Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Eternum Praetorian
Retribution. Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 17:33:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 01/07/2009 17:34:07 I bet that title got your attention fast didn't it
But seriously . . . I'll admit that for starters, I donĘt really care what carebears do all day, and I think those who enjoy the endless epic grind should be allowed to do so. But since the majority of this forum and CCP seems to not agree with me . . .
This occurred to me . . .
In theory you could make Lv 4 missions more liken to PVP, without it actually being PVP.
1.) Give the NPCĘs (in all missions) the potential to randomly spawn all the same types of modules that players can fit. Neuts, smart bombs, remote rep. sensor damps ex.) This will create environment where you will have to pay careful attention to what is happening in every mission that you run. One time, a battleship or two might close on you and neut your cap, another (In the exact same mission) the cruisers may be setting off smart bombs when you put your drones on them. This singly addition would dramatically effect the PVE game play.
Result: PVE will become more of an intelligent act like PVP. You will need to pay better attention to what the NPCĘs are doing and when. Thusą no more easy near afk walk throughs of LV 4Ęs. If you let a known neut BS spawn steal your cap while putting your drones on a cruiser thatĘs setting off smart bombsą. your going to loose your multi-billion ISK ship.
2.) Give them something more interesting to do. Say maybeą A mission that requires a few DPS ships and a hauler. You need to haul an amount of ore between two gates, but the indy cannot survive unless it has RR from its fleet mates. The DPS ships would then have to clear the spawns as they go, while engaging in RR with their corp mate in the inty (something typically associated with only PVP. )
Result: Rewarding people to work as a group (and forcing them to do so in some instances) will help make stronger corporations and less of a division between those who have a clue about PVP and those who have none whatsoever.
Now I am not going to pretend like I have got it all figured out. But ideas like these would better EVE as a whole, while not inspiring an exodus of eMO-raging-quitting Carebears. Anyone who likes to pvp in mission hubs like amarr or jita knows that moving LV 4Ęs to low sec is a dumb idea. Those systems, stations and gates would be camped and scanned 23/7, that suggestion is simply not viable period. As fun as that may be for pirates.
Also . . . why lower the bounties and drop rates in the name of all that risk VS reward bull**** everyone keep quoting when you can instead make the risk in LV 4Ęs = to the reward.
P.S. I didn't post this expecting an intelligent debate so flame on.
|
Jamyl TashMurkon
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 17:39:00 -
[2]
1st, We already have point 1 2nd THERE IS NO FRICKING PROBLEM YOU UTTER PILLAR !
|
Irida Mershkov
Gallente War is Bliss
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 17:41:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Jamyl TashMurkon 1st, We already have point 1 2nd THERE IS NO FRICKING PROBLEM YOU UTTER PILLAR !
Pillar?
The problem is that people can pull in ridiculous amounts of cash without any risk at all.
|
Gunnanmon
Gallente UNITED STAR SYNDICATE
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 17:41:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Jamyl TashMurkon 1st, We already have point 1
We do? Signature locked for discussing moderation. Navigator
|
Jamyl TashMurkon
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 17:43:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Irida Mershkov
Originally by: Jamyl TashMurkon 1st, We already have point 1 2nd THERE IS NO FRICKING PROBLEM YOU UTTER PILLAR !
Pillar?
The problem is that people can pull in ridiculous amounts of cash without any risk at all.
NO THAT IS NOT THE PROBLEM, THE FORUM WHINERS JUST NEED A NEW ASPECT OF THE GAME TO WHINE ABOUT,WHY THERE WERENT THESE THREADS WHEN FALCONS WERE THE THING TO WHINE ABOUT
i hate you (ingame)
|
Eternum Praetorian
Retribution. Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 17:43:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Jamyl TashMurkon 1st, We already have point 1!
No that is just an epic lack of reading comprehension
|
Gneeznow
Minmatar North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 17:45:00 -
[7]
I dont think lvl 4's in empire are a problem, people pay to play eve how they like and a safe way to make isk with friends is a form of socialising when doing lvl 4's together, grinding them on your own is a way to fund your pvp habits if you dont have the option or creativity to make isk other ways, live and let live man!
|
Joe Starbreaker
Valklear Guard
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 17:45:00 -
[8]
I say make all deadspace zones behave like 0.0. Let CONCORD patrol the asteroid belts, gates, and stations, okay, but having them instawarp to protect ships in missions is lame. If mission spaces become free-fire zones, the level 4 problem in empire would be solved very quickly.
- / buy my alt / - |
5pinDizzy
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 17:45:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian
I bet that title got your attention fast didn't it
Damn you, if I had wanted to be misled into being an audience to an attention ***** I'd have gone and surfed youtube.
|
Allen Ramses
Caldari Typo Corp
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 17:46:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Irida Mershkov
Originally by: Jamyl TashMurkon 1st, We already have point 1 2nd THERE IS NO FRICKING PROBLEM YOU UTTER PILLAR !
Pillar?
UTTER PILLAR! UTTERS NEED SUPPORT TOO!
Originally by: Irida Mershkov The problem is that people can pull in ridiculous amounts of cash without any risk at all.
Hardly. Losing a nighthawk to 8 elite amarr frigs and a dozen BSs and such is not 'without any risk at all'. 3 weeks worth of grinding can easily be lost in a matter of 45 seconds. ____________________ CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006. |
|
Eternum Praetorian
Retribution. Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 17:50:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker I say make all deadspace zones behave like 0.0. Let CONCORD patrol the asteroid belts, gates, and stations, okay, but having them instawarp to protect ships in missions is lame. If mission spaces become free-fire zones, the level 4 problem in empire would be solved very quickly.
Holy dumb idea batman...
Perhaps you need to eat more ginkgo biloba, only remedy I know of said to increasing brain power.
|
Kiri Serrensun
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 17:52:00 -
[12]
Point one seems a great idea--at the very least, the AI needs to be better than the "drown them in the blood of our dead" insano suicide NPC's we have now. What I'd really like to see gone is the need to learn two entirely different sets of tactics for PVE and PVP. If missions use the same tactics as players and have fewer better NPC's rather than a horde of idiots, then missions serve as a gentle introduction to PVP tactics and fittings. Also, I agree some degree of randomness in the mission would make them less dull.
Point 2...well, I like the idea of missions that reward bringing extra people. Right now, they're pretty much a solo activity because sharing means sharing the reward. But forcing that, (except for level 5's), not so keen. Perhaps have "you'll need a team for this" missions offered seperately to regular moneymaking ones.
|
Argent Lansing
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 18:03:00 -
[13]
Here is what the low/null crowd need to understand about carebears. For a while, running l4's is a kind of progression game of both training skills and isk to keep upgrading to a better mission ship. This progression is fun during the process because you keep seeing your dps improve, your mission time go down and profits go up. In essence, this is "the game" for the carebear. PvP is not part of that game for the carebear.
By the time you get to the later stages of this progression, your ship is fitted with extremely expensive modules yet is gimpy in a PvP scenario. Going into low/null sec to run missions is a exercise in stupidity. Asking CCP to do anything that pushes a mission runner into PvP will just make that person get frustrated with the part of the game they are playing and leave.
If you want to solve this perceived problem, one or more of the following would be necessary: 1) Make mission ships more disposable (ie: annoyance impact on your wallet, not devastating impact on wallet) 2) Alter missions to essentially require PvP fittings so that missioning in lowsec and encounting other players would be less of a gimp scenario. (ie: let warp core stabs actually negate NPC mission targets warb scrambling/disrupting). 3) Provide mechanisms whereby a player pirate that scans down a mission runner in lowsec will be at a disadvantage. Perhaps some kind of buff the mission runner gets only in the matching mission deadspace that the scanners will lack.
The point here is that some of us carbears would go into lowsec to mission if we felt there was at least some bit of a level playing field. Unfortunately, suicide will never be a viable option.
Lowsec players should keep in mind that all the juicy 1bil+ faction mods that are farmed from low/nullsec are purchased by mission runners, so all that farmed isk ends up in the hands of low/nullsec players anyway.
|
Niccolado Starwalker
Shadow Templars
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 18:14:00 -
[14]
What if we ditch this whol risk vs reward thought on the dung where it belongs?
And instead let us introduce a new formula:
Risk + time investment / reward
So not just should the risk involved being considered when it comes to paying out reward, but also the time invested into it?
have to admit I am tired of people yelling do this do that! Except ofcourse that most people who do just that usually have a private agenda of their own.
Why not accept this is also a game? Its not a weeding school for kamikaze pilots, where those who should remain are the most steadfast and the most loyal till death!
Originally by: Dianabolic Your tears are absolutely divine, like a fine fine wine, rolling down your cheeks until they flow down the river of LOL |
Cory Sopapilla
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 18:14:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Argent Lansing 3) Provide mechanisms whereby a player pirate that scans down a mission runner in lowsec will be at a disadvantage. Perhaps some kind of buff the mission runner gets only in the matching mission deadspace that the scanners will lack.
Instant aggro against the bigger threat that just warped in sort of like in WHs but without firing on the NPC. Having the aggro of the entire room while webbed, scrammed, and tank partially gone already is a handicap in itself when scanned down. I think it'd be funny to see a suicide ganker get warp scrammed and would probably be more likely to mission in low-sec for lol's.
|
Kane Starkiller
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 18:23:00 -
[16]
Convince the people who make more money than mission runners into lowsec. When the traders and scammers go low, mish runners will soon follow
|
Bonny Lee
Caldari The Guardian Agency Guardian Federation
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 18:24:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker
What if we ditch this whol risk vs reward thought on the dung where it belongs?
And instead let us introduce a new formula:
Risk + time investment / reward
This scenario wouldnt change anything for lvl4... it has the best reward in the shortest amount of time... so it would be worse for you :p
|
Kahega Amielden
Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 18:26:00 -
[18]
Quote: 1) Make mission ships more disposable (ie: annoyance impact on your wallet, not devastating impact on wallet)
Already exists. You can run L4s with a t2-fit BS. Hell, probably could do it with the right T1 fit.
Quote: 2) Alter missions to essentially require PvP fittings so that missioning in lowsec and encounting other players would be less of a gimp scenario. (ie: let warp core stabs actually negate NPC mission targets warb scrambling/disrupting).
A PVP fitting would be unlikely to save you. You already have the tools to avoid a fight. D-scan can ALWAYS find their probes before they can find you.
Quote: 3) Provide mechanisms whereby a player pirate that scans down a mission runner in lowsec will be at a disadvantage. Perhaps some kind of buff the mission runner gets only in the matching mission deadspace that the scanners will lack.
]
A missionrunner shouldn't be rewarded for sitting with his thumb up his ass and not paying attention. He should be rewarded for paying attention and actively looking for threats to avoid. This already exists via local and Dscan.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 18:26:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Jamyl TashMurkon
Originally by: Irida Mershkov
Originally by: Jamyl TashMurkon 1st, We already have point 1 2nd THERE IS NO FRICKING PROBLEM YOU UTTER PILLAR !
Pillar?
The problem is that people can pull in ridiculous amounts of cash without any risk at all.
NO THAT IS NOT THE PROBLEM, THE FORUM WHINERS JUST NEED A NEW ASPECT OF THE GAME TO WHINE ABOUT,WHY THERE WERENT THESE THREADS WHEN FALCONS WERE THE THING TO WHINE ABOUT
i hate you (ingame)
Oh, but there ....were ....
|
Frozen Fallout
Gallente Mecha Enterprises Group
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 18:27:00 -
[20]
I love how everyone has ideas on how to make this game better.
Really I do. I also find some of the ideas hilarious more then helpful.
Also there's a section on this Forum called Features and Ideas Discussion where real discussion on these idea's (or Jokes) should be openly discussed.
Thank you for your time Frozen Fallout
CCP gave my body back... wonder what I should do with my collection. |
|
Niccolado Starwalker
Shadow Templars
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 18:28:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Bonny Lee
Originally by: Niccolado Starwalker
What if we ditch this whol risk vs reward thought on the dung where it belongs?
And instead let us introduce a new formula:
Risk + time investment / reward
This scenario wouldnt change anything for lvl4... it has the best reward in the shortest amount of time... so it would be worse for you :p
Not if you consider todays standard to be the norm.
Originally by: Dianabolic Your tears are absolutely divine, like a fine fine wine, rolling down your cheeks until they flow down the river of LOL |
Kyra Felann
Gallente Noctis Fleet Technologies
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 19:55:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Kyra Felann on 01/07/2009 19:58:51 I agree with both of your points, with the addition of improved AI for all NPCs, not just sleepers.
Missions should be interesting and fun, like PvP combat, instead of a session of harvesting goodie-bags. Ideally, fighting NPCs should be almost as interesting and fun as fighting players.
As it is, I find missions at least as boring as mining. They're really quite similar--NPCs just happen to be mobile and able to shoot back, although they're almost as mindless as asteroids and not much more of a threat to a properly set up ship.
As it is, mission-running is the profitable activity I can do, yet I can't muster the patience to do more than one a night at the most, despite how lucrative they are. Usually each by the time I finish a level 4 mission, I'm regretting accepting it and feeling like swearing off missions forever.
When someone can literally go AFK while in a level 4 mission (as I can do in my Dominix), something is wrong with missions and NPCs.
|
Joiske
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 20:35:00 -
[23]
my bet on this is.. the majority of 'carebears' dont bother to read the forums, so for anyone to say that the majority of non carebears think there should be a change to lev 4's ... god damn this subject is so repetitive, no wonder the MAJORITY of eve never bothers to read the forums period... hey i bet a large number of potential eve subscribers are lost due to the minority of prats that post utter crap on eve -o ... jeez...
so .. lev 4's are fine
low sec is fine
0.0 needs a buff ....
pirates need to grow balls and find targets in 0.0 if there isnt enough targets in low sec ....
|
Sun Clausewitz
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 20:41:00 -
[24]
level 4's need a reduction in rewards
Here's an idea though, take that cool little sleeper AI and apply it to lvl 3 and 4 missions. Leave 1 & 2 alone for the noobies
Pick Three: Caldari/PVP/Solo/Success |
Mimi Ar'Skele
Minmatar Republic University
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 20:47:00 -
[25]
The only way to get any quantity missioners into lowsec is to provide blobbable PvE content. It's been said before -- anything else would be heinously broken or redundant from either the reward or effort standpoint. With PvP the larger your blob the smaller the risk (loss of ship) and more certain the reward (a killmail). Other than w-space PvE is solo content.
PvP in eve is mainly about hot blob on blob action -- it is, after all, a multi-player game. No amount of PvE will be a gentle introduction to PvP without involving blob and metagaming techniques: baiting, logonski, logoffski, OOG comms and forums, camping, alt scouting and so on. I'm not sure how to work station tanking into the PvE mix either.
Look at FW. It's eminently blobbable. It got people into lowsec, at least while it was shiny. Heck, even the elite PvPers from the alliance formerly known as bob are doing it. All it's missing is the reward piece.
|
Karentaki
Gallente Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 20:52:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Karentaki on 01/07/2009 20:52:37
Originally by: Jamyl TashMurkon
Originally by: Irida Mershkov
Originally by: Jamyl TashMurkon 1st, We already have point 1 2nd THERE IS NO FRICKING PROBLEM YOU UTTER PILLAR !
Pillar?
The problem is that people can pull in ridiculous amounts of cash without any risk at all.
NO THAT IS NOT THE PROBLEM, THE FORUM WHINERS JUST NEED A NEW ASPECT OF THE GAME TO WHINE ABOUT,WHY THERE WERENT THESE THREADS WHEN FALCONS WERE THE THING TO WHINE ABOUT
i hate you (ingame)
I, TOO, CAN SPAM IN CAPS! LOOK HOW COOL I AM!
As for the topic at hand, it isn't that we care what other people do. It isn't that we want to gank you - In fact the alliance I'm in is anti-pirate. It isn't that we are jealous - anyone can run missions. It isn't that we think your play style is inferior - EVE is meant to be a sandbox. It's that we dislike the fact that farming L4 missions can earn more isk than a Dysprosium moon.
The issue is simple market dynamics. An item is only worth what people are willing to pay for it, and in any normal market this will be a reasonable price representative of how much money the average person has available, how easy to obtain the item is, and how useful it is. The problem occurs when L4 missions are injecting massive quantities of ISK, T1 modules (meta 0-4), and faction items from the LP store, while at the same time the mission runners are buying up huge quantities of a very limited item set, especially faction BS's, active tanking modules, cap modules, and large weapons. No matter how you look at it, when you have 10-20% of the player base (estimate) running L4 missions every day, this is going to seriously imbalance the markets:
The prices of everything on average go up due to the extra isk (inflation). The prices of T1 and meta items go down. The prices of minerals, especially high-ends such as those found in lowsec and 0.0, go down. The prices of most faction items go down. The prices of many officer items go up.
Now, read through that list, and consider some of the problems in eve currently:
Very high trit price - low price of other 'rarer' minerals, making mining in all but the best 0.0 unprofitable. T1 manufacturing is mostly unprofitable. Massive inflation.
See any similarities?
Of course I'm not suggesting missions are solely to blame, but I think it would be a good step forward if CCP rebalanced missions to bring them more in line with other aspects of the game. It's stupid that someone making 5 mill an hour mining in highsec should have their profits cut by someone making 30 mill an hour doing a completely different activity.
Quote:
EVE is like a sandbox with landmines. Deal with it.
|
Bistot Kid
The First Thing You'll Ever See
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 21:36:00 -
[27]
A fairly casual player speaks. If I can't make some relatively straightforward ISK in high sec, how am I going to finance PvP ship losses? -------------------- What? Me Worry? -------------------- |
Cat Molina
Minmatar Intransigent
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 21:55:00 -
[28]
Again? We're doing this again?
A small and vocal (but rather stupid) group simply cannot accept that not everyone in this game plays the way they think they should.
Open your map and set to show population. Now... where are the most populated systems? Right... in Empire. Not in 0.0 and not in low-sec (where I live). Most paying accounts... erm... I mean players, are in Empire.
Now... who do you think CCP wants to please the very, very most? The few, or the many?
It's a business people. Get it through your thick skulls. A business... not your perfect little universe, not your fantasy f**king getaway where you can blob up some killmails and feel good about yourself.
Good grief.
|
Passageway
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 21:55:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker I say make all deadspace zones behave like 0.0. Let CONCORD patrol the asteroid belts, gates, and stations, okay, but having them instawarp to protect ships in missions is lame. If mission spaces become free-fire zones, the level 4 problem in empire would be solved very quickly.
Frankly, as a previous poster has said, where exactly is the "problem" in high sec. A bit of history: I spent my entire first year in 0.0, where I learned a huge amount about the game, ad met some great people. I left because I didn't have the time to commit to any-hour alliance operations, and wanted to play the GAME on my own terms. This is an argument I hear from low sec pirates and ninja salvagers all the time, and it's a perfectly valid one.
The fact is that everyone who plays the game in their own way contributes to the Eve universe. Whether you PvP in 0.0, mine, run missions or work the market, you're always interacting with other players. I know I love talking to other players in corp/local, helping out etc, but at the moment, I'm a confirmed mission runner.
I guess my point is, that by trying to force people to play YOUR game, you've forgotten that it is a game, and that those "carebears" are as much a part of it as you are. Try to make everything like 0.0 and you'll just lose the casual players who are (from CCP's point of view) paying as much for the game as you are.
Having said that, I agree with your suggestion that mission AI and variety (such as escorting a hauler, although not necessarily player-piloted) would be a good thing.
|
Shidhe
Minmatar The Babylon5 Consortuim
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 22:16:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Shidhe on 01/07/2009 22:17:51 Dont nerf high sec, boost low sec... Unfortunately too many people just want to have easy kills of marauders using the new easier scanning methods - it aint going to happen as carebears are not completely dumb.
Now more interesting missions - even care bears might accept a higher death rate for a bit more spice in life.
It would be really interesting to see stats for number of missions by level done in low sec (done, not given by agent in low sec). I suspect that it would not be large. Getting more people to low sec is not so easy. The easiest way would be to boost low sec industry by fixing the prom/dyspro market manipulation, but that doesnt make such a catchy pirate whine.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |