EVE Search - Why carebear L4 High Sec Mission Runners (L4MRS) are bad for Eve

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Why carebear L4 High Sec Mission Runners (L4MRS) are bad for Eve

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.10.17 11:45:00 - [1] Edited by: Bellum Eternus on 17/10/2009 12:04:52 If you haven't watched the Economy Fanfest vid, I suggest you do so. Very informative. CCP banned 3k accounts in March of 2009, another 6k accounts in June of 2009 and have a current total of over 18k banned accounts (this doesn't include trial accounts) just this year in order to combat RMT. Dr.EyjoG pointed out that there are three main types of RMT account activities: mission running, macro mining and macro ratting (specifically, ratting in 0.0). Of all three of these activities mission running was the most prevalent and had the most impact overall. In fact, the difference in consumption of mining ships etc. was non existent after the mass bans while prices for things like Ravens and Cruise missiles saw dramatic changes. Negative effects RMT mission runners have on Eve as a whole, as cited by CCP: Excessive hardware useage (more CPU cycles used per account than normal) Congestion of particular systems (all mission running hubs as an example) Impacted markets for specific items Broken game balance for those items General negative impact to overall gameplay (just quoting CCP here) RMT Mission runners generate in-game behavior that is game breaking and causes excessive loads on the server. Dr. EyojG's presentation was on RMT and why it's harmful, and the majority of RMT accounts were mission running accounts. If a small number of RMT mission running accounts is harmful to Eve as a whole, then what does that say about Mission runners in general, since their population is far greater than just a few RMT accounts? Mission runners do everything an RMT account does, only without that last step: selling ISK. They perform the same actions and exhibit the same behaviors and cause the same problems and issues. Mission runners congregate at mission hubs and place undue stress on the server cluster. Mission runners generate massive numbers of NPCs that would otherwise not exist, thereby adding more stress and load to the server cluster. Mission runners generate a disproportionate need for particular items while devaluing other items with oversupply. Mission runners destroy the balance of minerals and devalue mining efforts with the oversupply of minerals from refined items. In fact, there was a spike in pyrite prices after the RMT mission runners were banned, not because they were macro mining but because mission runners were supplying so much pyrite to the market due to refining. "But CCP needs mission runners!" No, it doesn't. To quote Dr.EojG: "Eve's economy has become so big that it can easily fight off any rapid change in the parameters of the game." Translation: "All L4s could be moved to lowsec tomorrow and the Eve economy wouldn't even blink. It would stabilize in a month or two." If a few RMT mission runners are harmful game-play-wise, then surely the massive numbers of L4 highsec mission runners currently in the game are even more damaging to the game, both inside and out. -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Tier 5 Battleships
Virtuozzo The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.10.17 11:47:00 - [2] In before trollbait ..
Kweel Nakashyn shadow and cloaking Mordus Angels	Posted - 2009.10.17 11:48:00 - [3] PvPer aren't you ? More tears, it's as funny as "nerf vaga" tears Fetchez la vache ! moar(tm) < soon(tm) :(
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.10.17 11:51:00 - [4] Originally by: Kweel Nakashyn PvPer aren't you ? More tears, it's as funny as "nerf vaga" tears No tears. Some moron kept asking for reasons why L4 high sec mission runners were bad for the game, so I made a post outlining the various facts as to why they are. umad? -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Tier 5 Battleships
Burnharder	Posted - 2009.10.17 11:53:00 - [5] So, move level 4's to low sec, see more people doing level 3's in high sec. Move those to low sec too? See more people mining ice in high sec. So, move all ice to low sec? The logical conclusion of your "move earning to low sec" point of view is eventually high sec becomes empty of players, not because everyone is now in low sec, but because people who enjoy PvE content no longer bother playing Eve. I'm all for banning macros by the way, but I just think that you want to roll the servers back to 2003, when there were 6k players online (I was one of them!).
Szu Chang Gallente	Posted - 2009.10.17 11:55:00 - [6] Edited by: Szu Chang on 17/10/2009 11:56:31 As more of a miner, I can tell you that Macro mining is a big problem, but I can see the logic in the "more missioners = laggy mission hubs" that is simple However, I do say that people may want to mission, I do on ocassions, and I do PvP on occasions, just fleet ops are not always "fire fire fire" sometimes its an hour on a gate acting as scout and eyes for a passing fleet of transports or something. Though, if Mission running was moved to lowsec, I can see more whaaaaaaaaaing from the mission runners. EDIT: Person above me got it as well, they would just run lvl 3's to death
Cown Caldari Privateers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2009.10.17 11:59:00 - [7] I concur with op, move all lvl 4 into low sec. -------------------------------------------------- Welcome to my personal opinion, if you don't like it, i don't give a s***. :-)
Kweel Nakashyn shadow and cloaking Mordus Angels	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:00:00 - [8] Edited by: Kweel Nakashyn on 17/10/2009 12:05:08 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Kweel Nakashyn PvPer aren't you ? More tears, it's as funny as "nerf vaga" tears No tears. Some moron kept asking for reasons why L4 high sec mission runners were bad for the game, so I made a post outlining the various facts as to why they are. umad? Not really, soon, Eve's population will realize that Whisky's rats are even more safer to farm and you will be happy. Enyo was speaking about maccroers, I think you got it wrong with L4. 10/20m / hour is not the best rate of isk/hour/safety rate within the game I think. -edit- the only broken thing with L4 in Empire is mining vs L4. Refining L4 item bring too much minerals. Other than that, I don't see anything broken. PvPers likes to think "hey a moving thing in space, let's break it". These are PvEers guys. And they do that to get mar ships to break in pvp, I don't see why you're crying there. Go within anomalies to find unaware targets and let them these L4ers alone. Fetchez la vache ! moar(tm) < soon(tm) :(
Gsptlsnz	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:01:00 - [9] So, to paraphrase the player-relavant parts: * Misson agents are poorly distributed, with "hubs" at which mission runners naturally congragate. * The EvE economy is not significantly affected by how much missioning goes on, or where it is done. As usual you're struggling to manufacture an argument out of nothing.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:02:00 - [10] Originally by: Szu Chang Edited by: Szu Chang on 17/10/2009 11:56:31 As more of a miner, I can tell you that Macro mining is a big problem, but I can see the logic in the "more missioners = laggy mission hubs" that is simple However, I do say that people may want to mission, I do on ocassions, and I do PvP on occasions, just fleet ops are not always "fire fire fire" sometimes its an hour on a gate acting as scout and eyes for a passing fleet of transports or something. Though, if Mission running was moved to lowsec, I can see more whaaaaaaaaaing from the mission runners. EDIT: Person above me got it as well, they would just run lvl 3's to death To clarify: I'm not saying that macro mining isn't a big problem, because it is. What I am saying is that mission runners have an even greater impact on the profitability of mining than the macro miners do. Get rid of them and watch your mineral prices climb through the roof. That and the drone regions. -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Tier 5 Battleships
Nyxster	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:02:00 - [11] Originally by: Bellum Eternus confirmation bellum is hard of understanding. ROFL at irony of Bellum epic failpoast. I seem to remember you, or at least one other member of your meatsausage faction spending time trying to canbait my CNR pilot with your logi ship, so given you clearly try to profit from MR's, enjoy baiting/ganking MR's then how are you, exactly a neutral and reasonable party to discuss the pros/cons of MRs in eve. The negative effect of RMT's on eve is because 1: RMT's: grind eve 8-10 hours a day, up to 7 days a week per account, if the average RMT trader spends 45 hours a week playing eve, and the average account holder spends 15 hours a week then they are using 3 x the resources. 2: RMT's dont pay to play eve. they grind isk 24/7 and pay for every account with isk, yes, you can say that someone bought the plexes therefore someone paid at some point - but since every 1 BN isk RMT's sell to eve players deprives CCP of 3x plex sales, if the RMT is making 100m a hour/ 900mn a day then he is depriving CCP of 3 x plex sales per day and costing CCP 3 x the amount a normal player costs. 3: RMT's are grinding LP's 24/7 - by constantly selling Faction items cheap they are undermining the MR's LP/hour ratios forcing them to work longer for the same isk, therefore grinding more missions to earn whatever they need. - so CCP's argument is the RMT's by grinding 24/7 they are putting 3x the stress on the server, yet depriving CCP of 3 plex per day per account, thats why they are costing CCP money and why they banned them. NORMAL MR activity vs Fleet flights, camping, ganking et al NORMAL MR's (the average joe) dont sit grinding Missions 24/7 however much you think. most people grind x amount of isk to get some new shiny then go and do something else. you might as well say jita traders who play 0.1 isk wars on hundreds of sell orders cause too much server strain because they are constantly battering the DB with changes, stupid argument is stupid. Fleet fights cause MUCH more server strain than MR's - you never have to put up a dedicated node in Motsu or have engineers babysit dodixie all sunday because there is a huge MR blob, but countless fleet fights cause entire servers to shat themselves forcing CCP techs to reboot and reinforce them - strawman argument is fail. Canning L4 missions will do nothing other than probably cause CCP to lose a huge amount of subs from casual players, also for all us dual PVP/bears who earn our isk from L4 to pay for our PVP losses in nullsec, when we get war-fatigued out and want to kick back and carebear some L4s and cant in peace, then we will simply lapse subscriptions and do something else for that downtime. this is easily one of the most ill-informed anti-MR poast i have ever seen, at least Rells uses some idea of behaviour science to justify his bearhate, you have just pulled together a bunch of random facts to try and create a non-existant case. A* for idiot troll poasting.
Ancy Denaries Caldari The Confederate Navy Forever Unbound	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:06:00 - [12] Originally by: Bellum Eternus ...Mission runners ... place undue stress on the server cluster. RMT mission runners use more CPU cycles because of their botting, not because they are actually running missions. If not, the CPU usage / player would have REMAINED THE SAME, since every player on average would've used as much CPU. ---- The Demigodess with a Conscience - An EVE IC Blog
Dr Deadbolt Gallente	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:09:00 - [13] There is always some bellend desperately trying to convince ccp to feed their gate camps with easy kills. You forgot to include your preference for officer fit, mission running CNR`s to be fed in 1 at a time. Maybe if you stopped gate camping / shooting defenceless miners etc, learn some basic pvp skills , eve would become more rewarding for you/your corp ? .
Kweel Nakashyn shadow and cloaking Mordus Angels	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:09:00 - [14] Nobody can play Eve 24/7. CCP should ban ppl playing Eve 23/7 (or even 20/7) for either account sharing or maccroing. End of drama. Fetchez la vache ! moar(tm) < soon(tm) :(
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:17:00 - [15] Originally by: Nyxster Originally by: Bellum Eternus confirmation bellum is hard of understanding. <Ignoring the facts> It doesn't matter that an RMT mission runner might run missions more than a 'normal' mission runner. The hordes of mission runners make up for any increase in total play time by RMT mission runners. You're totally ignoring the point: I am extrapolating the impact a very small group of RMT mission running accounts have to the level at which mission runners operate. Most mission runners I know don't pay to play either. Everyone I know uses ISK to pay for their accounts. It's so insanely easy to do it these days, it's stupid not to. I make all my ISK pirating yet I'm easily able to fund two accounts with in-game ISK. Mission hubs like Motsu don't need special consideration like fleet fights do because it's a constant known factor. It's already 'reinforced'. Only in 0.0 where empty systems fill up with a thousand players overnight do nodes need special attention. Don't be obtuse. It's people like yourself that ignore easily observed facts and construct ill-informed arguments with baseless facts to refute something just for the sake of counterpoint. Fail more. -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Tier 5 Battleships
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:22:00 - [16] Originally by: Dr Deadbolt There is always some bellend desperately trying to convince ccp to feed their gate camps with easy kills. You forgot to include your preference for officer fit, mission running CNR`s to be fed in 1 at a time. Maybe if you stopped gate camping / shooting defenceless miners etc, learn some basic pvp skills , eve would become more rewarding for you/your corp ? . Yes yes, please tell me more about how I can't PVP and 'all I do' is kill defenseless miners etc. etc. etc. because nobody has ever said that before. Also, you'd be amazed at the number of greedy carebears we can talk into trying to deliver a faction BS or T2 Marauder into lowsec, only to catch them and ransom them, or barring that, destroy their ship and pod because they're too stupid to pay the ransom. So in a sense, I generate my own supply of defenseless mission running CNRs that are fed into my gatecamps one at a time. Your attempts at insulting me are old and tired. -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Tier 5 Battleships
Kweel Nakashyn shadow and cloaking Mordus Angels	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:27:00 - [17] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Dr Deadbolt There is always some bellend desperately trying to convince ccp to feed their gate camps with easy kills. You forgot to include your preference for officer fit, mission running CNR`s to be fed in 1 at a time. Maybe if you stopped gate camping / shooting defenceless miners etc, learn some basic pvp skills , eve would become more rewarding for you/your corp ? . Yes yes, please tell me more about how I can't PVP and 'all I do' is kill defenseless miners etc. etc. etc. because nobody has ever said that before. Also, you'd be amazed at the number of greedy carebears we can talk into trying to deliver a faction BS or T2 Marauder into lowsec, only to catch them and ransom them, or barring that, destroy their ship and pod because they're too stupid to pay the ransom. So in a sense, I generate my own supply of defenseless mission running CNRs that are fed into my gatecamps one at a time. Your attempts at insulting me are old and tired. No L4 in Empire, no CNR. I still think you get it wrong. Fetchez la vache ! moar(tm) < soon(tm) :(
Newsflash Gallente NorthUnited	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:28:00 - [18] stfu allready about this stuff.
Lotus Sutra Caldari Sutra Inc	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:33:00 - [19] RMT accounts place more strain on the servers because they are online 23/7. Your average mission runner is online only a few hours a day (maybe 3-6 hours) compared to the RMT accounts, so their server load is a fraction of what the RMT runners caused because the average mission runner is not on 23/7. The fact is Bellum, If you removed all lvl 4 missions from high sec and dropped them in low sec, the prices we pay for everything will increase dramatically. The prices we all pay for stuff will increase simply because the supply will drastically DROP, and possibly simply fade out. Why is this? gasps Because they won't be dropping from the missions like they are now because people won't go to low sec and paint fat targets on their heads for idiots like you to shoot them. Arbelist Cruise Missile Launchers, Arbelist Heavy Missile launchers, LP purchased items, everything will become even more expensive, forcing people to grind even more hours than they do now to buy them, which will have a negative effect on the game because people will get tired of having to grind so much just to buy the stuff they had to grind for 1/2 the time before.. because idiots like you are to **ing stupid to see how incredibly idiotic your idea is. Honestly, did you even try to USE your brain when you decided to spew this idiots idea? Or did you just once again vomit bull onto the forums in your desperate and misguided and poorly thought out attempt to make more fat easy targets for yourself? Seriously, your not just an idiot, your a **ing EPIC IDIOT. ------------------------------------------------ The 5 minute posting timer is the direct result of people not using basic computer safety methods. Place the blame where it belongs.
Adunh Slavy	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:33:00 - [20] Originally by: Bellum Eternus No tears. Some moron kept asking for reasons why L4 high sec mission runners were bad for the game, so I made a post outlining the various facts as to why they are. No. You have an opinion. The Real Space Initiative - V6 (Forum Link)
Nyxster	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:44:00 - [21] Edited by: Nyxster on 17/10/2009 12:46:29 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Nyxster Originally by: Bellum Eternus confirmation bellum is hard of understanding. <Ignoring the facts which bellum made up> It doesn't matter that an RMT mission runner might run missions more than a 'normal' mission runner. The hordes of mission runners make up for any increase in total play time by RMT mission runners. You're totally ignoring the point: I am extrapolating the impact a very small group of RMT mission running accounts have to the level at which mission runners operate. what a stupid strawman argument, get a bloody clue! NPC's are computer controlled "drones" they use up probably less CPU each than 1 player drone, because they behave according to a predictable set of routines and constantly dont sent spamming requests to and from the client. before you start lecturing server load i suggest you do some computer programming courses. fail argument is still fail argument, a gatecamp of player pirates is generating more instructions due to number of drones deployed, constantly fiddling with your modules, orbits, etc etc etc. even 1 vs 1 PVP generates more CPU load because the server has to log 2 sets of player interactions and calculate each of the consequences and send it to and from the clients, PVE generates only 1 set. Most mission runners I know don't pay to play either. Everyone I know uses ISK to pay for their accounts. It's so insanely easy to do it these days, it's stupid not to. I make all my ISK pirating yet I'm easily able to fund two accounts with in-game ISK. so your point is what? you are trying to compare RMT's with mission runners. MR's dont generally grind EVE as a FULL TIME JOB. they dont generally play EVE simply to make money. if you deprive eve of 500$ every week by selling isk on ebay then you are costing CCP money, if you just play to pay for your own account plexes then CCP still gets the income. the problem is isk income going to RMTS and not to CCP! DUH!!!! Mission hubs like Motsu don't need special consideration like fleet fights do because it's a constant known factor. It's already 'reinforced'. Only in 0.0 where empty systems fill up with a thousand players overnight do nodes need special attention. Don't be obtuse. I'm not being obtuse you asshat, look up eve history and find me one occassion where CCP has had to have extended technical support to cover a PVE system overload, now look up the stats for alliance wars where systems were being camped 24/7. you might as well say all traders should be stopped because they put such a huge load on market hubs like jita. your argument because motsu is congested is to move motsu agent to lowsec - where it will still be congested, when the logical argument is to actually just put in 10 new Q18 L4 agents in different systems It's people like yourself that ignore easily observed facts and construct ill-informed arguments with baseless facts to refute something just for the sake of counterpoint. thats amazing bellum, you manage to contradict yourself entirely, you ignore the facts others present that are easily researched to support your own view, but you think your own facts are cast in stone. Get back under your bridge bellum troll, you are no better than any other crybaby eve'r who wants an entire gamestyle stopped/nerfed simply for his own selfish whims/view of the world. Eve isnt about you. its a business with 400K+ customers, if you didnt like how a ford car drived would you expect ford to re-engineer it to suit you??? You really are stupid beyond measure if you think anything you write here will be listened to, or acted on by anyone at CCP, CCP have a whole fleet of professional paid, game designers, programmers, level balancers to ensure they make a profit and the game mechanics work, instead of whining your self-important impotent poasting here if you want to make a change get a job at CCP ffs. bellum does Fail.
Brolly Caldari	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:45:00 - [22] The only reason they are bad is that people keep moaning on about a dead topic. Level 4's will never soley be moved to low sec. Deal with it. Another topic, mission may be moving to 0.0. Are we still going to have the same cheesy whines? If/when lvl 4's encompass all security regions (except for worm hole), are there going to be posts stating lvl 4's should ONLY be in low sec. Reality is, there is a lot to do in low sec. The fact is, not many peeps really care about it. Except for 'pirates'
Washell Olivaw	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:49:00 - [23] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Mission runners congregate at mission hubs and place undue stress on the server cluster. Mission runners generate massive numbers of NPCs that would otherwise not exist, thereby adding more stress and load to the server cluster. Think of us as the Quake and Unreal of EVE. We push the hardware to new limits. Our daily demands on the same systems is making CCP buy better stuff to handle the load, directly benefitting the PVP players/fleet fights. It's also providing a constant, live testing ground for stressed nodes. Allowing CCP to see the effects of code changes without having to wait for a fleetfight, which may not last long enough to gather significant data. Therefore, the only logical conclusion is: Mission runners are good for EVE! Originally by: Signature Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
Rhohan Minmatar Pelennor Swarm	Posted - 2009.10.17 12:52:00 - [24] Some pirates just want targets spoon-fed to them. Trying to force someone into any kind of gameplay is bad for this game.
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.10.17 13:08:00 - [25] Quote: Excessive hardware useage (more CPU cycles used per account than normal) So what you are saying is that you want to limit the ammount of hardware cycles you may use per month? So for example you may mine 20 hours a month (since that doesnt cost much), but when you mine longer your account gets blocked. Mission running and pvp is then limitted to something like 10 hours a month max, trading depends on how often you are undercutting, etc.
MatrixSkye MkII Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.17 13:15:00 - [26] Nah, I think what he wants is just to limit mission runners' usage. His profession should be allowed to play as long they want. It's just the professions he hates that he wants to limit their play time.
Nyxster	Posted - 2009.10.17 13:20:00 - [27] Edited by: Nyxster on 17/10/2009 13:20:47 Translation of OP's wishes: Bellum doesnt like skilled MR with more isk than him Bellum is lazy. he likes to no-risk pop MR pimp ships for fun and profit Bellum doesnt like hisec combat mechanics, because most clever MR's in pimpships dont fall for his canbait tactics. Bellum is frustrated, if only he could get them all to lowsec where he could FFA all those hawt ships for fun and profit! Bellum develops a strawman argument comparing MR's to RMT's based on notional CPU/server load usage Bellum thinks CCP actually listens to the forums instead of its paid game designers/balancers/server techs Bellum thinks CCP will move all Mission runners to lowsec to fulfil his supersekret plan. Bellum thinks MR's are stupid enough to take 5BN isk hawt ships to lowsec for crap lewt/rewards instead of just grinding L3's instead in the safety of hisec for a moderate income drop or stick to nullsec ratting for isk in safer alliance space. Bellum will be dissapointed whatever the outcome, because people just arent that stupid. apart from Bellum ofc. but if he was clever he wouldnt need to change the game mechanics with such a nonsensical argument to suit his supersekret plans would he?
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2009.10.17 13:23:00 - [28] Missions are tedious and high-sec missions even more so as the rewards are sod all compared to low-sec/null-sec missions. I spent a year in 0.5 doing missions and building ships for market from materials .. after I went low-sec my LP/ISK rewards have tripled yielding far more "me time" (time spent away from Eve) The security afforded by running in high-sec allows more people to do it without developing ulcers from paranoia and keeps them playing the game (and no, farmers/RMT are a fraction of the population). Removing them would not only alienate a lot of people but would force everyone else to spend more time doing the only thing even more tedious to get minerals - mining. Create better tools to identify the RMT people and deal with them appropriately or reduce the value of . Arbitrarily punishing legitimate players to get at them is wrong, simple as that.
Ban Doga	Posted - 2009.10.17 13:29:00 - [29] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Negative effects RMT mission runners have on Eve as a whole, as cited by CCP: Excessive hardware useage (more CPU cycles used per account than normal) Congestion of particular systems (all mission running hubs as an example) Impacted markets for specific items Broken game balance for tho<se items General negative impact to overall gameplay (just quoting CCP here) RMT Mission runners generate in-game behavior that is game breaking and causes excessive loads on the server. Dr. EyojG's presentation was on RMT and why it's harmful, and the majority of RMT accounts were mission running accounts. If a small number of RMT mission running accounts is harmful to Eve as a whole, then what does that say about Mission runners in general, since their population is far greater than just a few RMT accounts? Mission runners do everything an RMT account does, only without that last step: selling ISK. They perform the same actions and exhibit the same behaviors and cause the same problems and issues. CCP did not mention why RMT mission runner cause more hardware load than normal. You simply assume it's because they run missions. Might be as well because they spend more time playing. The other thing is you start talking about RMT mission runnners and then just jump to "normal" mission runners. But those are not the same! It's like saying "fast cars cause more accidents than other vehicles, so cars must be banned". There is a difference between "a fast car" and "a car"; a "fast car" is also "a car", but "a car" is not necessarily "a fast car". Which leads back to my first point: If the amount of time spent online is the actual reason for consuming more resources your whole argumentation is faulty. If running missions uses more hardware resources than other activities this is a technical issue and should be addressed accordingly. (Also I would think ratting causes the same hardware stress as missions, assuming same amount of time spent. So yes, I expect RMT bot to use more resources because their spending much more time in the game. That's why they said "more CPU cycles used per account" as opposed to "per hour spent online")
Hu Evur	Posted - 2009.10.17 13:33:00 - [30] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Negative effects RMT mission runners have on Eve as a whole, as cited by CCP: Excessive hardware useage (more CPU cycles used per account than normal) Congestion of particular systems (all mission running hubs as an example) Impacted markets for specific items Broken game balance for those items General negative impact to overall gameplay (just quoting CCP here) RMT Mission runners generate in-game behavior that is game breaking and causes excessive loads on the server. Mission runners congregate at mission hubs and place undue stress on the server cluster. Mission runners generate massive numbers of NPCs that would otherwise not exist, thereby adding more stress and load to the server cluster. Mission runners generate a disproportionate need for particular items while devaluing other items with oversupply. Mission runners destroy the balance of minerals and devalue mining efforts with the oversupply of minerals from refined items. In fact, there was a spike in pyrite prices after the RMT mission runners were banned, not because they were macro mining but because mission runners were supplying so much pyrite to the market due to refining. For all the problems you cited, whether they are caused by mission running or not, solutions other than simply moving all level 4s to low sec can be had that won't just result in carebears going to level 3s or leaving the game, neither of which outcome would be good. Server load: Some have already addressed your arguments, so I won't. Congestion and mission hubs: So CCP needs to redistribute Level 4 agents and quality levels in a better fashion throughout high sec. Impacted markets and broken game mechanics for specific items: This is the constant ship and item balancing that goes on. Can't fault anyone for gravitating toward items that give significant advantages over counterparts. Balancing and reducing egregious disparities is a constant process and one which CCP takes seriously. General negative impact to overall gameplay: can't get much more nonspecific than that, what to say . . . Destroying the balance of minerals and devaluing mining efforts: Ok, I think buttloads of base tech I items in mission drops that just get melted down to minerals is a problem. Easy enough to eliminate miner Is and other base tech I dren from npc wrecks. Would enough people who don't bot want to engage in mining and tech I production to take up the slack? I don't know, maybe not. Mineral prices would rise. Maybe some more interesting mining game mechanics would pull people into that low end economy. Anyway, how would moving missions to low sec solve the general problem? You think you've discovered a simple solution to a complex series of problems. Do you really think it would also result in low sec pirates having happy times killing more MRs? No, it wouldn't. Taking away particular benefits to force a behavior change with more risk will just result in risk averse player movement to lesser benefits in this case. Boosting lowsec positives would accomplish more. Also, there's a delicate ecology here. Upsetting it drastically could result in an ecosystem collapse. None of us want that.
Jojo Redana	Posted - 2009.10.17 13:38:00 - [31] The OP failed. I hope CCP tells this guy the real story about CPU usage and why macroing uses more CPU etc. Or maybe... We have to stop playing Eve because we use too much CPU. We should continue paying for Eve but not play it. This solves all problems.
Par'Gellen Gallente Tres Hombres Psychiatric Hospital Uno Chica Loco	Posted - 2009.10.17 13:46:00 - [32] Edited by: Par''Gellen on 17/10/2009 13:50:07 ROFL @ thinking mission runners = RMT scum. This is almost bio-worthy as comedy --- To err is human. But it shouldn't be the company motto...
FU10011101	Posted - 2009.10.17 13:47:00 - [33] i rat and plex in 0.0 but if i would be lvl4 mission runner in empire and those missions would be moved to losec i would just move on to do lvl3 instead, and im sure so would everyone else. losec is something i or pretty much anyone else would not even spit on. except pirates who try to find easy ganks there.
Ghoest	Posted - 2009.10.17 13:50:00 - [34] crai more OP another PVP noob Wherever you went - Here you are.
MatrixSkye MkII Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.17 14:03:00 - [35] Edited by: MatrixSkye MkII on 17/10/2009 14:05:37 Why the "Their Way And That's That" (Ts) players are bad for Eve. -They believe there is only one way to play Eve. If you refuse to play that way then you must automatically head to their gatecamps to get podded. These people think only 1-dimensionally and are usually harmless. However, when they become VERY VOCAL WHINERS they tend to start disrupting the forums with their rhetoric. -They absolutely abhor players that seek to minimize risk, well, except themselves of course. They consider it prudent common sense when they minimize their own risk. Due to their short-sightedness they tend to be self-destructive dragging the entire game population with them if they are listened to. -All the qualities they profess to hate in "carebears" they themselves posses. They are greedy. They usually love to hoard pixels (in the form of killmails) and they want the game headed in a direction that only benefits their play style. They seem to be extremely selfish and self-absorbed. -These players discharge large quantities of bitter tears. And funnily enough, usually profess that their ships run on "tears" as well. There is a plethora of other reasons, but meh.
Vherr Arkhar	Posted - 2009.10.17 14:28:00 - [36] Actually I wouldn't mind level 4's to be moved to highsec. At least then I wouldn't feel inclined to mission in my boring maraudeur and instead be doing level 3s in a hac or something. g Whoever STILL (like howmany years now?) thinks that chaning anything about the highest level available to high-sec would make people go lowsec... sigh
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.10.17 14:29:00 - [37] Quote: Dr.EyjoG pointed out that there are three main types of RMT account activities: mission running, macro mining and macro ratting (specifically, ratting in 0.0). macro mining =/= highsec mission runners macro ratting in 0.0 =/= highsec mission runners Leaving mission running. Except we know this isnt highsec mission running neither. It was lowsec courier missions. http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/Ingunn http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/Arzi and many more. Quote: Translation: "All L4s could be moved to lowsec tomorrow and the Eve economy wouldn't even blink. It would stabilize in a month or two." Except no numbers provided here have anything to do with lvl 4 highsec missions. Nonsequitor fallacy. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
Lotus Sutra Caldari Sutra Inc	Posted - 2009.10.17 14:44:00 - [38] Edited by: Lotus Sutra on 17/10/2009 14:44:41 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Translation: "All L4s could be moved to lowsec tomorrow and the Eve economy wouldn't even blink. It would stabilize in a month or two." "The eve economy wouldn't even blink" and "It would stabilize in a month or two." I wanted to point those two statements out so you can be laughed at for them. **sings One of these things doesn't belong here, one of these things just isn't the same*** ------------------------------------------------ The 5 minute posting timer is the direct result of people not using basic computer safety methods. Place the blame where it belongs.
trite boon Caldari The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.10.17 14:47:00 - [39] Originally by: Kweel Nakashyn Nobody can play Eve 24/7. CCP should ban ppl playing Eve 23/7 (or even 20/7) for either account sharing or maccroing. End of drama. I dont do lvl4s but ive done 23 hours befor now be it afew years ago!!!
Lotus Sutra Caldari Sutra Inc	Posted - 2009.10.17 14:51:00 - [40] Originally by: trite boon Originally by: Kweel Nakashyn Nobody can play Eve 24/7. CCP should ban ppl playing Eve 23/7 (or even 20/7) for either account sharing or maccroing. End of drama. I dont do lvl4s but ive done 23 hours befor now be it afew years ago!!! So have I, on a bad insomnia weekend, but once in a while is very different from 7 days a week, 365 days a year. ------------------------------------------------ The 5 minute posting timer is the direct result of people not using basic computer safety methods. Place the blame where it belongs.
Ban Doga	Posted - 2009.10.17 14:56:00 - [41] Originally by: Lotus Sutra Edited by: Lotus Sutra on 17/10/2009 14:44:41 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Translation: "All L4s could be moved to lowsec tomorrow and the Eve economy wouldn't even blink. It would stabilize in a month or two." "The eve economy wouldn't even blink" and "It would stabilize in a month or two." I wanted to point those two statements out so you can be laughed at for them. **sings One of these things doesn't belong here, one of these things just isn't the same*** Also I'd like to add that stabilizing in and of itself doesn't mean much. It only means it will not continue to develop endlessly in one direction. There is no guarantuee the outcome will be positive or even okay. How about a stable economy based on a Tritanium price of 20 ISK? A player count of 0 would also make for a very stable economy At this point I'd like to repeat my suggestion to go to SISI. There is no grinding, no carebears, no need to make ISK. Just pure, unfiltered PVP combat.
Madcow Minmatar Orias Fringe Enterprises	Posted - 2009.10.17 15:16:00 - [42] if you watched the film about why banning in mining didnt got effected that much was because the buffed the roid respawn rate allot so it was far easyer to mine the minirals you needed. ______________________ I am just a crazy cow
XXSketchxx Gallente Remote Soviet Industries	Posted - 2009.10.17 15:27:00 - [43] You never cease to amuse Bellum. Keep posting. I enjoy your threads. _____________________________________________ -Sketch, Certified Pharmacist Need a Boost?
Halion Archus	Posted - 2009.10.17 15:34:00 - [44] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Edited by: Bellum Eternus on 17/10/2009 12:04:52Stuff CCP banned RMT accounts (miners/missioners/ratters)because of RMT. These accounts also place extra load on the servers, not because of the activities they perform, but how they perform them. If you followed Holy Rage at all, you would have seen that Macro'd/RMT accounts are always more active than players and use more computing power than the average player per account. You would also have seen that the Macro'r crowd contributed a significant percentage of server load because of this something like 30% reduction in server calls/load after Holy Rage). Mission runners may do everything RMT's do - but they don't do it the same way (i.e. - macro) - for whatever reason, Macros generate more CPU usage than players. You also make the mistake of conflating "Eve's Economy" with CCP's budget, or the economy of Iceland. Eve's Economy may very well be able to recover quickly from various "shocks" - CCP survived this latest economic meltdown by having a vast subscriber base. Tell me, since player mission runners - RMT/Macro'rs; How big is CCP's bottom line. Are they running at Three (3)% profit? Seven (7) percent profit? How large a percentage of: Originally by: Bellum Eternus the massive numbers of L4 highsec mission runners are there? 1%? 2%? 3%? More? Less? Gee, we don't know, because CCP hasn't released those numbers... Another Lvl 4 mission runner whine thread = -10 Conflating Lvl 4 player mission runners with RMT's = -10 Bad logic = -10 Overall grade: fail
Asuri Kinnes Caldari The Bastards The Bastards.	Posted - 2009.10.17 15:38:00 - [45] Posted with wrong toon... /sigh... stupid computer...
Asuri Kinnes Caldari The Bastards The Bastards.	Posted - 2009.10.17 15:44:00 - [46] Originally by: MatrixSkye MkII Edited by: MatrixSkye MkII on 17/10/2009 15:25:18 Stuff... Yeah, really helping the discussion there m8... CCP has already had their say on this issue. They added more lvl 4 agents in Hi-sec. Which everyone seems to have conveniently ignored or forgotten... Want more people in low-sec? Do more to encourage people to go and/or do more to attract them. Want more people to go to 0.0? Do more to encourage people to go and/or do more to attract them. Quit waiting for CCP to do it for you. Oh wait... thats only Carebears that we can use that line on...
Ban Doga	Posted - 2009.10.17 16:18:00 - [47] Originally by: Halion Archus You would also have seen that the Macro'r crowd contributed a significant percentage of server load because of this something like 30% reduction in server calls/load after Holy Rage). Mission runners may do everything RMT's do - but they don't do it the same way (i.e. - macro) - for whatever reason, Macros generate more CPU usage than players. I don't really know but IMO it's about efficiency. As a human you can really push hard to play as fast as possible. You know, dock - agent - accept - set destination - undock - warp to 0 - warp to 0 - dock - agent - complete - set destination - undock - ... In other words generate as much traffic / CPU load as possible (aka "Spam the warp/scan/... button until you finally get the result"). But you can only do that for so long. Only till you finger goes numb and your eyes feel like popping out and your focus starts to fade. Then you will have little breaks, you will need another 0.1 seconds to find the button to click or simply look at the chat and forget to jump the moment you arrive at the gate. Basically you slow down and thus reduce the traffic / CPU load you cause over time and eventually take a break or even fall asleep. A macro will run at 100% efficiency for an indefinite amount of time (that's their sole purpose!) or - even worse - show a behaviour that is not natural to a human (eg using the directional scanner every 0.1 seconds ) which causes more traffic / CPU load for the server.
the plague Scoopex Majesta Empire	Posted - 2009.10.17 16:23:00 - [48] How original. Another post whining about the way other people play the game. If you want mindless PvP with no industry, minining, trading, or mission running, then Team Fortress 2 -------------->>>>>>>>>>>>>
Elias Modron S.K. Astronautics	Posted - 2009.10.17 16:37:00 - [49] Whole thread is pointless since L4s will never be moved to low-sec. +1 ---------- CEO, S.K. Astronautics
Anslo The Aduro Protocol	Posted - 2009.10.17 16:44:00 - [50] shut up Bellum, no one cares.
MatrixSkye MkII Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.17 16:50:00 - [51] Originally by: Asuri Kinnes Originally by: MatrixSkye MkII Edited by: MatrixSkye MkII on 17/10/2009 15:25:18 Stuff... Yeah, really helping the discussion there m8... CCP has already had their say on this issue. They added more lvl 4 agents in Hi-sec. Which everyone seems to have conveniently ignored or forgotten... Want more people in low-sec? Do more to encourage people to go and/or do more to attract them. Want more people to go to 0.0? Do more to encourage people to go and/or do more to attract them. Quit waiting for CCP to do it for you. Oh wait... thats only Carebears that we can use that line on... You realize that my post was a parody, right? Bellum is using his acronym L4HMRs (read: Lamers) as an insult to my style of play. I'm simply using his idiotic tactic back. At least I was kind enough to leave his El1te numb3r speak out. Anyway, was trying to be funny. That's all. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Sorry.
no pants	Posted - 2009.10.17 17:16:00 - [52] Paging Malcanis to this thread to post some ~words~
Pohbis Neo T.E.C.H.	Posted - 2009.10.17 17:32:00 - [53] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Translation: "All L4s could be moved to lowsec tomorrow and the Eve economy wouldn't even blink. It would stabilize in a month or two." Yes, 'cause that little 4 is the root of all evil. EVIL! If it were LVL3 mission runners, everything would be happy happy joy joy. Can't believe you even tried to stretch Dr. EyojG's presentation so far as to use it in a pro "Move LVL4's to low-sec" whine. Get it into your head, they wont follow. LVL5's showed us this. Now had you debated the negative impact of scrap T1 loot generated from missions, that would be a whole other story... but you didn't. TL:DR Version: I can haz your stuffz?
000Hunter000 Gallente Missiles 'R' Us	Posted - 2009.10.17 17:37:00 - [54] Bla bla bla, carebears are ebil, bla bla bla... Sigh... Some of u people are really tiresome with their 'my way is the only true eve way' cowexcrement... Just play and enjoy the game the way u like it. EVE is a cold harsh space, but if everybody would only pvp it would be going downhill in no time and dissapear in a matter of months... is that what u want? I don't. ________________________________________________
Exlegion Caldari Salva Veritate	Posted - 2009.10.17 17:40:00 - [55] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Translation: "All L4s could be moved to lowsec tomorrow and the Eve economy wouldn't even blink. It would stabilize in a month or two." I'm afraid this bit doesn't make much sense. You're contradicting yourself. If the economy wouldn't blink (i.e. no effect) then why bother removing them? If you mean the economy would stabilize I wasn't aware it was unstable to begin with. In any case you might want to organize your thoughts a little better. One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
Eskalin Minmatar Evolution IT Alliance	Posted - 2009.10.17 17:43:00 - [56] they are bad cause they keep spawning these stupid posts. ffs go kiss a girl/guy If babies weren't to be eaten they wouldn't be hibachi sized
Zeerover DeadSpace Exploration and Investigations	Posted - 2009.10.17 17:50:00 - [57] The real failure of the "move L4's to lowsec" argument is the presence of L5 missions in low-sec already. We are several people who've found this goldmine, which can easily be solo'ed or dual-boxed, and does bring in between 100m to 150m isk/hr... The incentive for low sec is plentiful (5x isk/hr earnings), but somehow a large majority of high-sec dwellers don't want to go into low sec, no matter what. Why they don't want to go into low-sec is the real problem, and moving L4 missions there isn't the solution...
banished Exiled Development	Posted - 2009.10.17 17:54:00 - [58] The only argument against level 4's is risk vs reward. Its anti-EVE. That being said, it will never change. The player base that still remembers how eve was before lvl 4's is dwindling and at this point CCP is too scared they will lose a chunk of their subscriber if they move the agents to low sec.
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.10.17 17:55:00 - [59] All level 4 missions could be moved to low sec if ccp made them like the fw or pirate speedboat missions. That way you don't need an expensive easy to catch faction fitted faction bs to effeciently run them. However I believe that is not the outcome Bellum really wants as none of the new level 4 mission runners would get caught in his camp. Quote: [03:39:05] Emperor Salazar > HOLY **** ITS ZEBA [03:39:20] Emperor Salazar > NEVER STOP POASTING Zeba is the BEST! ~Mitnal
Tres Farmer Gallente Federation Intelligence Service	Posted - 2009.10.17 17:57:00 - [60] Originally by: Bellum Eternus ... Negative effects RMT mission runners have on Eve as a whole, as cited by CCP: Excessive hardware useage (more CPU cycles used per account than normal) RMT-MR are online 23/7.. normal MR are online like 5hrs a day on average? Ergo: you got no point here. Originally by: Bellum Eternus Congestion of particular systems (all mission running hubs as an example) Lvl4q'high' agents are rare in high sec.. if CCP really was concerned about their distribution and load on the server, they would have scattered them out more ages ago OR introduced a new agent system, where each agent gives mission for all levels where quality/payment and what not is determined by the players 'farming' those area/agent/npc-corp/whatnot.. enough ideas floating around for helping with this. Ergo: you got no point. Originally by: Bellum Eternus Impacted markets for specific items If CCP would cared so much about this they would have removed t1 loot completely from Lvl4s ages ago and replaced it with something else.. There are enough ideas on the table for keeping fancy/oh-shiney stuffs in the loot, but also to 'boost' the industrialist/miners in the same moment and decouple it from the mission runners influence. Ergo: you got no point. Originally by: Bellum Eternus Broken game balance for those items Again.. does CCP care? Officially no. Originally by: Bellum Eternus General negative impact to overall gameplay (just quoting CCP here)... All I see here is that CCP removed Ressource-sinks from the game and at the same moment also got rid of revenue-thieves. If CCP really wanted to fight MR'ing and the interconnected problems they would do something about the agents-mechanic and the loot-tables.
Hamshoe	Posted - 2009.10.17 18:01:00 - [61] Edited by: Hamshoe on 17/10/2009 18:01:40 Originally by: Bellum Eternus No tears. Some moron kept asking for reasons why L4 high sec mission runners were bad for the game, so I made a post outlining the various facts as to why they are. umad? No, you cited various comments about why RMT farmers are bad for the game. To wit: Originally by: Bellum Eternus Negative effects RMT mission runners have on Eve as a whole, as cited by CCP: (Hint: Is Socrates a dog?) Pay attention, this isn't the complex part. It should be trivial. Kicked in the head by a horse, what's your excuse?
Mordrid Norad	Posted - 2009.10.17 18:03:00 - [62] Originally by: Zeerover The real failure of the "move L4's to lowsec" argument is the presence of L5 missions in low-sec already. We are several people who've found this goldmine, which can easily be solo'ed or dual-boxed, and does bring in between 100m to 150m isk/hr... The incentive for low sec is plentiful (5x isk/hr earnings), but somehow a large majority of high-sec dwellers don't want to go into low sec, no matter what. Why they don't want to go into low-sec is the real problem, and moving L4 missions there isn't the solution...
zus	Posted - 2009.10.17 18:09:00 - [63] Why they donÆt do L4 missions more difficult with better NPC more like the slippers fewer ships les CPU to use for eve , more powerful more challenging oneÆs that when they know they going to get destroyed they warp out so you need to have warp jammer ore have to look for them , and damage variety so you donÆt focus in two elements. I do L4 missions solo and I find them very easy I donÆt use BSÆs any more I only use HAC & BC Amarr I play 5 to 6 hours a week and I canÆt play in fleet pvp do to time restrictions pvp needs allots of moving around, I tried sum L5 missions but those are in low sec and I am outnumbered sans all the pirate players are not honorable to fight one on one, not even two on one . So those are sum reasons that I stop playing eve several times so donÆt worry if they donÆt do something to make the game more exiting for people like me then you all will have all the CPU you all deserve
Gsptlsnz	Posted - 2009.10.17 18:22:00 - [64] Originally by: Mordrid Norad Sure it is, all the brain dead monkies that run these 24/7 will be forced to drop down to level 3's and their isk income will be more inline with the bread dead grinding they are doing. Interesting assessment. How would you rate the mental challenge of 23/7 gate camping?
Taedrin Gallente White Horizon	Posted - 2009.10.17 18:25:00 - [65] Edited by: Taedrin on 17/10/2009 18:26:00 A few things: 1) Mission macros place an undue stress on the server because they operate 23/7. Normal mission running carebears will probably run a mission or two then log off. While mission running is still probably more CPU intensive than other player tasks, I doubt TQ is suffering for it. 2) Mission running carebears who do nothing but run missions will eventually leave EVE on their own once they buy their best mission running ship. You have effectively "maxxed out" and now have no way to progress any further. Therefore, the population of these parasites will not be permanent. Other mission runners run missions to make ISK so that they can fail at PvP/engage in other activities. This means that a considerable amount of mission runners do more than simply run missions. 3) Macro mission runners can NOT ruin mineral prices beyond a certain point. Thanks to T1 insurance, the mineral basket has a minimum value. Once prices of minerals fall to a certain point, you can buy them off the market, build a ship and self destruct it to collect insurance on it at a profit. This will create extra demand for minerals which will in turn cause the price of minerals to rise again. The end effect is that whenever the price of a certain mineral (say... Tritanium) falls, another mineral's price must rise (such as pyerite, mexallon, or megacyte) 4) Saying that mission runners congregating at mission hubs being a bad thing is like saying that fleet battles are bad things because they cause players to congregate in certain 0.0 systems. Players congregating is a GOOD thing, because it causes interaction between players. What interaction, might you ask? Ninja salvaging, suicide gankers, loot thieves, creation of market hubs, etc etc... There are plenty of examples. All that being said, I am 100% for all level 4's being moved to low sec, or some other change to make low sec MUCH more profitable than high sec. ---------- There is always a choice. The choice might not be easy, nor simple, nor the options be what you desire - but, nevertheless, the choice is there to be made.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.10.17 18:34:00 - [66] Originally by: Gsptlsnz Originally by: Mordrid Norad Sure it is, all the brain dead monkies that run these 24/7 will be forced to drop down to level 3's and their isk income will be more inline with the bread dead grinding they are doing. Interesting assessment. How would you rate the mental challenge of 23/7 gate camping? If you believe that the activities are equivalent, then you should have no objection in making the conditions equivalent as well. I mean gate-camping is in lo-sec and zero-risk, right?
Ukucia Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2009.10.17 18:40:00 - [67] Bellum, if you're such an uber PvPer, why the hell are you spending all your time on the forums *****ing about people you never see? Shouldn't you be using your epic skills to go wipe out the Goons or something?
Gsptlsnz	Posted - 2009.10.17 18:42:00 - [68] responding to Malcanis: 1. The quoted text is 100% genuine, but I deleted it and replaced it at the same time as Malcanis was replying. 2. There is no other context in my question. I was just asking about the mental effort required. I've never participated in a gate camp, but I have seen many posts claiming it's boring. This is usually a good indicator that the activity is simple and monotonous.
MatrixSkye MkII Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.17 19:04:00 - [69] Edited by: MatrixSkye MkII on 17/10/2009 19:05:19 Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Gsptlsnz Originally by: Mordrid Norad Sure it is, all the brain dead monkies that run these 24/7 will be forced to drop down to level 3's and their isk income will be more inline with the bread dead grinding they are doing. Interesting assessment. How would you rate the mental challenge of 23/7 gate camping? If you believe that the activities are equivalent, then you should have no objection in making the conditions equivalent as well. I mean gate-camping is in lo-sec and zero-risk, right? While we're at it, let's ensure that 23/7 gate camp monkies are PVE fitted. That means no warp scramblers/jammers/ECM. Compare apples to apples, mmkay?
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.10.17 19:08:00 - [70] It is boring indeed Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Gsptlsnz Originally by: Mordrid Norad Sure it is, all the brain dead monkies that run these 24/7 will be forced to drop down to level 3's and their isk income will be more inline with the bread dead grinding they are doing. Interesting assessment. How would you rate the mental challenge of 23/7 gate camping? If you believe that the activities are equivalent, then you should have no objection in making the conditions equivalent as well. I mean gate-camping is in lo-sec and zero-risk, right? So what you are saying is that wardecs should be removed? (Since apparently camps should only happen in low sec).
Saartje Sarel	Posted - 2009.10.17 19:14:00 - [71] what we got here is .. failure to computicate. mission runner lamers contribute to the economy on a vast scale. half the games minerals and probably more come directly from melted rat loot. I guess you are from cross teh pond? I was wondering what happened to our slack jawed ultra protestant breathing-is-indulgent kin. alive and well I see!
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2009.10.17 19:49:00 - [72] Originally by: Virtuozzo In before trollbait .. dood you are a post late and Mission runners do everything an RMT account does, only without that last step: selling ISK. They perform the same actions and exhibit the same behaviors and cause the same problems and issues. and only play a few hours as opposed to 23 hours in a day.
deza11	Posted - 2009.10.17 19:49:00 - [73] I'd mission in lowsec but you guys are mean and kill me with overwhelming numbers.
Jojo Jackson	Posted - 2009.10.17 20:01:00 - [74] Edited by: Jojo Jackson on 17/10/2009 20:05:38 +1 for pirate whine thread. didn't even bother with reading it g. Fact: - there are many people who do NOT want to PvP. live with or quit (can I have your stuff????) - more people would bother with low/00 if old inhabitants would be more frindly. Don't like to? not our problem! - removing L4 from highsec would destroy the BS ship market (espezialy faction and Marauder) as every missioner would start doing L3s - large T1 named moduls would become VERY rare and with this much more expensive - large amounts of and ore (drone missions/reprocess) would be missing on the market -> ships and produced stuff would become much more expensive - server population would shrink for sure With this removing L4 from highsec is just a stupid idear of some pirates who whine about not enough sheeps to sloughter :). PS and forgot: I'd say about 80% of all Pirates, lowsec and 00 inhabitants run L4 mission twinks to get the money for do what they like: buy stuff to shot other stuff. Remove L4s from save highsec would just kill your ability to buy new stuff if you had a bad day while PvPing. Ak you need to run even more L3s to again go PvPing. But year, whine more, ask to remove any income abilitys from highsec. Wonder why EvE becomes so dam empty suddenly g.
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.10.17 20:07:00 - [75] Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton Originally by: Virtuozzo In before trollbait .. dood you are a post late and Mission runners do everything an RMT account does, only without that last step: selling ISK. They perform the same actions and exhibit the same behaviors and cause the same problems and issues. and only play a few hours as opposed to 23 hours in a day. So what you are saying is nerf low sec courier missions.
Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles	Posted - 2009.10.17 20:37:00 - [76] This strikes me as more of a problem with missions themselves than anything else - specifically, that one single level 4 agent, or at any rate a cluster of them in a station or solar system, can support an unlimited number of players simultaneously, placing undue load on the nodes corresponding to the most popular mission hubs. It would be of interest to find out how much of a load there is on each of the ~200 nodes that make up the cluster - if a lot of them are idle most of the time, it might be worth placing a cap on the maximum number of missions that can be run simultaneously from any one agent or in any one system, forcing people to spread out and distributing the load more evenly. --- 34.4:1 mineral compression ISRC Racing, Season 7 - schedule
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.10.17 20:51:00 - [77] Edited by: Zeba on 17/10/2009 20:56:00 How to fix level 4 missions in a way that Bellum won't like but will actually solve most of the current 'problems' people claim they have on the economy. Nerf the isk rewards, bounties and lootz then boost the lp and salvage. Instead of instant wealth make them work for potential profits just like everyone else in eve has to do. That way you kill off the main abusers who grind missions for rewards and refined loot to sell then instantly send the isk to the nullsec/low sec main to use. This will have the desired effect of reducing mission spam and make grinding for isk alot moar attractive in the unused alliance space once it is properly upgraded after Dominion. That way you will have an alliance 'mission' hub your members can use to make isk and not need to make nub raven alts in empire away from the actual home territory. Quote: [03:39:05] Emperor Salazar > HOLY **** ITS ZEBA [03:39:20] Emperor Salazar > NEVER STOP POASTING Zeba is the BEST! ~Mitnal
stoicfaux	Posted - 2009.10.17 20:53:00 - [78] Edited by: stoicfaux on 17/10/2009 20:53:33 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Edited by: Bellum Eternus on 17/10/2009 12:04:52 CCP banned 3k accounts in March of 2009, another 6k accounts in June of 2009 and have a current total of over 18k banned accounts (this doesn't include trial accounts) just this year in order to combat RMT. Dr.EyjoG pointed out that there are three main types of RMT account activities: mission running, macro mining and macro ratting (specifically, ratting in 0.0). Dr. EyojG's presentation was on RMT and why it's harmful, and the majority of RMT accounts were mission running accounts. If a small number of RMT mission running accounts is harmful to Eve as a whole, then what does that say about Mission runners in general, since their population is far greater than just a few RMT accounts? Doesn't say anything. A RMT MR was macro-missioning 23/7 and was maximizing MR income as a full time RL job. If the regular players mission for three hours a day, then you would need 7.67 times as many RMT MRs to have the same effect. Six thousand were banned in June, so 6,000 * 7.67 = 46,020 MRs. Right now there are 45,000 accounts logged in. Almost all of Eve would have to be mission running before it had the same effect as the macro mission runners. Mission runners are not a problem. ----- "Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you! -- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Nietzsche, and PvP"
Xetal Maelstrom	Posted - 2009.10.17 21:01:00 - [79] It amuses me that those who supposedly "feed on tears" are often those who cry the hardest.
MatrixSkye MkII Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.17 21:05:00 - [80] Originally by: Xetal Maelstrom It amuses me that those who supposedly "feed on tears" are often those who cry the hardest. QFT.
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2009.10.17 21:05:00 - [81] Originally by: Jojo Jackson - large amounts of and ore (drone missions/reprocess) would be missing on the market -> ships and produced stuff would become much more expensive zomg so mining might actually become a viable profession?
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.10.17 21:18:00 - [82] Ahh, the parody thread of the parody thread... I'm really amused that so many mission runners thought that I was really serious. My OP was simply constructed to demonstrate just how ridiculous Matrix and his ilk sound when they post the same crap. Do I really think that CCP will move L4s to lowsec? No. Do I want them to? No. It would be pointless. Mission runners are incapable of living in lowsec, or they'd already be there, or living in 0.0, but instead the only thing they can accomplish is fighting NPCs. CCP should construct a report on mission running to reveal to the players the precise numbers about mission runners and their habits and that would settle this argument in about five seconds, would it not? But I doubt CCP would do such a thing. I'm sure you can guess why. For all the people continually telling me that 'all I want are easy targets flowing into lowsec', is that all you have to argue with? Why does this come up every time? Why do you cling to this argument so much and not use something else to back your side of the discussion with? Seriously, I'd really like to know. I'm curious to find out what CCP is doing design-wise with future projects in order to incorporate safety nets with respect to measures of scale. For the more simple minded, what that means is something that is done by one person or fifty people might fit into the framework of the game just fine, but what about tens of thousands? If Eve sees a PCU number of 45,000+ on a random day, what percentage of those people are engaged in a L4 highsec mission? How many are actively mining? How many are in 0.0? What is the split between all mission runners and those in high/low/0.0 sec? Or are you mission runners not interested in such things? I'd think you'd be concerned that other players are making the game more difficult for you by doing things that devalue your time and effort within the game. Well, you are concerned about people taking "your" salvage, but I guess that's about it. Why are high sec mission runners so unconcerned about the rest of the game around them and how it affects them? Why do they go to such great lengths to avoid the rest of the game? -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Tier 5 Battleships
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.10.17 21:27:00 - [83] Originally by: Bellum Eternus ...Do I really think that CCP will move L4s to lowsec? No. Do I want them to? No. It would be pointless. Mission runners are incapable of living in lowsec, or they'd already be there, or living in 0.0, but instead the only thing they can accomplish is fighting NPCs...Why are high sec mission runners so unconcerned about the rest of the game around them and how it affects them? Why do they go to such great lengths to avoid the rest of the game? Because a fairly high percentage of those high sec mission runners are isk generating alts of low sec pirates and nullsec alliance members. Quote: [03:39:05] Emperor Salazar > HOLY **** ITS ZEBA [03:39:20] Emperor Salazar > NEVER STOP POASTING Zeba is the BEST! ~Mitnal
Caldor Mansi	Posted - 2009.10.17 21:28:00 - [84] Originally by: Bellum Eternus I'm really amused that so many mission runners thought that I was really serious. No worries, I think no one who had a chance to read some of your posts isn't going to take you seriously ever. I like how you make the thread being a joke after you got laughed at. Dignity is important.
Merdaneth Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2009.10.17 21:34:00 - [85] Did you recently acquire this account, or have you gone completely daft Bellum? What is with the mission runner hate? A. Any activity affects gameplay. People manufacturing will impact the market, mining will impact the market, etc.etc. This isn't an argument in itself to try and change something B. You seem to have an agenda here you don't mention. If you want to combat the excessive CPU cycles, simply limit mission running to 10 per day or something like that. Even better, limit logon time to 3 hours per day. Heavy users use excessive CPU cycles per account. ____ The Illusion of Freedom \| The Truth about Slavery
MatrixSkye MkII Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.17 21:37:00 - [86] Edited by: MatrixSkye MkII on 17/10/2009 21:37:33 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Ahh, the parody thread of the parody thread... I'm really amused that so many mission runners thought that I was really serious. Translation: "Nah! Hell nah!. I was just kidding. Really. Haha. It was a joke. April fools! Nah, I was just kidding. Really."
MaxxOmega Caldari Wrong Indeed	Posted - 2009.10.17 21:47:00 - [87] Originally by: MatrixSkye MkII Edited by: MatrixSkye MkII on 17/10/2009 15:25:18 Why the "Their Way And That's That" (T.W.A.T.T.) players are bad for Eve. -T.W.A.T.T's, usually the extreme h4rdc0re PVPers, believe there is only one right way to play Eve. If you refuse to play that way then they whine to CCP to send you to their gatecamps to contribute as a killmail to their boards. These people think only 1-dimensionally and are usually harmless. However, when they become VERY VOCAL WHINERS they tend to start disrupting the forums with their rhetoric. -They absolutely abhor players that seek to minimize risk, well, except themselves of course. They consider it prudent common sense when they minimize their own risk. Due to their short-sightedness they tend to be self-destructive dragging the entire game population with them if they are listened to. -All the qualities they profess to hate in "carebears" they themselves posses. They are greedy. They usually love to hoard pixels (in the form of killmails) and they want the game headed in a direction that only benefits their play style. They seem to be extremely selfish and self-absorbed. -They usually prey on weak targets such as miners, ratters, missionrunners, and basically anything that won't give them a hard fight. They have the ability to choose their battles, killing anything they can gank in seconds, and avoid that which will give them anything resembling a fair fight. Yet, T.W.A.T.T.'s still complain they play Eve in hard mode while critisizing all other play styles and their lack of risk. -These players discharge large quantities of bitter tears. And funnily enough, usually profess that their ships run on "tears" as well. There is a plethora of other reasons, but meh. One of the best posts ever on this subject...
LaVista Vista Conservative Shenanigans Party	Posted - 2009.10.17 22:00:00 - [88] Originally by: MaxxOmega Originally by: MatrixSkye MkII Edited by: MatrixSkye MkII on 17/10/2009 15:25:18 Why the "Their Way And That's That" (T.W.A.T.T.) players are bad for Eve. -T.W.A.T.T's, usually the extreme h4rdc0re PVPers, believe there is only one right way to play Eve. If you refuse to play that way then they whine to CCP to send you to their gatecamps to contribute as a killmail to their boards. These people think only 1-dimensionally and are usually harmless. However, when they become VERY VOCAL WHINERS they tend to start disrupting the forums with their rhetoric. -They absolutely abhor players that seek to minimize risk, well, except themselves of course. They consider it prudent common sense when they minimize their own risk. Due to their short-sightedness they tend to be self-destructive dragging the entire game population with them if they are listened to. -All the qualities they profess to hate in "carebears" they themselves posses. They are greedy. They usually love to hoard pixels (in the form of killmails) and they want the game headed in a direction that only benefits their play style. They seem to be extremely selfish and self-absorbed. -They usually prey on weak targets such as miners, ratters, missionrunners, and basically anything that won't give them a hard fight. They have the ability to choose their battles, killing anything they can gank in seconds, and avoid that which will give them anything resembling a fair fight. Yet, T.W.A.T.T.'s still complain they play Eve in hard mode while critisizing all other play styles and their lack of risk. -These players discharge large quantities of bitter tears. And funnily enough, usually profess that their ships run on "tears" as well. There is a plethora of other reasons, but meh. One of the best posts ever on this subject... I was just about to say the exact same. You are on a roll' today MatrixSkye. Keep on posting
MatrixSkye MkII Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.17 22:07:00 - [89] Thanks! I'm glad some of you saw it as the parody it was meant to be. I thought it had been missed completely . The L.4.M.H.R.'s VS T.W.A.T.T.'s Oh, it's on!
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.10.17 22:11:00 - [90] Originally by: Zeba Originally by: Bellum Eternus ...Do I really think that CCP will move L4s to lowsec? No. Do I want them to? No. It would be pointless. Mission runners are incapable of living in lowsec, or they'd already be there, or living in 0.0, but instead the only thing they can accomplish is fighting NPCs...Why are high sec mission runners so unconcerned about the rest of the game around them and how it affects them? Why do they go to such great lengths to avoid the rest of the game? Because a fairly high percentage of those high sec mission runners are isk generating alts of low sec pirates and nullsec alliance members. No argument there! A while back I killed a mission runner in Gyerzen, and the guy had a maxed out deadspace fit Absolution. Dual Corpum A-Type medium reps, all sorts of good stuff. It turns out that it was an alt of a person in a large 0.0 alliance, and someone who was fairly high up in their command structure. Anyway, he was pretty mad about me shooting his stuff and complained a lot, but I just thought it was funny that so many 0.0/lowsec guys have mission running alts. -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Tier 5 Battleships
elohllird Funky Chill Collective	Posted - 2009.10.17 22:14:00 - [91] ummm bellum i dont give a **** about your opinions, As you are a poo poo head. check me out rasclart
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.10.17 22:33:00 - [92] Originally by: MatrixSkye MkII Edited by: MatrixSkye MkII on 17/10/2009 22:11:08 Originally by: Bellum Eternus Ahh, the parody thread of the parody thread... I'm really amused that so many mission runners thought that I was really serious. Translation: "Nah! Hell nah!. I was just kidding. Really. Haha. Ya'll thought I was for realz? Hehe, hell nah. It was a joke. April fools! Nah, I was just kidding. Really. ." You realize you're referring to someone who ratted their sec up from -10 to 0 for an april fools joke right? -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Tier 5 Battleships
Mara Rinn	Posted - 2009.10.17 23:49:00 - [93] Originally by: Bellum Eternus It doesn't matter that an RMT mission runner might run missions more than a 'normal' mission runner. The hordes of mission runners make up for any increase in total play time by RMT mission runners. You're totally ignoring the point: I am extrapolating the impact a very small group of RMT mission running accounts have to the level at which mission runners operate. Did you not read your original post, where you quoted CCP as saying that the RMT botters were using 30% more CPU than other players? How can you extrapolate the impact from a very small group of RMT mission running accounts to the rest of the people in the game running missions, when there is that basic fact you have yet to acknowledge? [Aussie players: join channel ANZAC]
Zartanic Red Federation	Posted - 2009.10.17 23:53:00 - [94] Originally by: Mara Rinn Originally by: Bellum Eternus It doesn't matter that an RMT mission runner might run missions more than a 'normal' mission runner. The hordes of mission runners make up for any increase in total play time by RMT mission runners. You're totally ignoring the point: I am extrapolating the impact a very small group of RMT mission running accounts have to the level at which mission runners operate. Did you not read your original post, where you quoted CCP as saying that the RMT botters were using 30% more CPU than other players? How can you extrapolate the impact from a very small group of RMT mission running accounts to the rest of the people in the game running missions, when there is that basic fact you have yet to acknowledge? ..and its the reason why scanner spamming was nerfed..the spam that PVP players were doing, not mission runners. Still, for some, facts are never allowed to get in the way of an opinion.
Acrid Acid	Posted - 2009.10.18 00:55:00 - [95] Bellum, you are such a coward, why dont you simply say; Sorry guys, I was wrong, duh. Instead of trying to turn your topic to a faked troll attempt... ''shake head''
Adonis 4174	Posted - 2009.10.18 01:23:00 - [96] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Mission runners do everything an RMT account does, only without that last step: selling ISK. They perform the same actions and exhibit the same behaviors and cause the same problems and issues. Any basis for that? I took all the stats you cite as being down to the impact of macros.
Aqriue	Posted - 2009.10.18 01:44:00 - [97] I dislike the huge grind of waiting out the skill system to ding 5 for just one skill after 3 weeks, imagine paying to watch a 2 hour movie but your stuck watching an hour of previews for up comming movies. Thats not fun and neither is waiting out the pleathora of skills that EVE offers, so I prefer to use just one set of implants and grind out missions to save up until I feel comfortable to PvP for an extended peroid of time. I also don't enjoy the hammer, rock, and anvil approach of PvP that much; turn on scrambler, web, orbit, then bash away at hundreds of thousands of hitpoints because everyone is using 3 1600 plates, 3 trimarks, a DCU, on an abbadon or a maller/drake with similar builds that emphasis on +hitpoints. Oh, and I enjoy the tears my actions bring because I seem to be "doing it wrong"
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.10.18 01:50:00 - [98] Originally by: Acrid Acid Bellum, you are such a coward, why dont you simply say; Sorry guys, I was wrong, duh. Instead of trying to turn your topic to a faked troll attempt... ''shake head'' LOL. I'm going to have to start getting Chribba to notarize my troll posts beforehand so that way I have third party verification as to what my original intentions are. Look at the very first reply to the thread. Someone was made aware of my intent outside of the thread just as I posted it lol. -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Tier 5 Battleships
Roger11	Posted - 2009.10.18 02:03:00 - [99] High sec mission runners are too large a portion of CCP's subscribers for them to be changed much. What I would like to see though is more high profit activities we can do in low and null sec to give people a good reason to try something that takes more risk. Its just not worth it for a lot of players atm. Decent profit with the least risk is the most sensible way to make ISK for pvping. Its got the best balance between risk/time invested/effort for ISK imo and that could be changed a bit without upsetting mission runners by just tweaking a few other isk making activities
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2009.10.18 02:04:00 - [100] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Acrid Acid Bellum, you are such a coward, why dont you simply say; Sorry guys, I was wrong, duh. Instead of trying to turn your topic to a faked troll attempt... ''shake head'' LOL. I'm going to have to start getting Chribba to notarize my troll posts beforehand so that way I have third party verification as to what my original intentions are. Look at the very first reply to the thread. Someone was made aware of my intent outside of the thread just as I posted it lol. and if that isn't enough see post 72 where I called it.
MatrixSkye MkII Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.18 02:24:00 - [101] Edited by: MatrixSkye MkII on 18/10/2009 02:25:43 The "Their Way And That's That" (T.W.A.T.T.) players certainly have a right to their opinions and definitely have a right to their play style. However, Bellum and the other T.W.A.T.T.'s need to understand that Eve is a sand box where anyone can be and do what he wants, including run missions if it's desired. The quicker these T.W.A.T.T.'s realize this the quicker we'll evolve to a more tolerable society within Eve and its forums. But the key is understanding. We must accept that not all of us enjoy playing the game a certain way. With that said, I invite Bellum and all the other T.W.A.T.T.'s that share his ideology to think of solutions to improve and at the same time allow all styles of play to co-exist with one another.
Dr Deadbolt Gallente	Posted - 2009.10.18 02:36:00 - [102] When bellend is old enough ( and manages to get the grades ) If he ever joined the army , I reckon he would insist on 1 forward gear and 6 reverse
NSSQUAD	Posted - 2009.10.18 02:44:00 - [103] i just want to know how can doing lvl 4 missions all day be fun? you can try to defend running lvl 4 missions all day and all night as "fun" but sadly your wrong and if that's all you do then you are noobs
De'Veldrin Minmatar Special Projects Executive	Posted - 2009.10.18 03:00:00 - [104] Originally by: NSSQUAD i just want to know how can doing gatecamps all day be fun? you can try to defend doing gatecamps all day and all night as "fun" but sadly your wrong and if that's all you do then you are stupid I fixed your post for you. No charge. --Vel In the world of emoticons, I was colon capital d.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.10.18 03:00:00 - [105] Originally by: Dr Deadbolt When bellend is old enough ( and manages to get the grades ) If he ever joined the army , I reckon he would insist on 1 forward gear and 6 reverse I'm not French. -.- -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Tier 5 Battleships
MatrixSkye MkII Minmatar	Posted - 2009.10.18 03:05:00 - [106] Originally by: NSSQUAD i just want to know how can doing lvl 4 missions all day be fun? you can try to defend running lvl 4 missions all day and all night as "fun" but sadly your wrong and if that's all you do then you are noobs I must admit I find them fun :( I know I'm a freak because of it but I don't know where to get help :( I don't want to be this way. I want to be normal and only like the things you like. Please, I need you to help me. I really really want to like the things you like and not the things that I like. My likes need to be about you, not me. I feel so whicked and devious :(.

CCP Applebabe	Posted - 2009.10.18 03:05:00 - [107] Troll. Locked. Applebabe Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online Contact us


Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one 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.