I would have liked to post this in one of the many threads on the old forum discussing this, but since we start on a clean slate, I'll have to start a new thread.

There can only be one motivation behind the removal of agent quality and that is to dumb the game down to a level where console SNERTS might be interested (for a short time).

It's a minor issue compared to the serious issues raised by the CSM regarding EVE Onlines future direction, dependencies to DUST 514 and that Vampire fail.

However, to me, it's a big freakin deal. Datacores seemed like a great way to earn some semi-passive income if you were interested in making the up-front investment and had the time for some seriously boring mission grinding. I made that investment in ISK and time, and my entire investment was seriously nerfed by CCP in a single release without warning.

I know that many other capsuleers feel the same about other key features that have recently been nerfed e.g. Sanctums

When are you nerfing Incursions? I'm aware that capsuleers are making 500 million - 1 BILLION in a few hours raping Incursions with coordinated fleets.

You should read the forums more often.

/snip

These things have been explained and discussed in great detail.

Agent quality was a ridiculous clustermuck that served to complicate the game unnecessarily. It also concentrated missioners into the same spot, creating havens for gankers and congested systems. It also rendered half the agents useless and discouraged travel and gameplay in a lot of systems.

Making things complicated does not mean you're making them smart.

And I farm datacores too - I'm receiving the same amount of RP I was before the agent change - what is this "nerf" you speak of? I'm asking genuinely - if I've missed a change in datacore agents I would love to know. But I just picked mine up the other day and kept on researching - nothing seemed to be different.

Datacores are no replacement for missioning - they are a long-term investment akin to putting your money into stocks, bonds, etc. It's supplemental AFK isk - and useless for funding everyday operations such as PvP. Its nice they're there, but they shouldn't be too lucrative.

Your post is a bit inconsistent - you cry foul at the "datacore nerf" and Sanctum nerf, but in the same breath ask when Incursions are being nerfed? Are you just wanting your personal taste in isk income to be protected but not others? I dont follow....

500mil-1 bil in a few hours really isn't abusive income potential. Anyone who PvP's regularly can lose isk much faster. Everytime someone finds out how to make money fast, others point the finger and demand nerfage cause of "farming". But we now see the consequences of these nerfs - unless players can sustain their pvp losses through quick isk replenishment, there is no motivation to fight, whether it be in Faction Warfare or the expanse of nullsec. The richer players are, the more fun stuff there is to blow up. Keep it flowing if you ask me.

I laughed when all the nullsec peeps cried foul over Sanctum nerfing. But than I saw how it affected them - and I feel bad. There should be a lucrative reason to compete over territory, and there is no reason in the current state. Even worse - they're coming to lowsec for lulz instead, bringing their imbalanced supercap fleets with them.

Players in Eve overall need to be more comfortable with quick, lucrative, farmable, income sources - they are simply a necessary component in the PvP ecosystem.

R&D areas and quality was a major task before investing in R&D. I enjoyed it, I'm just sorry that I never get a chance to see if I made the right decisions.

Aside from a revamped New Player Experience, which was a good thing, haven't seen any of this alleged "dumbing down." Agent quality was useless and simply forced players into a small number of mission hubs.

Incursions actually require perhaps the most real skill out of all other PvE content, and the payouts are quite decent considering the amount of effort required.

The maximum sustained income from an Incursion is approximately 100M ISK per hour. That assumes (1) no competition for sites, (2) shiny and high-dps ships like Nightmares, Machariels and Vindicators, and (3) no downtime. In practice, most make approximately 50-60M per hour on a good Incursion run, since incursion systems usually have more pilots than sites to run [aside from some sites which are an utter pain to run]. 60M is slightly less profit than running Sanctums in a carrier, no more than twice as much profit as running solo L4 missions, and about equivalent to mining ABC ores in nullsec. However, Incursion fleets are difficult to multibox solo, and the amount of ISK they can potentially add to the game economy is rather limited, unlike other PvE content.

Yet all PvE content aside from Incursions is not just soloable, but also can be mostly AFKed, even in nullsec. If a Logistics pilot in an incursion slacks off, the entire fleet can cascade in seconds, wiping out over a billion ISK in profits for some pilots. So Incursions are hardly "dumbed down" PvE relative to missions and anomalies. At the same time, Incursions encourage socialization and player interaction, which helps maintain player investment in the game.

Datacores are not "hard." They simply require one to grind standing, and provide easy, passive, and risk-free income once the grind is done for absolutely no effort. There's nothing "smart" about datacore farming.

I'm not aware that Sanctums have been made any easier. The drone hordes which I occasionally run in a cheap laser Dominix [even without bonuses, lasers do more dps against drones than hybrids] are exactly the way they were last year.

I'm still ******* pissed off about the Agent quality nerf though - it was fun to plan it out, now it just meh

When are you nerfing Incursions? I'm aware that capsuleers are making 500 million - 1 BILLION in a few hours raping Incursions with coordinated fleets.

R&D agents where never hard or complicated, all you have to do is figure out which cores you want(for profit or invention) and then grind standing like a mad man.

Repetitious is not hard, it just mind numbing. to me repetition is a sign of failure, in this case a failure in game design....which is why i had 3 chars with l4 R&D agent...

Ah yes, sorry I guess it came across different than I intended.

What I meant to say is, I've read multiple well thought out explanations on why the agent changes were good.
That is not to say that we would not need a new thread to continue discussing it, as opposed to a necro on an old thread.

i.e. keep up with the times man! You would already be pleased with the agent changes if you had read about them as they hit the dev blogs and people got all interested in discussing the changes for a week or two!

I may rather dislike these forums anymore but I still come here to stay current with what's what in EVE, there are still a few rational posters left, whether I personally agree with some of their points or philosophies or not.

But yes, reducing the largely illogical clutter of agent quality, mission types, divisions, and frequencies of mission handouts was a fair step in the right direction.

Who wants to be handed a mining mission from a security agent anyways?

^^ This.

Quality was not difficult or complicated. It was just an artificial and ineffectual hurdle in the agent level progression. It was so simple that everyone came to the same conclusion, and all it did was make large clusters and present people with obvious non-options - a classic Hobson's choice.

Now, without that overriding conforming factor, you can start to make some actual choices based on what you need - a good mission pool with the agent; a good agent clustering; close access to trading hubs; low security level; a low amount of co-missioneers (who only attract gankers); etc. etc. etc.

The removal of quality did not dumb the game down -- it opened it up for som actual intelligence and choice.

u get LP from incursions and some isk

we do need an isk sink in eve, which is why wardecs cost should be 10 times the current price.

True... it is rather homogenized and lackluster now in some regard, but then when is farming for money not after you have done the same things over and over a few thousand times?

I am more thankful that I have to think about it less than before than I am disappointed that it is no longer even remotely exciting or pleasantly intricate to be honest.

PvP is exciting.
PvE is... well if I wanted it to be truly exciting, I would play a single player game where most of the events are scripted like a movie so I can live vicariously through the plot twists and whatnot.

Incursions being treated as ISK fountains are not.

^^ This.

Quality was not difficult or complicated. It was just an artificial and ineffectual hurdle in the agent level progression. It was so simple that everyone came to the same conclusion, and all it did was make large clusters and present people with obvious non-options - a classic Hobson's choice.

Now, without that overriding conforming factor, you can start to make some actual choices based on what you need - a good mission pool with the agent; a good agent clustering; close access to trading hubs; low security level; a low amount of co-missioneers (who only attract gankers); etc. etc. etc.

The removal of quality did not dumb the game down -- it opened it up for som actual intelligence and choice.

Tippia: I agree with most you say about the important issues. I do not agree with this.

What an uppity. self-righteous OP. I can't stand people that believe PC gaming is the almighty-superior way to play a game. Especially since graphics are usually the only difference, aside from the use of a controller. And if you can't use one of those, whose dumb? Granted, I've been using PCs and consoles since 1989.

Take your World of Warcraft mentality and please leave.

What an uppity. self-righteous OP. I can't stand people that believe PC gaming is the almighty-superior way to play a game. Especially since graphics are usually the only difference, aside from the use of a controller. And if you can't use one of those, whose dumb? Granted, I've been using PCs and consoles since 1989.

Take your World of Warcraft mentality and please leave.

What an uppity. self-righteous OP. I can't stand people that believe PC gaming is the almighty-superior way to play a game. Especially since graphics are usually the only difference, aside from the use of a controller. And if you can't use one of those, whose dumb? Granted, I've been using PCs and consoles since 1989.

Take your World of Warcraft mentality and please leave.

I laughed when all the nullsec peeps cried foul over Sanctum nerfing. But than I saw how it affected them - and I feel bad. There should be a lucrative reason to compete over territory, and there is no reason in the current state. Even worse - they're coming to lowsec for lulz instead, bringing their imbalanced supercap fleets with them.

an now theyre (led by Mittans of the CSM) pointing at highsec to get nerfed

Can't happen fast enough. Between ~elite PvPers~ crying about their supers getting nerfed and empire pubbies crying about highsec we are awash in the tears of the unrighteous.

THIS is why Im glad for the forum block feature. Ive been filling it up with Goons

Just to clarify, my point is that the removal of agent quality from R&D agents dumbs down the game. It is NOT just a mindless grind for standing. The price difference between datacores, faction/corp standing, the accessability of agents etc has an impact on your earning potential.

Do not listen to the "old timers" - they set this up years ago and - in general - have no ******* clue how it works today.

My OP was never about agent quality for combat missions. If the business analysts, game designers or whatever they are called cannot see the difference, they should go a little easy on the bong.

Eve needs to be practically lawndarted into the ground for it to be dumbed-down enough for me to actually be successful at it.

Eve needs to be practically lawndarted into the ground for it to be dumbed-down enough for me to actually be successful at it.

Ok. Why not?

Oh, and the features I remember from 1993 (or, really, 1995) was that imps were really nasty, black was really expensive, and firewolves were more trouble than they were worth. I'm not sure I want any of those features in EVE.

thats a very dumb idea.
its not like it is the pvp corps that sit and make isk 24/7 but rather the carebears that do, if they cant handle a little war then you should go to your npc corp and sulk tbh.

little war makes men even out of some carebears.

u get LP from incursions and some isk

we do need an isk sink in eve, which is why wardecs cost should be 10 times the current price.