to realize their time is just as valuable as your time. Perhaps you should use YOUR time more wisely.
You doubt it and you're wrong.
In 0.0, true sec under -0.7 (that is, the rats with the 1.8M bounties which is pretty good) I made 25-30M per hour depending on luck with the spawns in a relatively un-crowded system with 12 belts (more miners there than ratters).
Since spending some time in lowsec with a Q-18 L4 agent, I've found myself making 25-40M per hour, depending on luck with mission assignments (sometimes he has me killing faction NPCs or drones which don't have bounties, but usually it's been nice missions like Angel Extravaganza or The Blockade or Mordus Headhunters, with lots of crap to shoot at).
That's a Q-18. I know of highsec mission hubs with Q-20 agents! Higher quality = higher mission rewards, higher standings increases...
The rat bounties and mission rewards alone add up to equal or greater than 0.0 ratting, depending on the quality of the 0.0 ratting space, then you add the salvage, loot and Loyalty Point store merchandise that mission runners earn (Faction ammo is still a goldmine) and yeah... High sec missions ARE making more ISK than carebears in 0.0 ratting.
You are casually ignoring the income of possible faction/officer spawns, hauler spawns, exploration sites, encounter sites and the mining towers humming in the background (even if it's not dysprosium). If you add LP store merchandise to the empire income, let's just be fair and include everything 0.0 has to offer as well, thx
Lets see then:
- exploration involves lots of travel which isnt exactly a safe thing to do alone in 0.0, so comparing that to anything earned in high sec dies pretty much right away.
- moon mining might be profitable, but about 95% of the valuable moons are in alliance hands or corporation hands. Unless you are the head of said corp or alliance, it is unlikely you will see personal profit from that.
- officer and faction spawns might be nice, but during 6 years of eve i had like 3 officer spawns in total, worth about 5 billion isk. Dont let me count up the billions i lost in pvp gear in the meantime.
- Hauler spawns are a chore.. most of them is trit or pyerite. If you think its worth hauling 100 million tritanium 2-3 jumps (in optimal cases) throught 0.0 to the nearest station, then you are sadly mistaken. The rare zydrine / megacyte spawn is usually less than 100m worth.
- Encounter sites, as in.. deep space anomalies if you refer to those are 99% of the time worthless, and the another 1 % is just not worth looking for.
Summarized, the three viable money making methods in 0.0 include:
- Mining - 3/10 income, 3/10 risk (with proper scouting)
- Ratting - 5/10 income, 4/10 risk (with proper scouting)
- Agent running (Only available in a very small portion of 0.0) - 8/10 income, 4/10 risk (with proper scouting)
- Exploration - 8/10 income, 6/10 risk (due to lots of travelling - with proper scouting)
Compare this to high sec lvl4 mission running, which is about
5/10 income, 0/10 risk.
or to low sec mission running, which is
7/10 income, 8/10 risk.
Am i the only one who finds high sec mission running to be a bit out of balance there?
My post does not represent the general or official opinion of anyone else besides me. No matter what YOU believe.
Phear the arrows of the HUNs >>----> |
csebal
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 09:32:00 -
[58]
Ideally i think it should look like this:
high sec - least risk, least reward:
1-4/10 income. (mostly low end mining and lv1-lv3 agents)
low sec - high risk, more reward:
5-8/10 income. (mining, exploration, rats and lv4 agents)
zero sec - variable risk, most reward:
6-10/10 income. (the usual stuff)
It just shouldnt be possible for the income to be comparative to eachother between high sec and the other two levels. between low and zero sec i wouldnt make such a difference, as low sec is actually more dangerous than zero sec in some cases. Guess the reason for the overlapping income scales.
My post does not represent the general or official opinion of anyone else besides me. No matter what YOU believe.
Phear the arrows of the HUNs >>----> |
Po3tank
Amarr
Basgerin Pirate
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 09:33:00 -
[59]
seams like a alright idea
but on the mission subject of this thread i would like to point out that,why should one mine when you can run lvl 4 missions and reprocess the t1 crap. stupid that there is a choice during chacter creation that they try to convince you to become a miner
Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com - Mitnal |
Soulita
Gallente
Inner Core
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 09:35:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Exlegion
Quote:
Since you are changing PVP, Lets change missions.
"CCP, you hurt me :(. Now please hurt them. I hate them :("
I swear, this place sometimes feels like grade school .
Qft.
Lets go kiddies - Foodfight!
Oh, on a more series note, can anyone tell me how nanonerf and insurance changes have anything to do with missions??
Also, Iskwise, running missions in 0.0 gives a lot better pay than running missions in empire - much higher LP point gain. Means you get those nice faction awards up to 3* faster in 0.0 than in empire. (5000 LP per top level 4 in empire as compared to 15000(!)LP per top level 4 in 0.0)
I'd call that pretty balanced.
Now... back to the foodfight all, will yas...
 |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |