| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
KWyz
   |
Posted - 2009.12.12 17:47:00 -
[1]
I see a great deal of fighting about HOW should the level 4 missions be nerfed.
However, no matter how much I looked, I couldnt find the reasons for people to demand this(aside from low-sec pirates wanting some easy kills, but I don't think that counts as a real motivation).
I haven't got the least intention to troll around such a touchy subject, all I'd like to see is players' arguments about the need for a nerf.
Personally, I don't feel affected in any negative way because of the proliferation of level 4 missions.That might be because in the EVE food chain. I occupy a different position(i'm a carebear explorer). However, I do benefit from these misioners, via faction drops that I sell and faction ammo that I buy. Since I'm not affected in any bad way by the running of level 4 missions, I don't think they need a nerf.
Please express your point of view about the need for a nerf on level 4 missions, and please do so in a civilised manner.
|
Carniflex
Fallout Research
Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 18:47:00 -
[2]
They want more targets in low sec mostly so they foam in the mouth and come up with various pseudoproblems that are in their eyes gamebreaking as other people do not play it how they want it.
Very few have valid points to back up their claims for need of change and proposed changes are usually not that radical - for example Kefira (peak isk/h fror excellent missionrunners) and Venkul (minerals from mission loot and T1 items) are examples of providing some reason to back up calls for change - altho I personally do not agree that all the presented data from them is problem that must be dealt with. I could list my own set of things in addition to that what in my own opinion might make EVE better place that one could change in L4 but that would not be nothing too radical either.
|
Lady Aja
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 19:20:00 -
[3]
They should not be nerfed but more "adjusted"
Hi sec is just that Hi sec where "pirates" are not generally welcoem be is player or npc..
to reflact this. all hi sec missions should be vs apposing empire factions, if you want bounties, goto low sec or 0.0,
"but they will not get bounties from killing" i hear you say.. well tags are bounties, they are also a source of income for mission runners and Lp store rewards.
"but they will not be able to goto other parts of empire due to bad standings from killing oppsing empire factions" well you are right. this is part in parcel of running missions, if you want to be able to goto jita dont mission against them or thier allies.
what i am saying is. hi sec = empire factions, low sec/0.0 = bounty missions and empire faction missions too.
|
Krutoy
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 19:35:00 -
[4]
0.0 should be up, not L4 nerf
|
Tippia
Reikoku
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 19:38:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: KWyz
However, no matter how much I looked, I couldnt find the reasons for people to demand this(aside from low-sec pirates wanting some easy kills, but I don't think that counts as a real motivation).
You should look harder. The whole "more easy kills" line of thinking is largely something highsec dwellers dream up because they believe lowsec if wall-to-wall pirates, based on a complete lack of lowsec experience.
The reason L4s need to be nerfed is because they provide a very high income for something that is easily, universally, and infinitely available, and are almost completely devoid of competition, unlike pretty much every other kind of money-making in the game.
The argument could be made that this is a bad thing in and of itself – should something with all those advantages really pay that well? There's also the issue with the amount of ISK L4s pump into the economy, and the inflationary effects this has – especially since mission runners aren't likely to lose the stuff they spend that ISK on.
The main problem, however, is that the ubiquity of L4s combined with the level of income they provide creates an unduly high baseline against which all other methods of ISK making are compared. It makes it very hard to balance those other activities and it makes it next very difficult to introduce new ways of making money without ruining the economy altogether. The latest example of this is the nullsec upgrade system – a mechanic that provides income that is on par with L4s… except it's in unsafe space, and you have to pay for it… so why even bother? It's easier to just stay in highsec and grind L4s. To make those upgrades truly enticing as an alternative, they pay-out would have to be through the roof – an ISK fountain this game definitely does not need. And note that this is not about luring people out there – this is about giving people who live there a reason to stay there, and not clog up highsec with their money-making alts.
You saw the same when T3 was introduced: the argument immediately became "how many man-hours does it take to gather the material" – if the income from those man-hours spent gathering stuff was less than what you could have earned doing L4s in the same amount of time, who'd bother doing it other than as a hobby? You've been able to see it for a long time in relation to mining: why bother doing a corp-level mass mining OP, when you could instead do a corp-level mass-L4 OP, use the money to buy the minerals off the market and have a large pile of left-over cash in the end?
In short: the issue with L4s is that they overshadow so many other activities in the game, relegate them to being diversionary hobbies, and thus kill the variety of the game.
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
Kodelka K
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 19:41:00 -
[6]
I don't think an overall reduction would be a good idea since it would penalize new players and people flying sub-optimal ships too harshly. People come in and quote these ridiculously high isk/hr numbers. Even if we believe their numbers, I often don't, the average citizen isn't achieving anything like that. Since we aren't all flying Golem/CNR and aren't getting huge lp conversions. I don't get anywhere the quoted numbers myself. If these peak performers are really such an issue do something to drop them down to our level, don't pull everyone down.
|
000Hunter000
Gallente
Missiles 'R' Us
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 19:48:00 -
[7]
Just whining from people who want to have easy targets in low/0.0 sec tbfh...
So people move to 0.0 and find out they don't really make tons of cash as they were promised, so they whine on the forums.
________________________________________________
|
Empire Dweller
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 20:06:00 -
[8]
no one but butthurt null sec ppl and lazy pirates think lvl 4's should be nerfed. Everyone else thinks the system works fine as it stands.
|
Banana Torres
The Green Banana Corporation
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 20:16:00 -
[9]
Empire level 4s should be nerfed because it is really silly design that most profitable resources are located in safest of places.
It would be like putting the best dungeons at the gates of Stormwind in that game.
|
Montmazar
Vard School of Cryo Cuisine
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 21:50:00 -
[10]
having one of the richest income streams in the game also be the safest is contradictory to the spirit of this game in every way. I say that as a level 4 mission runner.
And storyline wise, it's ridiculous there are thousands of pirate battleships floating around in space where if a player frigate warp scrambles another player frigate, CONCORD instantly appears and kills everyone.
Space should either be safe or have lots of pirate activity, not both at once. That's crazy.
So why do I do these missions? Because it's easy money. I would be crazy to not take easy money.
|
|
|
KWyz
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 21:51:00 -
[11]
I think Tippia has an interesting point of view. I'd like to argument however that I believe any sort of "adjustment" done to level 4 missions is bound to reflect itself in a decrease of the general isk income.
Any way I try to cut it, that doesn't seem to be very pleasant, for a lot of people.
There is no argument against the overshaddowing done by mission running to other ISK producing methods(comparisons will always exist). However, it is my belief that even if mission running IS the best way to make money, it's far, FAR away from being the most fun course of action in that direction. I listen to my corp mates, and running missions seems to be tedious for them.
I'm not saying it's a pleasant way of looking at the situation, but you can think of mission running like...that job you need to hold on to in order to make a living. The gig at the deli to wich you can always come back to in case your stand-up comedy career goes south. The problem people see here is in how much money the deli thing actually churns out...But switch the deli job to being a garbage trucker and you see the way lvl 4s actually are.
Just my newbie opinion, and I'm eager to hear some more regarding the validity of such a much-discussed nerf.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 21:57:00 -
[12]
What most people miss is that it work in the opposite direction.
Level 4 missions in high sec don't pay more that level 4 missions (or level 5 for that) in low sec or 0.0; they pay less (and on the tune of 5K LP/mission it mean 10-20 million/hour if you use the same LP/isk conversion Kerfira used).
It is that they are in a combat zone, so you don't have a constant stream of revenue (if you run a constant stream of missions).
So if you run the same missions you run in high sec in low sec/0.0 you can get 20-40% more when you are successful, but there is no guarantee that you will be successful.
It all depend if you think that a 20-40% extra revenue pay enough for the risk or not.
Note that in the recent past (till Dominion 1.0.2) it was possible to get up to 100 million isk in LP from the FW missions using a stealth bomber.
Reinstating the standing loss on mission refusal should have reduced that, even if several players have stated that they have already contingency plains to keep the FW rewards to that level.
Strangely no "nerf level 4" guy want to use the FW missions as a comparison in the low sec rewards. 
|
Dacryphile
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 22:28:00 -
[13]
No change necessary imo.
In MMOs you usually have a sereration between income generating stuff and fun stuff. You need to do the boring income stuff to pay for the fun stuff. That is why most MRs are alts.
Good pirates can combine both, but thats about it.
Originally by: Doc Robertson
...take a good look at this pic and tell us which one is you.
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 22:47:00 -
[14]
Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 12/12/2009 22:54:16
Originally by: Banana Torres
Empire level 4s should be nerfed because it is really silly design that most profitable resources are located in safest of places.
It would be like putting the best dungeons at the gates of Stormwind in that game.
I'm sorry but this isn't true. It's an illusion. Lo sec and 0.0 rewards are already higher. The reason it looks like hi sec is more profitable is because lo sec and 0.0 are too unstable for the average player to make a decent living out of. And they're unstable precisely because of how the population that inhabits these regions have turned it into. But they refuse to take responsibility for what they themselves have made lo/null sec. Until more alliances open up their space as CVA has done, empire will ALWAYS look more productive.
Additionally, pirates and hardcore PVPers shot themselves in the foot by asking for highly efficient equipment like bubbles, infinipoint cruisers, ridiculously fast probing mechanics. These things have become extremely uncomfortable to overcome in lo/null sec. Not difficult, but so uncomfortable it makes it a pain to try and make a decent living, much less a lot. On top of that WCS have not only become useless but also obsolete in some cases (HIC anyone?).
With that said, if indeed the T1 market has gone to ****s there is an easy peasy solution to fix it without asking CCP to nuke hi sec. Replace T1 with Meta 2-4 + blueprints. There is absolutely nothing else that needs to be done. If lo sec and 0.0 dwellers want more people in their space then they need to start easing up their policies. In other words, REAP WHAT YOU'VE SOWED.
Unfortunately most of these uber PVP types aren't interested in more players in 0.0/lo sec. What they want is more targets to easily gank. They hate adapting and are usually lazy. It's easier to cry and whine. Thus these threads pop up once or twice in a month demanding CCP 'fix' empire. And by that they mean 'mOaR tArG3tZ PLoX!"
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Emperor Cheney
Celebrity Sex Tape
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 23:09:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Emperor Cheney on 12/12/2009 23:10:14
I'm waiting for someone to explain to me what all those Angels are doing hanging around Balgina (.7 sec). How come CONCORD can find my barely probable frig instantly but some crappy Serpentis cruiser is invisible to them?
And to the above poster, I've done level 4's in lowsec and in highsec. You make maybe 30% more money in lowsec from better agent quality. How much more risk does a player have in lowsec? More than 30%, you better believe. A lot more.
And btw - bubbles do not work in lowsec. Your arguments about lowsec would carry more weight if you knew how lowsec worked.
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 23:30:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Emperor Cheney
And btw - bubbles do not work in lowsec. Your arguments about lowsec would carry more weight if you knew how lowsec worked.
I should have been cleared for the tards. My apologies. When I say low/0.0 I mean mechanics that apply to either or.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 23:30:00 -
[17]
Look closely OP. You will see that it all boils down to three true reasons:
1. The desire to have more targets.
2. Wallet envy.
3. Those who want the high reward 0.0 but long for the efficiency of high sec at the same time.
Here is a prime example of number three:
Originally by: Tippia
There's also the issue with the amount of ISK L4s pump into the economy, and the inflationary effects this has û especially since mission runners aren't likely to lose the stuff they spend that ISK on.
Red herring. There IS no inflation in Eve. Prices are so low, it is now a profitable to blow up battleships for the insurance. This argument is often tossed around but you will never see it supported by facts.
Originally by: Tippia
The reason L4s need to be nerfed is because they provide a very high income for something that is easily, universally, and infinitely available, and are almost completely devoid of competition, unlike pretty much every other kind of money-making in the game.
At first the Tippia suggest that it is the fact that missions are not competitive which means they need to be nerfed. According to this logic not only do level 4 missions need to be nerfed, but all missions need to be nerfed.
Solution? Introduce dynamic agents. Agents that are overused loose quality over time. Agents that are not used gain quality over time. Problem solved without need for an overhaul.
At what point did you come to this conclusion? What coloured your position that level 4 missions were ruining Eve? Was it before or after you did your grind to 9.74 with Corporate Police Force? Or was it while you were on the road to 9.52 standings with Federal Navy when you had this epiphany?
No. No. It must have been when you made the big leap to 0.0 with IT Alliance that suddenly Level 4 missions became game breakingly broken.
The way I see it, being in empire is a tradeoff. You gain the protections of Concord to reduce your risk to loss. For this protection you make less isk in just about every endeavor you engage in. You are also not allowed many of the truly amazing toys this game has to offer. No capitals, bubbles, bombs, assigned fighters, player owned outpost, etc.
The only advantage of high sec missioning (and mining) has nothing to do with the rate of pay. It is efficiency. You do not have to dock up and quit your mission when someone enters local and you can jet can mine until your eyes bleed.
So now you moved to 0.0 and found that your efficiency is down. How is that anyone's fault but yours? You want on demand pew pew, and the ability to carebear at the same time?
Originally by: Tippia
The main problem, however, is that the ubiquity of L4s combined with the level of income they provide creates an unduly high baseline against which all other methods of ISK making are compared. It makes it very hard to balance those other activities and it makes it next very difficult to introduce new ways of making money without ruining the economy altogether.
So when did you come to this conclusion? I will read on for clues.
Originally by: Tippia
The latest example of this is the nullsec upgrade system û a mechanic that provides income that is on par with L4sà except it's in unsafe space, and you have to pay for ità so why even bother? It's easier to just stay in highsec and grind L4s. To make those upgrades truly enticing as an alternative, they pay-out would have to be through the roof û an ISK fountain this game definitely does not need. And note that this is not about luring people out there û this is about giving people who live there a reason to stay there, and not clog up highsec with their money-making alts.
 I get it now. Sometime around a month ago Level 4 missions broke. FOR YOU!
Patri
I'll Roshambo you for that Titan? |
Junko Togawa
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 23:36:00 -
[18]
It annoys people who think EVE should be a second job and not a game. They think that someone shouldn't be able to play casual and (relatively) secure and get nifty stuff like faction/deadspace-fit T2/faction battleships and keep them in that same (relatively) secure space, making ISK hand over fist.
They think the market for those expensive fits should be affordable only for the people who sit on top of the nosec hills and can easily push aside anyone trying to claw their way up the heap. In short, they want their time in-game and their earnings and accomplishments to make them better than someone in hisec who can run missions ad nauseam and stack ISK like mad. And they want this not by making things better in their space but worse in other places.
Which is why I think of these people every time I lay waste to another mission pocket in my pimped-out Golem and stack some more loot to haul to Jita and inject into the endless machine of the game economy. And I smile and imagine their tears of frustrated impotence at how their fail in life can't be compensated by space pixels. And lulz when the whinethreads arise, cos I just know CCP will never nerf them. At best they'll stealthbuff nosec slowly to keep enough subs from falling off that the increases brought by new expansions will insure continuing growth.
So trolls, how'd I do? 
|
syphurous
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 23:36:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Emperor Cheney
I'm waiting for someone to explain to me what all those Angels are doing hanging around Balgina (.7 sec). How come CONCORD can find my barely probable frig instantly but some crappy Serpentis cruiser is invisible to them?
All pod pilots are connected to the same intelligence grid. This is what allows you communications to other pilots, and your resurrection when you get blown to pieces. We simply don't have access to the location data as Concord does. Also, Concords ship designs are provided by the Jove, I cant remember if the back story said they are all mindless drone ships but it would explain a lot,....
Most people will read this thinking it's part of my post, when its actually my sig :P
|
Emperor Cheney
Celebrity Sex Tape
|
Posted - 2009.12.12 23:37:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Patri Andari
At what point did you come to this conclusion? What coloured your position that level 4 missions were ruining Eve? Was it before or after you did your grind to 9.74 with Corporate Police Force? Or was it while you were on the road to 9.52 standings with Federal Navy when you had this epiphany?
Are you saying that because someone ran level 4's, they shouldn't criticize level 4s? Almost everyone runs level 4's, because you would be crazy not to. It's free money with near zero risk. That is the problem.
Highsec mining is both more dangerous and less profitable. Think about that.
|
|
|
Empire Dweller
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 00:54:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Emperor Cheney
Originally by: Patri Andari
At what point did you come to this conclusion? What coloured your position that level 4 missions were ruining Eve? Was it before or after you did your grind to 9.74 with Corporate Police Force? Or was it while you were on the road to 9.52 standings with Federal Navy when you had this epiphany?
Are you saying that because someone ran level 4's, they shouldn't criticize level 4s? Almost everyone runs level 4's, because you would be crazy not to. It's free money with near zero risk. That is the problem.
Highsec mining is both more dangerous and less profitable. Think about that.
If lvl 4 missions can be ran with "near zero" risk its because so called pirates have gotten lazy. Instead of going around ganking mission ships- they go on the forum and whine about lvl 4 mission profitability.
|
Emperor Cheney
Celebrity Sex Tape
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 01:17:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Empire Dweller
Originally by: Emperor Cheney
Originally by: Patri Andari
At what point did you come to this conclusion? What coloured your position that level 4 missions were ruining Eve? Was it before or after you did your grind to 9.74 with Corporate Police Force? Or was it while you were on the road to 9.52 standings with Federal Navy when you had this epiphany?
Are you saying that because someone ran level 4's, they shouldn't criticize level 4s? Almost everyone runs level 4's, because you would be crazy not to. It's free money with near zero risk. That is the problem.
Highsec mining is both more dangerous and less profitable. Think about that.
If lvl 4 missions can be ran with "near zero" risk its because so called pirates have gotten lazy. Instead of going around ganking mission ships- they go on the forum and whine about lvl 4 mission profitability.
What?
Are you CCP Nozh?
|
Wet Ferret
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 02:19:00 -
[23]
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2
With that said, if indeed the T1 market has gone to ****s there is an easy peasy solution to fix it without asking CCP to nuke hi sec. Replace T1 with Meta 2-4 + blueprints. There is absolutely nothing else that needs to be done.
This just replaces one problem with another. Players make blueprint copies to sell, they shouldn't be dropping from NPCs if the idea is to aid the player-driven market. Simply replacing T1 with meta 1 would work just fine.
Originally by: Emperor Cheney
Edited by: Emperor Cheney on 12/12/2009 23:10:14
I'm waiting for someone to explain to me what all those Angels are doing hanging around Balgina (.7 sec). How come CONCORD can find my barely probable frig instantly but some crappy Serpentis cruiser is invisible to them?
And to the above poster, I've done level 4's in lowsec and in highsec. You make maybe 30% more money in lowsec from better agent quality. How much more risk does a player have in lowsec? More than 30%, you better believe. A lot more.
And btw - bubbles do not work in lowsec. Your arguments about lowsec would carry more weight if you knew how lowsec worked.
Pod pilots are extremely skilled and (potentially) dangerous in the EVE lore, it makes perfect sense for CONCORD to be especially harsh with them and even to target them exclusively. The petty rats we shoot at missions would basically be sentry gun fodder if they ever came out of their deadspace anyway, so dealing with them is just left to the local corporations.
But, yeah. These forums seriously need some indicator that the post has ended and the sig has started.
EVE has devs that care about sound? (Ha ha ha! Gotcha. It actually doesn't!) |
Burnharder
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 02:23:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Burnharder on 13/12/2009 02:22:45
Quote:
However, no matter how much I looked, I couldnt find the reasons for people to demand this
On every thread on this issue, I've posted a question, "what exactly is the problem here that we're trying to solve?" and every time I've been ignored! I take it that either my forum charisma is at a record low, or that there is no rational answer to the question.
|
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 02:27:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Patri Andari on 13/12/2009 02:32:25
Originally by: Emperor Cheney
Originally by: Patri Andari
At what point did you come to this conclusion? What coloured your position that level 4 missions were ruining Eve? Was it before or after you did your grind to 9.74 with Corporate Police Force? Or was it while you were on the road to 9.52 standings with Federal Navy when you had this epiphany?
Are you saying that because someone ran level 4's, they shouldn't criticize level 4s? Almost everyone runs level 4's, because you would be crazy not to. It's free money with near zero risk. That is the problem.
Highsec mining is both more dangerous and less profitable. Think about that.
You are dumb. When I say dumb I mean without sound most often. but in this case I mean stupid.
Patri
I'll Roshambo you for that Titan? |
Empire Dweller
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 02:30:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Burnharder
Edited by: Burnharder on 13/12/2009 02:22:45
Quote:
However, no matter how much I looked, I couldnt find the reasons for people to demand this
On every thread on this issue, I've posted a question, "what exactly is the problem here that we're trying to solve?" and every time I've been ignored! I take it that either my forum charisma is at a record low, or that there is no rational answer to the question.
The problem we are trying to solve is-
How do we get butthurt wannabe pirates to stop whining on the forums.
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 02:33:00 -
[27]
Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 13/12/2009 02:36:00
Originally by: Wet Ferret
This just replaces one problem with another. Players make blueprint copies to sell, they shouldn't be dropping from NPCs if the idea is to aid the player-driven market. Simply replacing T1 with meta 1 would work just fine.
True that. And just so that it doesn't mess with the income/hour they could have meta 2s drop more often than meta 3s and so on. That way it would neither be a nerf nor boost to level 4s and industrialists get the exclusive benefit of producing T1 equipment. If for some reason the income/hour is reduced/increased all CCP would need to do is tweak the meta drops until it more or less resembles what it was pre-T1 drops.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Emperor Cheney
Celebrity Sex Tape
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 03:07:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Burnharder
Edited by: Burnharder on 13/12/2009 02:22:45
Quote:
However, no matter how much I looked, I couldnt find the reasons for people to demand this
On every thread on this issue, I've posted a question, "what exactly is the problem here that we're trying to solve?" and every time I've been ignored! I take it that either my forum charisma is at a record low, or that there is no rational answer to the question.
People have posted many answers. You have to be trying really hard to not read them. From this thread alone:
By Lady Aja
Quote:
They should not be nerfed but more "adjusted"
Hi sec is just that Hi sec where "pirates" are not generally welcoem be is player or npc..
to reflact this. all hi sec missions should be vs apposing empire factions,
From Tippia
Quote:
The main problem, however, is that the ubiquity of L4s combined with the level of income they provide creates an unduly high baseline against which all other methods of ISK making are compared. It makes it very hard to balance those other activities and it makes it next very difficult to introduce new ways of making money without ruining the economy altogether.
From Banana Torres
Quote:
Empire level 4s should be nerfed because it is really silly design that most profitable resources are located in safest of places.
It would be like putting the best dungeons at the gates of Stormwind in that game.
The pro status quo arguments, on the other hand, come down to one of two ways of the angry monkey.
close the eyes and the ears (though apparently not the mouth):
Quote:
no one but butthurt null sec ppl and lazy pirates think lvl 4's should be nerfed. Everyone else thinks the system works fine as it stands.
or just flinging poo
Quote:
You are dumb. When I say dumb I mean without sound most often. but in this case I mean stupid.
|
Dungheap
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 03:57:00 -
[29]
most players posting, for changing missions, have an agenda. few, if any, are truly concerned with game balance. look at some of the typical arguments for reducing income or changing missions.
move lvl 4 to lo-sec: player wants more pve fitted targets.
reduce drops/reprocessed amount: player wants higher prices for their minerals.
reduce meta 1 drops: player wants higher prices for the t1 items they produce.
0.0 dwellers worrying about empire income: their enemies hi-sec alts make more than their own hi-sec alts. (and, since dominion, i think they don't realize just how much isk can be made in upgraded systems.)
these folks would like their game play enhanced, without effort, at the expense of others.
then theirs the old 'risk vs. reward' argument. which has become the war-cry of many a forum whiner. this is a game, and intentionally leaving out factors such as 'fun', 'challenge', or 'mind-numbing repetition' reveals your concern is not with game play in general, but how others play affects yours.
it's a myth that lvl 4's, and all missions, are risk-free. rarely a day goes by, in npc corp, that someone doesn't ask for help, advice, or reports a ship loss in missions. when the economic blogs first came out, the raven was cited as the most-lost ship in eve. followed by the caracal. think that dispels the 'no risk' argument.
nearly every activity in this game affects another. it's a simple matter to manipulate statistics to prove an argument for, or against, -anything- .
the only problem i see with lvl 4's, is that they present little challenge for an experienced player. HP buffs, cheap and available faction mods, concise mission guides, and changes to aggro, have made them truly a grind. more a necessary evil, than an enjoyable activity.
|
Emperor Cheney
Celebrity Sex Tape
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 04:06:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Dungheap
most players posting, for changing missions, have an agenda. few, if any, are truly concerned with game balance. look at some of the typical arguments for reducing income or changing missions.
Quite to the contrary, the only people who don't see the problem with highsec lvl 4's are those who do little else. The only place on any eve forum I've ever seen people fine with infinite high income moneyspouts and infinite pirates in high security space is here, in the Missions and Complexes forum.
You point out that highsec lvl 4's are boring. As one who does them for income, I completely agree. So why should any player trying to make money outside the market or without 0,0 access be compelled to run them to stay competitive?
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |