EVE Search - Current wspace implementation is fail (doomed to)

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Current wspace implementation is fail (doomed to)

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Maren Maen	Posted - 2009.02.23 01:29:00 - [1] Edited by: Maren Maen on 23/02/2009 01:30:51 The reason people run missions is because they are repeatable with a minimum amount of risk once one knows how to run any given mission. Implementing a PvE system whereby there are significant elements of risk that cannot be controlled for is simply doomed to failure because by and large people won't be willing to risk their shiny ships when they don't know what to expect. Sure, some segment of the population will get off on the thrill, but most will not (judging by how popular the current exploration system is vs lvl 4 missions, and the current exploration system is hardly risky at all by comparison with wspace). I want wspace to be successful, but as it is now, it is not a viable alternative to mission running. Devs and hardcore types can flash all the 's they want about how cool not knowing if you're going to jump into a Sleeper gankfest that will fry a CNR in 10 seconds is, but for every on the issue, there's 10 PvE players' and 5 's. You guys are out of touch, sorry to say. And considering t3's success is contingent upon wspace's success (in order to bring the prices low enough to be accessible), I suppose two years from now we'll all look back and be thankful that at least we got a skill queue and attribute respec.
Karrade Krise Galatic P0RN Starz	Posted - 2009.02.23 01:33:00 - [2] Edited by: Karrade Krise on 23/02/2009 01:34:09 out of touch? Right... Like many naysayers, you havn't realized the way to beat sleepers. You have to do it like it were pvp. For now that is all I'm going to say on the matter. Originally by: CCP Whisper Boo hoo. Cry some more. Whisper is now officially my hero.
Maren Maen	Posted - 2009.02.23 01:43:00 - [3] Originally by: Karrade Krise Edited by: Karrade Krise on 23/02/2009 01:34:09 out of touch? Right... Like many naysayers, you havn't realized the way to beat sleepers. You have to do it like it were pvp. For now that is all I'm going to say on the matter. Engaging in any sort of gang PvP is likely to result in losses, even if successful. And given the current damage outputs and target selection AI coming out of the Sleepers, even victorious engagements are likely to be quite costly. The OP follows this to its natural conclusion. The incentives necessary to get people to take this kind of risk would have to be quite considerable and since t3 will only be successful if it is either accessible (i.e., affordable) or overpowered (i.e., worth any price), this would seem quite unlikely (because the revenue from selling the parts would be relatively low if the end product's price is low in the first case or that total volume would be low if prices are superhigh in the latter).
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.23 01:46:00 - [4] That's entirely not the reason I do missions. Theory = Disproven. I'm sorry, but broad sweeping statements are not very good to make without significant data to back them up. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Maren Maen	Posted - 2009.02.23 01:52:00 - [5] Originally by: An Anarchyyt That's entirely not the reason I do missions. Theory = Disproven. I'm sorry, but broad sweeping statements are not very good to make without significant data to back them up. Heh, and I could say you made that post just to 'disprove' mine as opposed to there being any truth behind it, as you provided no further arguments yourself. You're off your trolling reservation.
ShadowGod56	Posted - 2009.02.23 01:53:00 - [6] umm this is a good thing, much like in real combat situations you don't know what to expect and if you do it can quickly change so this puts more risk and fun into missions, that's always the things i hated about missions, if i did the mission i knew it was going to be easy and what to do making it boring as ****, so this is heading a step into the right direction if you ask me
Karrade Krise Galatic P0RN Starz	Posted - 2009.02.23 01:56:00 - [7] Originally by: Maren Maen Originally by: Karrade Krise Edited by: Karrade Krise on 23/02/2009 01:34:09 out of touch? Right... Like many naysayers, you havn't realized the way to beat sleepers. You have to do it like it were pvp. For now that is all I'm going to say on the matter. Engaging in any sort of gang PvP is likely to result in losses, even if successful. And given the current damage outputs and target selection AI coming out of the Sleepers, even victorious engagements are likely to be quite costly. The OP follows this to its natural conclusion. The incentives necessary to get people to take this kind of risk would have to be quite considerable and since t3 will only be successful if it is either accessible (i.e., affordable) or overpowered (i.e., worth any price), this would seem quite unlikely (because the revenue from selling the parts would be relatively low if the end product's price is low in the first case or that total volume would be low if prices are superhigh in the latter). A well organized gang with the right setups and discipline and experience will hardly have any losses. BufferTanked RR BS gangs shouldn't have too much of a problem if done right and big enough for the spawn. Might lose the first and second ship, but insurance covers a good majority of that. The longer you're alive, the longer you can put out dps. We've all seen what the Sleepers can do to active tanks. Within 3-4 months a standard will be found and used in taking on these spawns. But just to leave it an open discussion... We shall see what we shall see. Originally by: CCP Whisper Boo hoo. Cry some more. Whisper is now officially my hero.
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.02.23 02:04:00 - [8] Originally by: Maren Maen Originally by: An Anarchyyt That's entirely not the reason I do missions. Theory = Disproven. I'm sorry, but broad sweeping statements are not very good to make without significant data to back them up. Heh, and I could say you made that post just to 'disprove' mine as opposed to there being any truth behind it, as you provided no further arguments yourself. You're off your trolling reservation. Fortunately, the burden of proof is not on me. That, falls on the prosecution. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Maren Maen	Posted - 2009.02.23 02:24:00 - [9] Originally by: An Anarchyyt Fortunately, the burden of proof is not on me. That, falls on the prosecution. It's a good thing this is a discussion forum then and not a court of law. As your Mighty Trollness knows, mere Troglodytes (players) are not given access to the same information that a prosecutor in a court case would, so to hold players to the same standard is rather obtuse and clearly counterproductive. It would also render impossible most any discussion as very few global statistics are ever released. Of course, you already know this. But hey, all your trolling on these forums has actually made you pretty good at spouting off logic and legal maxims. It's a shame you seem incapable of applying that same talent to a constructive discussion that might serve to improve our shared pastime.
Alora Venoda GalTech Whiskey Creek Alliance	Posted - 2009.02.23 02:42:00 - [10] for me, the reason i gave up on exploration was mainly cause of the SLOW and BORING scanning system and the lack of good sites. but missions are 100% accessible, no waiting, and there is no competition over them. it looks like the new scanning system will increase accessibility, provided that enough sites are spawned to meet demand. but the main barrier is now looking like the actual difficulty of the sleeper encounters. many will probably try a few times and give up because it's too hard. but i really don't think w-space was supposed to be an alternative to casual mission running... only dedicated corps/alliances will really be driven to fully pursue w-space content. and with very high potential profit, i am pretty sure w-space will not be a complete waste... ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ Take away the risk and it would make flying around in space utterly pointless. Take away the flying around part and you make EVE into a space themed spreadsheet application.
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.02.23 03:07:00 - [11] My experience for best tactics would be ; - Fly a Vulture - Fly a Nighthawk - Fly a Spider tanking battleship gang, stay alligned due to surprise spawns with scrambler frigates, hope noone disconnects. - Work out some sort of warp in warp out system with your friends to help protect weaker ships and spread the damage, assuming you can get the scramblers off them before they die. I find it a bit humerous that people say fight them like you fight in pvp, buffer tank ships have the tendancy to die horribly. Torps nuking my nano'ed cruiser.
Akor Flandres	Posted - 2009.02.23 03:13:00 - [12] WAH WAH BOO HOO CRY SOME MORE MAUREEN.
Roemy Schneider BINFORD	Posted - 2009.02.23 03:33:00 - [13] hummm so basically one has to fly the biggest ships to participate? CS, BS and stuff? what about sprinting sniper hacs, or sniper BC for that matter? what'S the survival rate of interceptors and or baby dictors? - putting the gist back into logistics
Zex Maxwell Caldari	Posted - 2009.02.23 03:52:00 - [14] ---
Soporo Caldari The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.02.23 04:20:00 - [15] Quote: BufferTanked RR BS gangs shouldn't have too much of a problem if done right and big enough for the spawn. Might lose the first and second ship, but insurance covers a good majority of that. The longer you're alive, the longer you can put out dps. We've all seen what the Sleepers can do to active tanks. Assuming of course no one with ebil intent would ever take advantage of your distraction with the Sleepers. I reckon day one on TQ is going to be insane.
libertarian cole	Posted - 2009.02.23 04:33:00 - [16] Originally by: Soporo Quote: BufferTanked RR BS gangs shouldn't have too much of a problem if done right and big enough for the spawn. Might lose the first and second ship, but insurance covers a good majority of that. The longer you're alive, the longer you can put out dps. We've all seen what the Sleepers can do to active tanks. Assuming of course no one with ebil intent would ever take advantage of your distraction with the Sleepers. I reckon day one on TQ is going to be insane. No guarantee the sleepers won't turn their guns on a newcomer. Unless you know how the aggro works, because I don't.
Soporo Caldari The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.02.23 04:41:00 - [17] Edited by: Soporo on 23/02/2009 04:44:33 Sniper + Cov-Ops + 200k bm to nearest player who is between him and the Npcs could cause big trouble I bet. No idea how often such a thing would occur though. Hell, a good long range Scorp or Falcon would be even worse.
Marlenus Caldari Ironfleet Towing And Salvage Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2009.02.23 05:51:00 - [18] Originally by: Maren Maen I want wspace to be successful, but as it is now, it is not a viable alternative to mission running. You say that like it's a bad thing. I'm not sure I'll enjoy engaging the sleepers in W-Space, but I do know that I'd rather gouge out my eyes with glass than do missions in their current form. I don't believe W-space is intended to replace mission running in the affections of the folks who currently enjoy running solo endlessly-repeatable missions having zero element of surprise. That's one mindset for which the game already has rather a lot of content; w-space, I believe, is intended as content for people who want some PvE action but can't stand endless predictable repetition. It's not designed to be "repeatable with a minimum amount of risk" and so its failure to meet that goal is not the fail OP thinks it is. ------------------ Ironfleet.com
Straight Chillen Gallente The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.02.23 06:12:00 - [19] This just in, Wormholes do not bring you to a lvl 4 mission. If you approach these things as a PVE encounter your already doomed to fail. No body said you had to go to wormhole space and risk your ****. You can happily stay in highsec running your lvl 4's all day. The big boys with balls will be having a blast doing these. Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Matt G Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2009.02.23 06:28:00 - [20] Not the reason I do missions, either. I'm just too much of a wuss to go pvp. I'd rather fight concord and lose my ship to them than go let somebody have a killmail on me!
Ol' Delsai Caldari Kernel of War Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.02.23 06:47:00 - [21] Originally by: Maren Maen Edited by: Maren Maen on 23/02/2009 01:30:51 The reason people run missions is because they are repeatable with a minimum amount of risk once one knows how to run any given mission. I personnaly don't run mission for this reason.... Moreover, I'm now less interested in LVL4 missions since I know them all ... it's boring and I don't play a game to be bored. So my personnal feeling is strictly the opposite of yours. Since W-space may be (actually it's only on sisi, and the pops may be a lot harder that it will be on M10 and after) risky and challenging, it will be successful. Remember this is a game. People are not so shy to take risk and challenge ... at least in a game.
Unctom	Posted - 2009.02.23 07:44:00 - [22] I don't think mission runners were on their mind at all when they decided it would be lawless space with delayed local with super strong/smart rats. I consider it as basically 'fixing' exploration and adding another difficulty tier: hisec->lowsec->0.0->w-space They are very aware of risk/reward which is why t3 won't be riskless. Merely flying the ships themselves you are risking skillpoint loss and you are complaining you can't farm production materials for them without risk?
Typhado3 Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Axiom Empire	Posted - 2009.02.23 09:12:00 - [23] so your saying that w-space is different from missions and is bound to fail. So repeating the same old **** with only slight differences but can be done in the exact same way is the only way to do things? this is why ccp are devs and you are not. ccp fix mining agent missions % pls
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.02.23 10:14:00 - [24] Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 23/02/2009 10:16:32 W-Space is not meant to be PvE territory or a replacement for missioning. With the story arcs and additional missions included in Apocrypha that much should be obvious. I am very much looking forward to the new missions and the new exploration content. W-Space is a way for PvP'ers to Carebear without having to wash out their mouths whenever they mention it. The Sleeper AI will choose targets based on threat levels and apply eWar according to effectiveness .. similar to PvP combat. The current stats on the T3 cruisers indicate that they are geared towards PvP use as well, further enforcing the Carebear-PvP connection. With T3 partially being built in POS labs it becomes even more obvious as the null-sec folk ("PvP'ers") already have the POS system as part of their everyday lives. Question is; Will there be a place in Q-Space for the PvE Carebears? My answer would be yes. Not to start out as it requires the pilots to adopt PvP skill-sets and tatics which will take some time. The industrial backbone of the PvE entities is much stronger than their more violent brothers' though, so in the long run W-Space will become an extension, perhaps even specialised version, of the mission corporations. Regardless, CCP will be tweaking numbers for months to come until they hit whatever sweet spot they have in mind for the W+Space content. So todays impossible Sleeper spawn may be tomorrows *****-cats.
Camerta Gallente	Posted - 2009.02.23 10:15:00 - [25] The big difference between missions and w-space is that w-space is a group effort. There is lot of skills required to make a profit from w-space not everything is about fighting although from the reports unprepared ships are going to get ganked hard but that is nothing new anytime you jump into a 0.4 system there is a risk of being gatecamped. Once you have the materials from the sleepers or Gas clouds there is a whole series of other activities involved in processing the materials that don't require any interaction with w-space at all. Those that don't want to take the risk will choose one of those roles. This adds a whole chain of opportunities with varying degrees of risk depending on where you participate.
galphi Gallente Unitary Senate Unitary Enterprises	Posted - 2009.02.23 10:32:00 - [26] For mission runners, there will be the epic mission arcs. W-space is a blend of ratting with some pvp elements added. With tactics, proper fleet setup and large numbers, anything is doable, even defeating Sleepers. The only problem I see is that it may require a lot of resources to acquire the components for t3 ships, making them extremely rare and valuable - after all the obvious effort that has gone into making the new modular t3 designs, only a limited number of people will really get into it. Unless of course you're planning on making all the ships modular eventually? Because that would be so cool!
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2009.02.23 11:03:00 - [27] My expiditions into w space was absolutely the most fun I ever had pve wise. Risk of course was there but Ill be more than happy to toss my spare murader against this risk JUST for the FUN factor ALONE. of course the fat paycheck to the side is nice too. Also its been far more mangable than any pvp enoucnters I had the pleasure of meeting. of one sidedness. ============= Pre Order your Sisters of Eve ship today
Durzel The Xenodus Initiative.	Posted - 2009.02.23 11:32:00 - [28] Edited by: Durzel on 23/02/2009 11:34:59 Here's a revelation for you: Nothing is changing with the current missions. That's right - come Apoc there will still be Angel Extravaganza, Worlds Collide, et al for people to grind like drones. Nothing is changing in terms of what missions are available, where the agents are, etc. How then can anyone call this extra content "fail" on the basis that it doesn't cater to their exact needs, when there is already something in place which caters towards it is beyond me. People, like the OP, talk about w-space like it is the only thing they will be able to do in the game when the expansion is out, or that it is replacing what already exists.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.02.23 11:37:00 - [29] Originally by: Marlenus I don't believe W-space is intended to replace mission running in the affections of the folks who currently enjoy running solo endlessly-repeatable missions having zero element of surprise. That's one mindset for which the game already has rather a lot of content; w-space, I believe, is intended as content for people who want some PvE action but can't stand endless predictable repetition. It's not designed to be "repeatable with a minimum amount of risk" and so its failure to meet that goal is not the fail OP thinks it is. Then you look the time needed to harvest the gases used for T3 construction and you get some doubt on that assessment.
Kashimir Otoko no Baito	Posted - 2009.02.23 12:00:00 - [30] Edited by: Kashimir on 23/02/2009 12:02:10 Still haven't managed to probe down a single WH on SiSi... But I'm trying, cause this sounds waaay to good to miss out Compared to the current lvl4 mission running... Well, the fact that there is the word 'running' in that sentence seals the deal. I think a lot of mission runners will continue making Isk by lvl4s but will start spending it on wormholes.

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.