EVE Search - FW MISSION NERF INCOMING!

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Warfare & Tactics

FW MISSION NERF INCOMING!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.24 23:49:00 - [1] Yep, caps letters are needed. CCP is likely going to nerf FW agents into "useless" again as currently on Sisi FW agents behave again like normal agents, thus declining a mission will result in a pretty heavy standing loss. Some say, FW mission declining and browsing missions is "abusing" them. IMHO it was one of the best things to make them usefull for doing mission and combining them with any PvP related activity which IIRC was their original purpose. To get ppl into low sec. I could live with a reduced reward but making them not "browseable" or "pickable" again is IMHO just stupid. Yes, Im annoyed. Propsal in the Assembly hall to keep it like it is: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1219869 ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.25 10:28:00 - [2] Gallente and Caldari NPCs may need balancing. Maybe the reward needs a balancing (if CCP think it is to high). This is about HAVING A TOOL IN A SANDBOX TO PLAY WITH. In my link some of you dont seem to bother to read I stated out something very important: Originally by: "Garr Anders" An example setup for a mixed PvP/FW/plexing corp operation. Rallypoint is a top station. FW mission are gated by acceleration gates just like plexes. Pick lvl of FW mission according to your fleet composition. Everybody pick a FW mission targeted. Move there in a fleet with scouts +1 or +2, to make sure gates are clear and the "heavier" stuff can pass. Alternatively go out in SBs only Kill targets of opportunity, avoid drawing attention from bigger fleets. In your target system: Assign one speed tank and dps per mission. Have scouts checking the systems around for early WT warnings [] Have fast tackle on gates to grab targets of opportunity [] Check for plexes in system This will allow you to: [] Gain standing via plexes and FW mission for higher FW mission agents [] Gain LPs via the missions [] Roam around for solo PvP [] Having scouts out independent from militia chat and on Eve Voice in Fleet [] Have back up for small gang in case solo isn't possible [] Take plexes and contest systems annoying the Amarr *[] As FC: Gives yourself an objective that can be achieved and the whole fleet a purpose, which you can announce so the whole fleet can work toward achieving your objective.** This whole operation doesnt need a lot of ppl. Feel free to grab ppl from trustworthy militia members (use common sense and take ppl who are a bit more patient) but make sure that your corpies are the dominant force (so never take more from the militia as you have corp mates in gang). The predominance of your own corp members allows you as FC to enforce your operation goals, while at the same time showing the militia/non corpies that plexes, FW missions and PvP can be combined to a fun operation with a goal rather than sitting hours on a gate. Although it significantly lowers your LP income and standing increase by sharing, this is still more than sitting on gate. You can speed this up by announcing such an operation a day ahead (feel free to use corp mail) so ppl can browse for good missions in your target system before you go out. FW mission will stay 24hours in your journal. Failing, not responding will not result in an standing loss. So rather than gate camping/station games/or aimless roaming around your fleet will have an target system(s) an objective, as well an incentive to PvP. If you as an player are the opinion that I in FW am earning to much ISK or better LP, feel free to shoot me! Im in low-sec! I got NPC aggro! Not gate guns! No need for a scanner the beacon is visible to everybody, yes including neutrals! These are not untouchable lvl4 high sec mission in motsu, Im there waiting for you to come to shoot me! But if your opposing faction militia is too stupid to look out for you and let one side grind all LPs rather than stop them its the PLAYERS own fault. Hey! That would be like ... PVP in a SANDBOX ! Ppl are asking to shoot misions farmers, so there they are! Where are those griefers if you need them but going up against a target in militia beacon is to "difficult"? ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.25 11:46:00 - [3] Edited by: Garr Anders on 25/11/2009 11:47:49 If you all think that there reward is to high, LOWER THE REWARD. Browsing/cycline/failing/chosing hasnt anything to do with that. That only allows you to : * choose your target system to contribute to the occupancy/victory points * pick missions suiteable to your fleet/ship (and especially for newer players this can be crucial, and wasnt FW meant to be for newer players) Or even better, why dont you try to shoot me? I repeat: * Im in low-sec. * On a visbible warpable beacon * with NPC aggro * and not gate or station guns arround! What's stopping you from stopping me? ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.25 15:23:00 - [4] Originally by: Merdaneth As recent as yesterday I've seen low-skill militia alts self-destruct their capsule to travel as fast as possible from the mission agent to the target mission system and open the warp in point. After opening the warp in point, they leave their noob ship and clone back to the agent system.... Efficient, yes. Odd, most certainly. Just opening the mission beacon also dont complets the mission for them. As long as the objective is not done (usually a kill mission) he will get no reward. If now somebody else is so nice to complete it for him thats something else. But we have RR alts already in PvP, so now we have other ppl filling other ppls LP wallet? You could just "not" complete the missions you dont know to whom they belong ? ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.25 15:53:00 - [5] Originally by: Merdaneth ... Obviously, this alt (the word alt kinda gives it away) has buddies set up inside the target system (or constellation) who complete the mission for him. They don't even have to be in an FW corp. So working in a team and setting an player created objective within an sandbox is easy income and needs to be nerfed? You could also just go there and shoot those players? You dont like the involvement of neutrals in FW? We have RR neutrals already in PvP. Also Ppl working together is now an exploit? Those ppl still need to share the reward and if its an alt so what? Ppl are multiboxing to increase their profit, thus multiboxing with an Orca and a Hulk to haul, give boni and get the roids is an exploit too? Sandbox anyone? Dont like it you can shoot me/them! Its not like Im farming Lvl4 missions afk in a CNR in motsu and complain about my salvage. I just want to pick my mission regarding my player created objectives. If the reward is to high, LOWER THE REWARD. The declining and "picking" missions is "game mechanic and balacing -wise" something different. They interact but can be examine independently and the "picking part" is NOT broken/unbalanced. LOWER the reward into OBLIVIION - frag - but that's not my point. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.25 16:41:00 - [6] Originally by: Merdaneth ... As an RP I'm disturbed by these obvious 'farming' excesses because I simply can't make sense of them in-character nor address or counter them in an in-character appropriate way. Sorry I got two posts mixed up in one. I am too disturbed by the farming of FW mission. But I am the opinion that the "cherry picking" is not the broken part. The reward might need to be adjusted to a reasonable level and Im all up for that to stop the farming. Not wanting to shoot neutrals I totally can understand too but neutral interference is something FW has to coop with since start, in PvP and now as missions as well. Having Eve as a sandbox and without destroying the sandbox that Eve is and with CCPs likely current stance (neutral RR ing in PvP is not an exploit) there is not much we can do against that. But again, cherry picking missions is not the broken part of the farming. Just reduce the reward and those only out for "easy and near exploiatble profit" will go back to what they were exploiting before and will leave the FW game to those that want to game that game. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.25 18:11:00 - [7] Originally by: Ralnik Have you guys noticed that standings don't get shared in gangs? I've been using a alt in gang with me and wanted to share the rewards to help build his TLF standings but they are never shared. Yes, Militia NPC corp standings does not share to chars not in the militia. Sharing along militia members and/or corp members does seem to work. My corp has been doing missions and sharing standing and LP for these together and that works. We use these mission to guide our new recruits into FW as well as plexing as well so far showing them a way to make at least some income while being in FW. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.25 18:39:00 - [8] Originally by: Ralnik Edited by: Ralnik on 25/11/2009 18:22:03 Originally by: Garr Anders Yes, Militia NPC corp standings does not share to chars not in the militia. Sharing along militia members and/or corp members does seem to work. My corp has been doing missions and sharing standing and LP for these together and that works. We use these mission to guide our new recruits into FW as well as plexing as well so far showing them a way to make at least some income while being in FW. Well he is in Militia and in FW, it's the CEO alt for my corp. I was trying to grind up his standings while I was running missions, but the standings never get shared. In normal high sec missions the NPC corp standings do get shared just not the faction standings. I haven't been able to figure out why I can't get shared standings, being he is running the missions with me. The only thing that gets shared is the LP's and ISK. Hmm I heared from somebody else trying to raise his CEO standing having similar issues. You might want to bug report that. We had two new players recently getting into my FW corp and we raised their standing from almost zero to 2something during the weekend doing missions and plexes described in one of my previous posts. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.26 09:57:00 - [9] Edited by: Garr Anders on 26/11/2009 09:58:48 Originally by: Ellamar Don't you realize the consequenses of quick and easy ISK ? Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 25/11/2009 23:56:28 Originally by: T'san Manaan Edited by: T''san Manaan on 25/11/2009 22:26:57 Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah I know FW costs a lot of money, hell, I spent countless billions on it and I left every once in a while to get ISK back until I got myself some extra accounts to run AFK-dominixes to rake in plenty of ISK to support my habit. quick CCP nerf AFK domis someones usintg them as a "free ISK" button As soon as they make more than 100 mil isk per hour and ruins the spirit of a whole aspect of EVE, I'd be the first one to support that. Originally by: Lusulpher Damn, FW missions are the least of 3 exploited and unbalanced ISK faucets(LvL4s in highsec, moongold!, in that order). ... Being able to choose target system and objective would equal AVOIDING PvP at ALL COSTS. ------- For clarity lets gather some facts: LvL4 mission: generate instant ISK as reward. LvL4 mission: generate LP as reward. Lvl4 mission: generate instant ISK with NPCs bounties. LvL4 mission: are done in high-sec. LvL4 mission: if somebody shoots/steals you, concord will kill him. LvL4 mission: any neutral will have to scan you down first LvL4 mission: can be done AFK LvL4 mission: can generate more than 100mil instant ISK per hour if done with an ALT (loot, salvage, dualboxing) LvL4 mission: can be done without any PvP LvL4 mission: You only can decline missions every 4 hours without a standig loss editLvL4 missoin: Can be done in an NPC Corp safe from wardecs. A huge ISK faucet in the game will cause inflation. There is no way for the market to adapt to this in another way. Factional warfare: missions on correction almost generate ISK no. Factional warfare: missions only generate LP as reward. Factional warfare: do not have bounties on the NPCs Factional warfare: are done in low-sec Factional warfare: if somebody shoots you, you have to shoot back yourself or die Factional warfare: a beacon is visible to everybody, WTs, pirates, neutral Factional warfare: mission can not be done AFK Factional warfare: can generate a large amount of LP with an ALT Factional warfare: can try to avoid PvP Factional warfare: you can deline missions without standing loss everytime edit Factional warfare: I am a wartarget A huge LP faucet in the game will lower the cost of faction items. The LP to ISK conversion will drop till the supply reaches a steady flow and the market will adjust. ---------------- Farming is done when something is so profitable that you do it repeatedly. If farming the reward for factional warfare missions for profit becomes lower than what you can do with something else with the same amount of effort ppl will stop farming factional warfare missions. If you want to stop farming, lower the LP reward. ---------------- Im not even arguing that the factional warfare reward is to high. Im not even arguing that lvl4 missions should get a lower reward either. I just want to be able to decline missions everytime I want without taking a standing hit. And why? So I can give my missions together with my fleet a target system of my choice rather than roam aimlessly around: Giving your FW fleet a purpose: FW mission, plexing and PvP in one. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.26 10:31:00 - [10] I fly for the minni militia. In a two man gang, so far I only ever pulled 10k LP mission and the minimum I need to jump was 4 jumps from High sec into a low sec system. I so far have never ever had a mission in the system I had the agent. In that two man gang we need 20mins in a HAC or in an SB + a frigate from picking the missions and turning it in. I must be doing something horribly wrong when I see others doing them solo in 5mins and getting 25k-30k LP, so sorry my lack of knowing how to farm these mission. I just play the game. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983

Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.26 15:21:00 - [11] Originally by: Raimo Originally by: X Gallentius Will the proposed changed reduce FW mission rewards so that they are below high sec mission runner's income? Most likely, just like it was. I don't see anyone running Gallente missions after the change. Caldaris can probably continue to do solo SB roaming with somewhat reduced income. (but still meaningful ISK) If I run out of ISK it's squid alt time then ;) Originally by: Insa Rexion Also I have a question as someone who didn't run these missions until after apoc 1.5. Did failure to complete the missions inside the 12 hour window result in a standings hit as declining or quitting did ? Actually we should ask these questions in the test server feedback forum in this thread I was so deliberate to quote them there. This is my "whine and cheese thread" and "you should be nerfed" thread because "I would even do the mission for free if I can pick my target systems". ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.11.27 08:56:00 - [12] Originally by: Insa Rexion Originally by: KrakizBad My concern isnt about being able to pick missions, its more taking a standing hit when i dont complete a mission, cause of hostiles in a system ect in teh time frame i have to do missions. Same here, I think the completion should be upped to that of hisec missions. They get days to complete a mission where there is almost zero risk of another player preventing completion. FW get 12 hours (and that translates to 2 or 3 hours for many players) to complete a mission where it is entirely possible there could be a WT blob or pirate camp preventing completion for the entire time. THIS IS NOT BALANCED and many players will just go back to hisec mission grind after taking a few inevitable standings hits which risks getting them (or even their corp) ejected from militia. Players can find ways to deal with an occasional pirate or WT or two entering their mission whther it is killing them or legging it. But there's not a lot one can do about an enemy/pirate blob especially if you only have a couple of hours playtime. We should be given at least the same time to complete as hisec (risk free) mission runners or better yet, no penalty for failing after 12 hours... declining or quitting can stay penalised. My proposal in the Assmebly hall is called [Proposal] Keep FW Mission declineable without a standing loss which actually implies being able to fail, without a standingloss as well. We can actually seperate several different game mechanics within the current FW mission assignments, but only one really is cause of the current LP "inflation" on two races. Being able to pick a target system Being able to pick a mission type (kill structure, commander or industriel, or courier) Being able to pick the amount of reward To fail without a standing loss The current major issue with FW missions is the amount of reward that two factions payout. So why not just lower the reward. Simple, easy, only to fix an integer or multiplicator. No messing with standing loss for camped missions. People can dedicate their operation system to a player set objective and can adjust the mission type to their playstyle just like in a sandbox. Other fixes: Increase the time to finish the missions as proposed before. Allow declining in a smaller time window (half an hour e.g.). ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.12.03 11:36:00 - [13] Originally by: uglybast The only thing that needs to be nerfed ATM is the ability to do the missions in an Stealth Bomber which makes you almost invunerable to enemy FW players and pirates alike. A few mwd'ing scrambling and webbing frigs in the missions would take care of this. Actually there are already a few scambling and MWD frigates in the mission plex (talking from the minni side). Amarr NPCs BS, crusiers and frigs make heavy use of tracking disrupting and heavy neutralizing as well and I recall one mission where a Amarr NPCs is flying an BS with a "MWD" (as he goes from 300m/s in boost up to 700m/s). Point is the inherent problem was/is not the declining without standing loss but the heavy difference in NPC ECM and weapon usage and thus their resulting difficulty as well the skewed rewards that are currently possible (30k LP per mission, I havent seen that on minni side yet). If you want to dig further you will notice that the "set discount" for the whole militia is not good as well as people with higher standing should have a get a higher discount (rewarding their dedication). The simple and easy fix would balancing the rewards but CCP and ex CSM A.............. decided other (stupid) wise would be a better solution. So now ppl will be moving to random systems (lowering the "LP velocity" - compareable to the ISK velocity) but not really balancing the rewards. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983
Garr Anders Minmatar The Red Circle Inc.	Posted - 2009.12.03 13:45:00 - [14] Originally by: Neo Gabriel Gee garr, are you ***ing blind? Didn't you read that there is no nerf? THERE IS NO NERF! Just accept and then quit the mission. How hard is it for you? Stop crying, you got what you wanted, now go farm your isk. EVE needs plenty of cheap navy ships and items. Hmm, I'm somewhat disturbed about the hostility and I already realized that there is no "nerf". The discussion in this thread already "moved on" to other issues and I actually quoted you in the assembly hall showing that the inherent issue with "farming" is still possible* and that inherently had nothing to do with an standing hit on declining (or accepting and then declining) the mission. Further in case you might have missed it, Im not here to support "farming LP" if you read my post correctly, as Im all up for lowering or balancing the rewards (down) to a reasonable level. It is the reward that needs to be changed not the standing penality, not matter where and how bad CCP might implement this. You might want to step back from the keyboard and then look up what I actually wrote rather that just assuming I would be supporting farming LPs. ----- Garr Anders "The only winning move is not to play" is about the best damn advice anyone can get regarding arguing over the internet. - referring to the Movie WarGames 1983

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.