Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Mr DXV
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 17:49:00 -
[181]
I am one of those unconventional players in Eve, since the only thing I do is run missions, something a lot of players consider to be the most boring aspect of the game. But what can I say, I enjoy doing them; the predictable (if you prepare right) but still dangerous nature (since you are facing potentially scores of rats) of missions appeal to me. I am still not at that stage where I can breeze through missions, bacause my SP aren't that high yet. I have spent a large portion of my time trying out almost every T1 battleship of every race to see which I one I enjoyed the most, which is why currently I am not well skilled any of the race's battleships. What I am now engaged in is a quest to become the ultimate mission runner, something I am long way off from becoming. And as such, I am not bored of missions yet, but I may become bored in the long run. I I ever get bored of doing them, I will think of something else to do.
So I love doing missions, but if high-sec level 4 missions are really ruining or unbalancing the game as some people claim, than I guess CCP has to do something. But after reading all the comments, I still feel like moving level 4s to low-sec is a bad idea, because your PvE ship doesn't stand a chance against a group of PvP fitted pirates. And it doesn't matter if you are really skilled, intelligent, or experienced, it still doesn't change the fact that your ill-fitted ship (in terms of PvP) that is being warp-scrambled isn't going to last very long against the pirates. Sure, you can try to make a hybrid PvE/PvP setup, but that just going to mean that your ship will be mediocre in both fields. So to me moving level 4s to low-sec will ruin level 4s for a lot of people, which I guess solves some of the problem by making sure very few people do them.
But there has got to be a way to solve the problem without ruining the main motivating factor for playing the game for a lot of players. And yes, as long as you don't introduce the element of competation into missions, it will always stand out from the rest of the aspects of the game, and be perceived as something unfair by some players. But how do you really introduce the element of competation into an aspect of the game that is inherently PvE? Nerfing the rewards involved with level 4s doesn't solve the problem, because there is still no element of competation. And yes, I too dislike ninja-salvagers, but if you don't shoot them first, they pose no threat to you, they just reduce your overall profit (profit reduction can range from negligable to annoyingly high). Lowering or removing bounties? That would almost ruin level 4 mission running, and still not add an element of competation. Putting a collective quota on the number missions an agent hands out? Maybe. In the end I still haven't seen a good way to bring competation into level high-sec level 4s, which may the reason why CCP has so far left them alone, because they just couldn't figure out how the change the high-sec level 4 mechanic wouldn't actually ruining it.
|
Shaun Klaroh
Caldari The Report Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 17:54:00 -
[182]
Edited by: Shaun Klaroh on 27/05/2009 17:54:28 I think it'll be a poor decision if it ends up with all Level IV missions being shifted to low-sec. I'll outline my rules of engagement, and what runs through my mind when I am faced with entering low-sec.
---- Stay 0.5 or higher at all times.
I'm not going to be misguided to the point where I think I can hold a candle to any decent pirate holding up at the low-sec systems I'd be working in. If the loss of a ship is likely to result in the loss of over 40% of my current value, there's a reason why I won't poke my head in there. Especially since it would also endanger a good set of costly implants just the same. I won't go there, because I'm not ready to go there yet, and trying to force me out there while I'm frankly just waiting on training skills won't make me any happier.
The current skill training system favors a "Mission/Mine/Pirate/Trade/Research while you wait" approach, and with skills or skill trees that can take 20-30 days, you'll end up with players wondering what the point of paying for a lack of hi-sec objectives would be.
We need to consider beyond just "we need people in low-sec" and into what will this do to the overall playerbase?
-----
Quote: "Are these people prisoners?" Arkhan asked.
"Not at all," Melak replied. "They're free to run and get shot any time they like."
|
lollerwaffle
Sileo In Pacis The Space P0lice
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 17:58:00 -
[183]
Originally by: Essence Praetor --Towards the end of the Nanonerf most intelligent people agreed it needed to be done. They didn't all like how it was implemented but they agreed.
--ECM nerf . . . no one is complying that Falons are now grossly under powered now, and now we have the rook
This is hotly debated, to many people disagree, CCP would be stupid to EVER do something like that.
What is this in context of? I don't really understand sorry.
Originally by: Essence Praetor So miss lollerwaffle of The Space P0lice, you and people like you can take your Epeen and just float and sputter. Not gonna happen the way you want it to. And yes you can save this post and try and throw it im my face many years from now when there STILL will be level 4's in Empire. Even if they change it a bit, they will NEVER change it much.
What's with your obsession with epeen? At which point did I start waving my epeen about? Why do you keep bringing it up? If you've actually followed the thread were you left off a bit you'll see that it's been about lack of competition in that aspect of EVE, but it's cool maybe it's a problem with my reading comprehension again. Also you never really elaborated which bit I needed to read twice etc, picking up from where we left off. Also you seem to think that I would actually care enough about who you are to remember to throw this post back at you if CCP decide to make a change. I'm sorry, I would in all honesty but I have a pretty bad memory .
Originally by: Essence Praetor hey look --->
This buds for you.
Unfortunately, throwing insults about or screaming fail all the time doesn't really lend strength to your argument, not does it give your post any meaningful content. Your first post that I replied to was fairly OK-ish but it has degenerated into meaningless drivel by now. You need to pick up the pace son.
Also, irony is calling someone else fail and failing at spelling and punctuation (Oh wait I forgot you don't understand what irony/subtlety/sarcasm are). Bolded so you know what i mean. Does that imply the smilie after or before buds for me? And how does it do it? I wasn't aware it was a flower. Does it also bloom after?
|
Essence Praetor
Retribution. Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:02:00 -
[184]
Try reading it all again. You may catch a clue this time
So about that question I was asking?
Anyone?
Or you just going to beat the drums of your personal view of how EVE should be played. And how its player base should spend its time?
|
Fionnghuala Hue
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:03:00 -
[185]
I just Find it funny that people are Wanting to move Lvl 4 Missions to lowsec... I Sure as Heck aint gana go out there. Why would anyone? Ill just run Lvl 3's, Mine, and Trade. Then we will hear nothing but make Jita low sec Or move lvl 3 missions ect. News flash to most Pvpers, We dont wana play with you.
|
BharkKoum Zeer
Gallente Amarr Empire Research Copr
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:11:00 -
[186]
It is so gratifying to hear the pirates to be so selflessly trying to get the playerbase to come into the low security systems. I am sure they will be happy to await us at the gates to "escort us" to our favorite level 4 agent through the cloning express. Please do not be so kind and accomodating dear pirates since in your kindness you have killed the golden goose already. If instead of gathering kill mails, you would have a regular code of ransoming players for a decent fee at least this idea of moving missions to low sec would be reasonable.
Instead you want kill mails, well, tough you are not going to get those from most of the players!!
|
lollerwaffle
Sileo In Pacis The Space P0lice
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:12:00 -
[187]
Originally by: Essence Praetor Try reading it all again. You may catch a clue this time
So about that question I was asking?
Anyone?
Or you just going to beat the drums of your personal view of how EVE should be played. And how its player base should spend its time?
How about you post whatever it is I'm supposed to 'catch a clue'? Wouldn't that solve your problem if you were genuinely interested in getting an answer? Also what question were you asking?
This btw, ladies and gentlemen, is an example of someone who can't be bothered to read and makes posts with no reak arguments or contents. However, this might be attributed to differences in age, and as such is not a fault of the poster. Quoting your own posts repeatedly thinking it adds emphasis is a measure of how well you can present and argument. What's worse is getting called out on it and trying to cover it up with a 'it was on purpose'. Unfortunately that concept's been done before in the form of 'I didn't want that ship/moon/pos/whatever anyway'.
|
Essence Praetor
Retribution. Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:15:00 -
[188]
Originally by: Essence Praetor
Originally by: RedSplat
Originally by: Max Tux from what i can see, people want level 4's moved to low sec mainly so they can have more people to kill, they will not be good fights they will mainly be ganks.
this is a poor excuse to want to change the main income on many players, maybe reduce the loot drops, yes,but the idea of forcing people into low sec won't work.
People want Level 4's moved to Lowsec 'cause of imbalanced risk vs reward.
Personally, i want only the Lowest quality lvl 4's to be in Highsec- if you want complete safety then you should have a vastly reduced income to what lvl 4's currently churn out.
Oh here is a question?
What does a Carebear do with 1B ISK that he earned in one week that he cant do with 1B ISK it took him two 2 or 3 weeks to earn? What have you achieved besides futzing up the market?
Someones not reading . . .
|
lollerwaffle
Sileo In Pacis The Space P0lice
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:20:00 -
[189]
Originally by: Mr DXV )*snip*
Well said. That is where the crux of the problem lies. Missions are and always have been a form of income. However, they have no competitive element to them making them stick out like a sore thumb. Moving them to lowsec would not solve this problem, and the only possible implementation would be making mission pools a commonly shared finite resource. But then again there lies the problem of making it (sort of) fair to everyone, otherwise people in different timezones like the US would not have any missions left to them when they logged on in their primetime. An alternative would be more mission pool reseeding, but too much of this would create exactly the same situation as we have now.
|
Opera Noir
Amarr State Protectorate
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:21:00 -
[190]
Edited by: Opera Noir on 27/05/2009 18:23:09
Originally by: Mr DXV Stuff
I think the majority only want to see them balanced out in regard to security status. As such the first reaction is gonna be "move them to low sec and done." Personally I don't see a need for that I think there are other far more efficient ways to entice (not force) people into low sec.
First, the sec status could apply a simple multiplier modifier of the bounties, meaning the higher the sec you killed the bounty in the low3er the reward (which makes sense cause there are a lot more people gunning for them so less enticement would be need for the same result. In such a case the lvl 5 missions run in .5 space would have bounties worth half as much as those run in .1 . Or something along those lines anyways, the details could be worked out.
The second enticement could be, as many have suggested, making agent rewards worthwhile. This has to be done as far as Im concerned in the first place, but if it were done and those agents in low sec were worth that much more it would provide additional motive for running missions in low sec. Agent quality also may be able to be played around with (I have no idea if it already works like this or not), in other words a quality 0 agent in low sec could be equivalent to a level 20 in high sec.
Naturally this would make running missions in low sec a lot more profitable then running em in high sec, in addition it would also balance the rest of the missions along with it. Meaning people would not just stop running lvl 4s and move to lvl 3's.
People should be able to run missions and make money safely in high sec, but the real profit should be where the risk is greater.
edit- spelling
|
|
Essence Praetor
Retribution. Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:29:00 -
[191]
well?
|
lollerwaffle
Sileo In Pacis The Space P0lice
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:31:00 -
[192]
Originally by: Essence Praetor
Originally by: Essence Praetor
Originally by: RedSplat
Originally by: Max Tux from what i can see, people want level 4's moved to low sec mainly so they can have more people to kill, they will not be good fights they will mainly be ganks.
this is a poor excuse to want to change the main income on many players, maybe reduce the loot drops, yes,but the idea of forcing people into low sec won't work.
People want Level 4's moved to Lowsec 'cause of imbalanced risk vs reward.
Personally, i want only the Lowest quality lvl 4's to be in Highsec- if you want complete safety then you should have a vastly reduced income to what lvl 4's currently churn out.
Oh here is a question?
What does a Carebear do with 1B ISK that he earned in one week that he cant do with 1B ISK it took him two 2 or 3 weeks to earn? What have you achieved besides futzing up the market?
Someones not reading . . .
Your sentence makes no grammatical sense due to blatant disregard for the proper usage of 'does' and 'can' as well as sentence structure. If I choose to interpret that as:
What can a carebear do with 1bil isk that he earned in 1 week, that he can't do if it took him 2 or 3 weeks to earn that same amount?
There are various possible answers to that question: Buy a carrier every week (pointless plus the carebear won't be in lowsec so he can't use it)
Afford to go out and PVP more often (Although earning 1 bil every 2 or 3 weeks is more than enough money to PVP, unless he really sucks and insists on flying expensive stuff while he learns. However this point is still moot since the carebear would not want to PVP with his isk anyway)
Create a new alliance every week (Again, a bit pointless)
In short, I have no real idea since I don't really know what carebears do with all the isk they make anyway besides hoarding it and feeling happy everything some internet spaceship game number goes up.
How about you enlighten us?
|
lollerwaffle
Sileo In Pacis The Space P0lice
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:32:00 -
[193]
Originally by: Essence Praetor well?
I heard patience is a virtue, and typing out coherent posts takes more time than single word replys.
|
lollerwaffle
Sileo In Pacis The Space P0lice
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:33:00 -
[194]
Edited by: lollerwaffle on 27/05/2009 18:33:23 Hurry up and tell us EP
posted this forgeting he doesn't understand sarcasm. I fail :(
|
lollerwaffle
Sileo In Pacis The Space P0lice
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:37:00 -
[195]
Originally by: Opera Noir Edited by: Opera Noir on 27/05/2009 18:23:09
Originally by: Mr DXV Stuff
I think the majority only want to see them balanced out in regard to security status. As such the first reaction is gonna be "move them to low sec and done." Personally I don't see a need for that I think there are other far more efficient ways to entice (not force) people into low sec.
First, the sec status could apply a simple multiplier modifier of the bounties, meaning the higher the sec you killed the bounty in the low3er the reward (which makes sense cause there are a lot more people gunning for them so less enticement would be need for the same result. In such a case the lvl 5 missions run in .5 space would have bounties worth half as much as those run in .1 . Or something along those lines anyways, the details could be worked out.
The second enticement could be, as many have suggested, making agent rewards worthwhile. This has to be done as far as Im concerned in the first place, but if it were done and those agents in low sec were worth that much more it would provide additional motive for running missions in low sec. Agent quality also may be able to be played around with (I have no idea if it already works like this or not), in other words a quality 0 agent in low sec could be equivalent to a level 20 in high sec.
Naturally this would make running missions in low sec a lot more profitable then running em in high sec, in addition it would also balance the rest of the missions along with it. Meaning people would not just stop running lvl 4s and move to lvl 3's.
People should be able to run missions and make money safely in high sec, but the real profit should be where the risk is greater.
edit- spelling
That is a good suggestion which boils down to boosting lowsec rewards in relation to hisec. However, to do that, you'd have to be careful not to make it more rewarding than 0.0, which is where all the best rewards should be (even though they're not really atm)
Highsec pay out would have to be adjusted accordingly as well.
I think they main content of anyone who's been following the last few pages is that level 4's currently (and missions by default) are isk generators which are not subject to the same things that govern the rest of eve, namely lack of any real risk or competition.
|
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:46:00 -
[196]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Rhinanna No there aren't. There is no set-up that can do every mission like this. Quite a few missions have Nos/Neut that whips out your tank pretty quick, even with a passive tank as they turn your hardeners off.
WC4 sansha side can easily break 1000 dps/second (before resists) shield tank. A lot of rats react fairly randomly to drones in particular.
Nos/neuts in L4s are a nuisance, not a threat to well-set up ship. And no, WC4 does not do 1000dps/są although it might reach 1000dpsą
Theres more than a couple of missions where its more than a nuisance. With 3x CFC||s, 3xCCCs I didn't have enough regen left to perma run a L shield booster, let alone a XL which would what have been needed to properly tank that amount of damage (EM/Thermal) in one BR mission, had 6+ nosing BS'es spawn simultaniously. If I hadn't of been careful and researched the mission first that one would have easily dumped my Cap to fairly close to zero leave me in a 'run baby run' situation :)
Fortunatly I have a lot of DPS so they didn't last long enough to get my cap down enough to break the tank but it wouldn't have taken much. It doesn't help that the missions with any sort of a challenge seem to only pop up once in a blue moon. I really enjoyed that mission ;) ąsorry, it's a pet niggle of mine.
|
Andrest Disch
Amarr Letiferi Praedones
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:47:00 -
[197]
Originally by: Essence Praetor
Oh here is a question?
What does a Carebear do with 1B ISK that he earned in one week that he cant do with 1B ISK it took him two 2 or 3 weeks to earn? What have you achieved besides futzing up the market?
Using this logic I should be able to go from -10 to 0.0 sec status by killing one rat, I mean no one else is affected right?
No. It's not like that because it would be unfair. Just like low-risk isk-printing missions are unfair. |
Essence Praetor
Retribution. Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:51:00 -
[198]
Edited by: Essence Praetor on 27/05/2009 18:53:07 The I's have it.
You have no clue. You are trying to enact change and have no real idea about what it is your trying to change. Thus any implementation could only end in folly
The point is this. I will spell it out very clearly so you wont get confused again.
Point 1.) IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE CAREBEAR DOES WITH IT. All that matters is that he has a 1B isk wallet. Being that he is a Carebears and he will sit at roids endlessly and grind missions endlessly (and he will like doing it.) It is natural for a massive wallet to culminate over time.
Thus: It don't matter how long it takes them to get 1B isk. Be it 1 week or 3 weeks. You achieve exactly squat.
Point 2:) (read closely waffle) They will indeed grind LV 3 missions in Empire if need be. Or they will all skill for perfect hulks and mine Empire dry. They will also emo quit. They vast majority of the carebear player base will not do what you want them to do (as you picture it perfectly in your mind)
Out come: What you have achieved however is royally screwed the market. With out the massive base of carebears having significant funds to throw around, you leave the market to be dictated solely by the megacorps in 0.0. Not to mention tied to whatever is going on there on any given Sunday.
This is why I keep throwing up fail signs. You have no idea about what you are suggesting.
Eventually when the market stabilizes we would end up with more hulks and Orca's in empire then there are CNR's now. Carebears will still be rich, you still wont be able to kill them unless you gank them, and the EVE player base would drop dramatically.
So what happens then to our beloved PVP in New Eden? Care to take a guess on that one?
|
Andrest Disch
Amarr Letiferi Praedones
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:55:00 -
[199]
Originally by: Essence Praetor
aloada spaced out words
Oh no, the "mega corps" are coming to get us.
I honestly don't see the bad side in having more corps taking risks to mine in lower sec systems to manufacture stuff. Also, good for them, if they want to grind lvl 3s they can. Everyone just wants to stop people making alot of ISK in a short ammount of time for no risk. People do care about the timescale, if mission runners don't they can grind lvl 3s.
You don't seem to be making a good case against this. |
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 18:57:00 -
[200]
WTF happened with that last post! I wasn't even in the same room as the computer when it did that! :)
Wow.....
I love the way people are using one argument as to why L4 missions and are bad and then basically saying 'Well that doesn't count for trading/mining/ratting/plexing' Why are they saying that? Probably because thats how they are making their ISK. Any of those professions will earn you NEARLY as much if not more ISK/hour than running L4s in a decent ship, with a decent setup. So why change anything... If it ain't broke don't fix it.
|
|
Turin
Caldari Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 19:00:00 -
[201]
Originally by: Max Tux from what i can see, people want level 4's moved to low sec mainly so they can have more people to kill, they will not be good fights they will mainly be ganks.
this is a poor excuse to want to change the main income on many players, maybe reduce the loot drops, yes,but the idea of forcing people into low sec won't work.
WTB more whine with my EVE pls.
Seriously. We can rename it to whine online!
waaaaaaaaaa!!!!! They make to much isk!!! My poontang hurts!!! waaaaa!!!!!
|
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 19:00:00 -
[202]
Originally by: Andrest Disch Using this logic I should be able to go from -10 to 0.0 sec status by killing one rat, I mean no one else is affected right?
No. It's not like that because it would be unfair. Just like low-risk isk-printing missions are unfair.
And using your logic trading should be banned since its lower risk and has a higher rate of isk/hour......
Thanks for failing, particua lly on the stupid sec status arguement since it WOULD affect other players since you would be allowed back into to Hi-sec, no doubt to suicide gank players down to -10 again then rat back to 10 ad naeusum.
|
Essence Praetor
Retribution. Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 19:04:00 -
[203]
But seriously... in the end.
Originally by: Essence Praetor Edited by: Essence Praetor on 27/05/2009 17:06:47 /0\
Hot topic I step away from the keyboard for an hour and six pages lol
Which is point in fact . . .
--Towards the end of the Nanonerf most intelligent people agreed it needed to be done. They didn't all like how it was implemented but they agreed.
--ECM nerf . . . no one is complying that Falons are now grossly under powered now, and now we have the rook
This is hotly debated, to many people disagree, CCP would be stupid to EVER do something like that.
So miss lollerwaffle of The Space P0lice, you and people like you can take your Epeen and just float and sputter. Not gonna happen the way you want it to. And yes you can save this post and try and throw it im my face many years from now when there STILL will be level 4's in Empire. Even if they change it a bit, they will NEVER change it much.
So bleh...
This.
|
RedSplat
Heretic Army
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 19:05:00 -
[204]
Edited by: RedSplat on 27/05/2009 19:05:52 Missions are a competition free, risk free extremely lucrative income.
Level 4's are the only such source of income of this nature in the game.
Moving everything but the lowest quality least profitable level 4's to Lowsec would re-balance the inequality somewhat in a direction that is needed.
EDIT: I mean hell, even CCP think the current situation with LVL4's is a farce...
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
|
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 19:09:00 -
[205]
Edited by: Rhinanna on 27/05/2009 19:09:54
Originally by: RedSplat Missions are a competition free, risk free extremely lucrative income.
Level 4's are the only such source of income of this nature in the game.
Moving everything but the lowest quality least profitable level 4's to Lowsec would re-balance the inequality somewhat in a direction that is needed.
Thank you for repeating the same fail as people before you. Lvl 4s generate less income than a decent trader. Decent traders can often generate this risk without leaving a station.... how is that less safe than running missions? Death by boredom? Loot/Bounties/Salvage can all be stolen, just like when ratting. The deadspace areas aren't locked to anyone but the mission runner.
So no ratting, trading or mining either in hi-sec please.... or how about we just delete hi-sec, or delete concord and make everywhere lo-sec. Althrough after that was done these same whiners would be back on this forum complaining about market prices having skyrocketed, no-one to kill from the carebears all having quit e.t.c.
|
Andrest Disch
Amarr Letiferi Praedones
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 19:13:00 -
[206]
Originally by: Rhinanna
And using your logic trading should be banned since its lower risk and has a higher rate of isk/hour......
Thanks for failing, particua lly on the stupid sec status arguement since it WOULD affect other players since you would be allowed back into to Hi-sec, no doubt to suicide gank players down to -10 again then rat back to 10 ad naeusum.
Firstly, I don't understand how you could possibly go about measuring trading in isk per hour.
Secondly, if you don't see the implications of whoever I'm fighting having access to a fountain of isk that is lvl 4s I don't think I can take you seriously. The idea that people making loads of isk off lvl 4s in total safety doesn't affect anyone is completely stupid.
Also, how come every other post in this topic contains the word "fail"? (just filling the quota) |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 19:13:00 -
[207]
Originally by: Rhinanna Edited by: Rhinanna on 27/05/2009 19:09:54
Originally by: RedSplat Missions are a competition free, risk free extremely lucrative income.
Level 4's are the only such source of income of this nature in the game.
Moving everything but the lowest quality least profitable level 4's to Lowsec would re-balance the inequality somewhat in a direction that is needed.
Thank you for repeating the same fail as people before you. Lvl 4s generate less income than a decent trader. Decent traders can often generate this risk without leaving a station.... how is that less safe than running missions?
because you can't lose ISK trading right?
|
Tippia
Raddick Explorations Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 19:19:00 -
[208]
Originally by: Rhinanna Lvl 4s generate less income than a decent trader.
Irrelevant, for reasons already explained.
Quote: Decent traders can often generate this risk without leaving a station.... how is that less safe than running missions? Death by boredom?
Has already been explained.
Quote: Loot/Bounties/Salvage can all be stolen, just like when ratting.
Doesn't incur a loss of ISK — only lowers your earning, as previously explained. ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki |
Shaun Klaroh
Caldari The Report Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 19:43:00 -
[209]
No one has rebutted the idea of limiting available Level IV missions in the systems they are in at the time. Is it safe to assume that people agree with the idea, or people are just ignoring each other, causing this circular conversation to continue over and over. -----
Quote: "Are these people prisoners?" Arkhan asked.
"Not at all," Melak replied. "They're free to run and get shot any time they like."
|
Arec Bardwin
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 19:46:00 -
[210]
Some people really like their horse meat tender
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |