Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tylara duChelm
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 11:22:00 -
[31]
Move more interesting oretypes to highsec roid-fields. One of the complaints about l4 missioners is that they're producing too large a % of the rare ores. . .
|
Laevateinn
Novus Aevum Dominatus Novus Aevum
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 11:24:00 -
[32]
What's the matter OP, want to ruin the experience of those players who actually like High Sec for their own varied and legitimate reasons? Missioning is in itself a profession and generates its own market, a demand for modules, an outflow of loot/reprocessed ore, tax for corporations and a desire for expensive faction modules. Level 4's are fine in high security the way they are.
You want more people to shoot in low sec? Make low security a more tempting place and balance the risk vs reward equation, right now its High Sec for missioning, low sec for PvP, null sec for blobs. For the solo missioner or small corporation just finding their feet, low sec is probably the last place they would want to mission right now. And the industrial potential is a joke.
|
Vadimik
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 11:27:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Vadimik on 03/11/2009 11:30:32
Originally by: Tylara duChelm
Quote: Because it's beneficial to EvE in the long term.
How?
You have pretty much answered your own question - by offering too easy and mindless of a way to earn isk. (Again, as compared to other highsec activities.) Sure there can be some other way to balance out lvl 4's - but simply forcing them into lowsec it both easy and pretty foolproof. And makes sense storyline-wise, too.
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 11:58:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 03/11/2009 11:59:15
Originally by: Gyle Interesting points but unfortunately not valid. The market will be just fine.
That's interesting. Will you take the responsibility if it goes wrong?
Originally by: King Rothgar People in high sec absolutely refuse to take any risk at all in the game so they will just watch their income get slashed rather than learn to mission in low sec safely.
To mission safely in low sec means becoming a pirate, doesn't it? Apart from that, how do you think pirate population will develop with L4s in low sec? Even if running missions in L4 is fase now, it won't be safe then.
The only valid argument I've read so far is that high-sec missions are too safe and easy. And I agree. Well the direct solution would be to make them harder. So boosting mission NPCs and include ways to screw up and get into dire problems seems like the way to go. Regarding NPCs, what's with those NPC batttlecruisers anyway? They're total pushovers and seem to have stats like pre-boost BCs.
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
ropnes
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 12:22:00 -
[35]
Edited by: ropnes on 03/11/2009 12:24:00 What do you think would happen if you made them harder? People would either not do them or do them in large groups, because for the people we're talking about loss is unacceptable. You can't have real risk in missions as long as they're static and predictable because people will min/max them to the point where they never lose ships and make the most profit.
People not doing the missions is the same thing as moving them to low sec, people doing them in groups is good.
Honestly though, if you aren't capable of missioning in low sec then you suck. If you don't dare to try then you're a coward (not that I care). I do care about the first point though, because you're not rewarded for not sucking. The reason you'd move L4 missions to lowsec is to make the difference in rewards between highsec and lowsec / 0.0 very big. If it's very big then people will be encouraged to go there. You could do that by increasing the mission rewards outside empire by an insane amount but the problem with that is that they would be a bit too good. Maybe nerf highsec L4s and buff lowsec / 0.0 ones at the same time?
Realistically lowsec wouldn't be able to support a large missioning population because surviving there has a lot to do with it not being very populated, but that will balance itself out. We still need a buff of the rewards. Dominion seems like it could remedy this problem in 0.0 but we won't be seeing changes to NPC space...
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 12:43:00 -
[36]
Originally by: ropnes Honestly though, if you aren't capable of missioning in low sec then you suck. If you don't dare to try then you're a coward (not that I care).
The same could be said about posting with your main.
Honestly though, I don't get your arguments, if there are any. Making them harder doesn't mean making them impossible for single, smart, pilots.
If you make missions harder, people have to actually think about what they're doing, instead of aggroing the whole room and permatanking it. That would be the first step anyway. Increase overall NPC dps per mission room to a level that can't be permatanked. There's nothing worse than AFK missionrunning. Next thing would be slight randomization.
You could argue about low sec missions just the same. Either people will not do them, because loss is unacceptable, and pirate population will grow if L4s would be moved there, or you are/become a pirate, effectively negating most of the risk. This whole discussion seems like a big "boost us pirates" request in disguise.
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
ropnes
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 13:17:00 -
[37]
If you make them harder people fit more tank and the missions take longer. It's the same thing as nerfing the rewards. If you make them harder to the point where people actually risks their ships then people stop doing them. Missions can never be hard. You can't add difficulty to them as long as they don't require skill, and missions currently don't.
It's not about boosting pirates it's about rewarding players who dare step outside of highsec. In my opinion the rewards outside highsec should be SIGNIFICANTLY better than in highsec and they're not.
|
Dis Assemble
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 13:22:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek The same could be said about posting with your main.
Alt or main, who cares? Only in WoW people care, and even there only when lvl 1 toons post. Add to that the default posting toon settings sometimes act quirky on these forums, and the simple fact that specialization of seperate characters doesn't make the person behind it any less credible, and it really doesn't matter what people post with.
For all it matters, a 5 year old character could have less than 2 mill skillpoints spent and never seen lowsec. That still won't tell you whether it's maincharacter ever saw lowsec either. The main character might even be as young as 2 weeks!
|
nafiy gnaw
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 13:45:00 -
[39]
Not gonna happen: People will just switch to another method to make hi-sec money.
Not gonna happen: One less reliable method of making money, even harder to replace lost ships, even less incentive to PVP.
Not gonna happen: Lets blow up the faction loot market.
It has been said before, it will be said again. Lvl4 missions will be in high-sec until the last bit of EvE is deleted from this universe.
|
Tarron Sarek
Gallente Biotronics Inc. Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 14:38:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 03/11/2009 14:42:31
Originally by: Dis Assemble
Originally by: Tarron Sarek The same could be said about posting with your main.
Alt or main, who cares? Only in WoW people care, and even there only when lvl 1 toons post. Add to that the default posting toon settings sometimes act quirky on these forums, and the simple fact that specialization of seperate characters doesn't make the person behind it any less credible, and it really doesn't matter what people post with.
For all it matters, a 5 year old character could have less than 2 mill skillpoints spent and never seen lowsec. That still won't tell you whether it's maincharacter ever saw lowsec either. The main character might even be as young as 2 weeks!
Quoting out of context is not useful. Wasting a whole reply on a quote that's not relevant to the topic is also not useful.
Actually that was the point of my comment, which you slightly missed. Chest-beating statements about people being cowards or just 'sucking' without the slightest evidence to back it up is not useful for the topic. Apart from that it might be interesting to know if someone is a pirate or not ingame. Players posting here in F&I should be impartial, but most are not. It's always good to know who you're talking with.
___________________________________
Balance is power, guard hide it well
"Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam" |
|
Roemy Schneider
Vanishing Point.
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 15:04:00 -
[41]
just fiddle with the lolly point equation in regards to system security rating [unless unprobe'able t3 in null-sec would be able to flood the market with slave imps and machariels -.-] - putting the gist back into logistics |
Traidor Disloyal
Private Nuisance
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 15:05:00 -
[42]
Originally by: nafiy gnaw It has been said before, it will be said again. Lvl4 missions will be in high-sec until the last bit of EvE is deleted from this universe.
Not going to happen. CCP seems to be going down the "Easy Road" in this game. CCP is making the game more "friendly" for people and easier for people to make isk. Does anyone honestly think that CCP will make a major change and move Level 4 mission agents into low sec just to please a small number of players?
If you do believe this then I have some prime swamp land in Florida that has your name on it. ************************************************* I have three characters. One has Cov Ops V along with all the bells and whistles that goes with it. |
Misanthra
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 16:37:00 -
[43]
Edited by: Misanthra on 03/11/2009 16:37:11 If level 4 moved to null sec...noone would run them. 2 problems
1. Agents are not creative. Same missions, same locations. Even a really slow pirate will learn mission station A sends every missioner to system b severals tims a day. Be like delivering people to gate camp pirates.
2. Or say you ninjya by the gate camp...you are now a pve ship running missions that can take time to run. NOt all pirates are lazy gate humpers...some actually scan and hunt your down. So...they give the missioner time to run the mission abit , find them and pop them when fighting off several bs's since softened up. Kill mail, t2/named fittings off the killed missioner since kind of hard to tank and fight lv 4 bs's on t1 gear, and the millions in salvage left behind for the taking.
Sounds sooo good, if a low sec pirate.
|
Cearain
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 18:18:00 -
[44]
Originally by: annab Personally moving all lvl4s to low sec will just mean people move to lower agents or start mining....
You forgot not logging in to eve anymore.
Some people like running missions. They look forward to getting that golem or other t2 ship or whatever. It would simply take too long running level 3s. Obviously CCP has done something right with missions since so many people enjoy that aspect of the game why should they f it up?
Why don't they move level fours to low sec? Because itĘs too much fun swimming in the tears of pirates who are too incompetent to get kills against anything other than pve setup ships. Why does the op want to fight ships that are set up for pve? Why not fight pilots who have their ship set up for pvp? DonĘt bother answering - we know the answer.
|
FISHANDCHIPS
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 18:21:00 -
[45]
you know thinking about it the low and null sec carebears are crying more than most of the high sec carebears
|
Markus Reese
Caldari Lorentzian Expeditionaries
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 19:19:00 -
[46]
Counterpoint to the profit arguement that the L4s are too much isk, just think, if mining was revamped to remove macros and tritanium hit 4isk/unit again, tritanium mining would outprofit missioning. Should all tritanium be moved to lowsec? As well, if this happened, cost of ships would go up, as would ammo, fittings, etc and suddlenly mission running isn't so profitable.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 19:53:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Markus Reese Counterpoint to the profit arguement that the L4s are too much isk, just think, if mining was revamped to remove macros and tritanium hit 4isk/unit again, tritanium mining would outprofit missioning. Should all tritanium be moved to lowsec? As well, if this happened, cost of ships would go up, as would ammo, fittings, etc and suddlenly mission running isn't so profitable.
my corp mate really liked the 15+m/hour during the 4isk/trit period^^
|
DeputyFruitfly
|
Posted - 2009.11.03 21:49:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Gyle Move all level 4 agents in high sec into low sec...
no qualification necessary, the benefits are obvious. nuff said.
If you want targets, go to 00, wuss.
It's all relative, eh?
|
Freya Vistari
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 18:54:00 -
[49]
CCP really needs to act on this. Its been beaten to death for a reason its an idea that should have been implemented years ago.
Essentially there are two types of players who are against it.
1)The Noobs. Not meant as a slur, there are plenty out there and lots of the above posts seem to go over the same old arguments such as "we are a high sec corp and we just want to play the game that way." That statement is fine you can go on to do so but at the moment you are being rewarded too heavily for your game time. As inflation becomes more and more noticeable in EVE CCP really needs to work on their handling of this matter.
2) The experienced players with ALTS. These guys should know better. CCP Has never been about making a fluffy game where everyone can get their fair share on their alts whilst pvping in low sec or 0.0 with mains.
CCP is all about doing what is best for the game and although there are plenty of whiners who would always make colossal noise over changes they don't like, it doesn't change the fact that something needs to be done. All the 0.0 Alliances are about to loose huge tracts of space in the coming Dominion patch no doubt upsetting thousands of players but that doesn't change the fact that these are changes that NEED to happen.
Back when i used to live in highsec there was a nice quiet little system where i used to hang out. but then CCP plonked a LVL 4 agent in there and it ballooned to 170 member average. TBH its makes me queezy seeing all these people crowding these systems while lowsec stays partially deserted. Bottom line is if you take enough reward out of what's happening in highsec and throw it into lowsec people (whether they will admit to it on here or not) will HAVE to move there. It would be how eve used to be with anti-pie corps banding together to try and secure the lowsec systems from pirates so they can run the missions.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE CCP. Listen to this suggestion and lay this matter to bed once and for all.
|
Gyle
Caldari Arcana Imperii Ltd. Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 19:11:00 -
[50]
Originally by: DeputyFruitfly
Originally by: Gyle Move all level 4 agents in high sec into low sec...
no qualification necessary, the benefits are obvious. nuff said.
If you want targets, go to 00, wuss.
It's all relative, eh?
Yeah I live in 0.0 bro. Perhaps stop trying to make out you understand more about peoples play habits then you do?
My Issue is with all cowardly grinders hiding in Highsec and clogging up the space. CCP has been trying to shift people out to low sec and and 0.0. Hence fctional warfare and sov changes.
If, they want to do it properly then all they have to do is hit the nervous stote-like grinders in their pocket.
|
|
Aqriue
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 20:19:00 -
[51]
I have yet to any reasonable explanination as to why all level 4s need to be moved to low sec other then "to shoot with impunity because low sec is safer to do so" . The opposite of shooting people in high sec. To balance any chance between both sides of the pirate and mission runner, CCP would have to something to make it equal such as any one of the following
1)Reduce NPC damage so you don't need 2x2 damage specific hardeners + 1 rep eatting up 5 low slots for armor tank.
2)Increase resist on hardeners, such as 90% to that resist so you only need one instead of 2. Buffer disseappers very quickly in PVE and landing in the middle of a pirate ambush reduces your chance of getting to sniper range with buffer to avoid damage.
3)Find a use for capacitor in pvp other then laser/hybrid cost, because its not used on buffer tanks for repairing during battle and neuts make it useless while overly large cap boosters make it pointless to store ammo charges in your cargo hold.
4)Make pvp more dynamnic rather then relying on Counterstrike/Halo online method of grinding buffer tanks/hitpoints down to zero. What about hits to engineering or rendering weapons systems inoperable (ECM don't count)
5)Lowsec is part of empire, but they don't patrol it. Then its not part of their empire. Or perhaps CONCORD should respond to lowsec encounters with a hugely delayed reaction time and pirates need to destroy the ship quickly, but need to run for 15 minues and its legal to do so without fearing the BANHAMMER.
6) Gateguns and Station Sentries should be loaded with CONCORD One-hit-wonder rounds, so you can't choke/gate/station camp in lowsec. Doing so completely negates any reason to put more rewarding missions in lowsec.
7) Scanning would have to be made more difficult. Why mission when in 30 seconds you know a pirate is going to warp on top of you. You can't go back, because they will be waiting. so cancel and try again, taking a faction hit. Ultimately, they will have to leave because the level 4 agent will no longer talk to them and then you the pirate will log off to kvetch on the official boards about lack of targets.
8)There would have to be much greater reward for missioning in low sec to offset the cost of bringing in 3/4s of a billion in implants in my head. I know I am not going to spend 2 months in highsec grinding my skill que doing missions with crappy rewards to get a set of tech II large guns, then jump out and training at a slower rate while missioning for higher risk/reward. I want to move on to the next ship I want as quickly as possible and don't say "spam warp to celestial" because it only takes 1 or 2 unlucky lag spikes to get my pod locked by an interceptor because the pilot wanted to polish his e-peen and my wallet allows me to afford only a set of +3. My subscription is my time, not yours (otherwise "mining your own minerals" is actually free) and I would sooner cancel my sub then sit in station spinning a newbship because I have nothing better to do.
Once I feel comfortable to PVP, I will do so with a wallet to fund the activity.
|
Sig Sour
|
Posted - 2009.11.09 21:59:00 -
[52]
If level 4 missions were moved to low sec, people would just run level 3's yes. There would be by far less isk being seeded. Level 4's would be extremely profitable. And maybe, just maybe, a few mission runners seeking fortune might go into *gasp* low sec.
|
Mike Voidstar
|
Posted - 2009.11.10 14:25:00 -
[53]
Don't fool yourselves. Believe it or not, the vast majority of carebears will never enter low-sec for a simple reason:
They don't like to be killed in PvP.
Give them 2 free faction fit ships for every time they get killed in low sec, and most of them still would not go. They simply don't like that style of play. It goes beyond Risk Vs. Reward, the same guy that would laugh off the loss of his ship because he forgot to turn on his armor rep 20 minutes after his insurance cancelled will not go to low-sec regardless of the reward because he does not want to pvp with mouth-breathing baby eaters.
Add to that the sheer number of mouth-breathing baby eaters that live in low-sec, camping gates and waiting to kill (and for some reason, pod) defenseless newbs trying to do that first courier run into lowsec and the situation is just un-acceptable to the actual carebears.
It is just not going to happen.
|
Van Gend
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 12:53:00 -
[54]
I just wonder why you want them there? Would you not rather have PVP players there to do combat with? Why would you ask CCP to force PVE people into your little trap?
Or is it a matter of you being tired of highsec missiongrinding and you would like CCP to increase the profit in lowsec, so you can afford to do so even if you lose ships now and then. Becouse thats what you are offering the highsec PVE players mate!
|
Thenoran
Caldari Pelican.
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 14:10:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Thenoran on 13/11/2009 14:12:52 Are level 4's too easy money? Yes, deffo on that one. But if you move it to low-sec, people won't run them, even for the current ISK. The pirates and other pilots looking for a profit would swarm all the L4 agent stations like mad, killing anything that undocks. On top of that, any pirate with half a brain would quickly know where the agents are sending the mission runners. That means gate camps, and quite a few as well.
No one would fit faction gear to their battleship anymore (I never have actually), killing off the faction loot market as very few would dare putting an X-Type XL Shield Booster on a PvP ship.
Moving it to low-sec is just a boost to pirates in disguise, nothing more. I do agree level 4 missions need a change, but not this kind of change that is entirely one sided towards pirates getting easy kills.
Make the level 4 missions harder, especially the ones issues by L4Q18-20 agents. Add neut towers, add statis towers, more scrambling frigs and overall DPS.
If that makes people group up to run the missions, good! (would also split the rewards) That's what EVE is about, teamwork.
The other option is to make level 4s in low-sec runnable in something other than a battleship. PvE battleship in low-sec is NEVER EVER going to work, no matter what other say. A T2 fitted PvE Raven will always die very quickly if missioning in low-sec due to its crappy mobility. However, if level 4 missions that appear in low-sec were adjusted a little so you could run them in a HAC or a CS, maybe then it would be a little more equal terms. Also, the mission itself should be a lot harder to scan down in order to give the mission runner a chance. ------------------------ Low-sec is like sailing along the coast of Somalia...
|
Doctor Penguin
Amarr Viziam
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 14:30:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Doctor Penguin on 13/11/2009 14:30:43 I would quit if this happened. I only have about 10m SP, lvl 4s are not "money making machines" for me. I need that ISK to enjoy PVPing in 0.0 when I stockpile enough so I don't have to worry about losing a few BS.
Oh, hang on, I have an idea. Sure, move all lvl 4 agents to lowsec, but also remove local and make them unscannable in mission rooms. And buff the rewards. ________________________________________________
Originally by: CCP Soundwave Get out Mindstar, or I'll punch you in the ovaries. |
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 17:06:00 -
[57]
Originally by: FISHANDCHIPS
Originally by: Gyle Move all level 4 agents in high sec into low sec...
no qualification necessary, the benefits are obvious. nuff said.
then people will start farming L3 missions and you will be back here crying your eyes out
try to think of a good idea that will benefit everyone
Pretty much what I'd do if they nerfed level 4s. I only run them casually in a Raven to fund pvp, but if they trashed it I'd just switch over to a horribly pimped out Drake and steamroller 3s. Everyone loses.
|
Athar Mu
Gallente Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 17:41:00 -
[58]
Ok if you do move them to lowsec, make it so all missions in lowsec have acceleration gates and if the mission isn't yours or you are not in the same gang as the mission runner then you cant enter the mission area. This way mission runners are safe in there mission BUT they are not safe when going too and from the mission so lowsec pirates have the chance as they undock from the station, go to gates to move systems and come back to the station.
Mission runners don't need to have PvP fit BS's to fend off the gank that would usually come, if they did them in lowsec but it would up the risk of running them so make the quality of the agents in lowsec higher to counter this, so only low quality agents are in highsec and the high ones in lowsec. So you get more rewards in lowsec BUT you also have more risk if you get caught on the undock. Plus if you have to warp out and a pirate is waiting on your acceleration gate into the mission you could get caught then as well.
|
Tylara duChelm
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 18:20:00 -
[59]
The PvE system, as it stands currently, creates a huge wall between low and high-sec missioning. The wall is there for many reasons. Several people have touched on the differences between PvE and PvP fitted ships. What few people are recognizing is the strategic value of opportunity.
Say you're a solo missioner doing level 4s. Lets even say that you are fully set up for PvP, and it doesn't hamper your PvE abilities.
Some PvPer scans you down and jumps in on top of you. Now here's the problem. You already have the NPCs to worry about, and now here's a PvP ship honed to a fine edge for killing ships like yours. Not only do you have to worry about the PvPer, but the NPCs don't miraculously go away. What's worse, more likely than not the PvPer won't be alone. The battle is HIGHLY HIGHLY stacked against the Missioner. Further, the PvPers can warp in at no risk. If they don't like the ship they see, they can warp out before the missioner has a chance to respond.
PvPing mission runners is PvP easy-mode. In fact, I would go on to say that demanding more people move PvP to lowsec is cowardly and shameful. If the problem is "too much profit in too little time" the solution isn't to "spank them like a naughty monkey!" it is to either increase the amount of time needed to make the same profit, or reduce the profit per mission.
If the problem is that level 4s are too profitable compared to other high-sec methods, you need to either reduce the profitability of level 4s, or increase the profitability of the other isk-generators.
If the problem with level 4s is that they "out mine mining" then reduce the minerals one gets from the loot in level 4s.
If the problem with level 4s is that they aren't risky enough for the reward, either increase the risk, or reduce the reward.
if the problem with level 4s is that they are more profitable than level 5s due to the risk of level 5s, then either reduce the profit of level 4s, increase the profit of level 5s, or reduce the risk of level 5s. (like, oh, make missioning deadspace unprobeable)
|
mettisitis sindicis
|
Posted - 2009.11.13 18:52:00 -
[60]
Originally by: wallenbergaren It's not about wanting more targets in lowsec, it's about people playing this game like a totally mindless grind MMO. I don't care if you remove lvl 4s from highsec or simply make the ones outside highsec five times as profitable, but the current balance is f***ed because right now there is no real incentive to make money outside highsec (on a personal level)
That's a fundamental design flaw of the game. PvP in this game is only sustained through pve farming(directly or indirectly), but pve is not sustainable in systems without some form of protection. When the gank crowd throws about the term "risk vs. reward" they completely ignore that fact. The risk of losing ships, items and isk is really measured in how much time you have to spend doing boring stuff to get it back. There are already more lucrative opportunities outside hi-sec, but mission running will never be one of them. You can not efficiently take on 30 NPC rats, while watching the d-scan every 5-seconds, and running away (since your pve fit is useless pvp fits) every time someone finds you. Couple this with ganks and podkills when you occasionally get caught off guard and the potential standing loss for failing missions and it simply isn't worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |