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) |
Takseen
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 16:28:00 -
[61]
As someone who has basically no interest in pvp, I think it'd be a good idea to rebalance the highsec level 4 mission income a wee bit. As others have said it devalues all other high sec economic activities, and makes lowsec missioning seem rather pointless. Its also not sufficiently subject to market competition. There's always going to be one activity in EvE that pays the best and that people will gravitate towards. If that turned out to be mining or exploring, then more people would get drawn to it until the overall reward is reduced because there's fewer belts/sites to go around. This pretty much can't happen with missions, because the more people that mission, the more missions get generated.
I think some sort of dynamic agent quality would be a good idea. Tally up how many missions were completed for a given agent in a given day. Then after the downtime, the agent gets assigned a new Quality based on how many missions were handed in. Busy agents get nerfed down to Q-20, rarely used agents get buffed to Q20.
|
Wet Ferret
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 16:30:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Forge Lag There should be more variety and randomnes to missions, to battle the preprogrammed afk missioning in obscenely expensive ships.
No change needed here. An AFK fit is either using FoFs or straight up combat drones and in either case it is laughably inefficient. So basically: WGAF?
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!) |
Wet Ferret
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 16:35:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Takseen I think some sort of dynamic agent quality would be a good idea. Tally up how many missions were completed for a given agent in a given day. Then after the downtime, the agent gets assigned a new Quality based on how many missions were handed in. Busy agents get nerfed down to Q-20, rarely used agents get buffed to Q20.
This alone wouldn't change much. In order for dynamic quality to be meaningful, the agent reward needs to be much more significant portion of the total mission income ie: most of it.
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!) |
Takseen
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 16:45:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Wet Ferret
This alone wouldn't change much. In order for dynamic quality to be meaningful, the agent reward needs to be much more significant portion of the total mission income ie: most of it.
Oh good point. Using Kerfira's figures, the rewards break down as Bounties: 27% Reward: 7% LP: 27% Salvage: 20% Loot: 18%
I'm not entirely sure if LP rewards are tied to agent quality. If not, they could be made to do so. Then reduce bounties on highsec pirates to encourage more faction missions. Removing some of the meta 0 loot would reduce that part of the income and help out the miners and industrialists. Salvage would probably have to stay as is, unless another source of rigs was made available.
|
Asuri Kinnes
Caldari The Bastards The Bastards.
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 16:55:00 -
[65]
Originally by: Emperor Cheney There is a reason a massive number of people grind level 4 missions in highsec. Many reasons, in fact. A lot of people in nullsec, which is supposed to harbor all kinds of riches, in fact support their hobby out there by grinding highsec level 4s. It is one of the best ways for an individual player to make money. Should it be? I think that's pretty hard to justify, personally.
Missions will always be the "best" way for a player to make money. Steady, predictable money. The Absolute *BEST* way to make money is trading/station trading. Null-sec people will run them because they can't be interrupted. Move 4's to low-sec or 0, and people will run 3's. Why? THEY CANT BE INTERRUPTED IN HI-SEC! That is not going to change, and it will remain more "efficient" to run money making ops where they can't be threatened.
Originally by: Tippia Or simply having a "mission hijacking" mechanic, where whomever brought the mission items back or killed the completion ship got all the rewards.
Can't see that being abused at all...
Quote: 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.
Originally by: Tippia But is it enough less? That's the issue. The current game climate clearly demonstrates that it isn't.
Enough less for what, exactly? IMHO - yes, it is enough.
|
Takseen
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:03:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Asuri Kinnes [
Missions will always be the "best" way for a player to make money. Steady, predictable money. The Absolute *BEST* way to make money is trading/station trading. Null-sec people will run them because they can't be interrupted. Move 4's to low-sec or 0, and people will run 3's. Why? THEY CANT BE INTERRUPTED IN HI-SEC! That is not going to change, and it will remain more "efficient" to run money making ops where they can't be threatened.
Is it a problem if people run level 3s in highsec?
|
Empire Dweller
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:09:00 -
[67]
Edited by: Empire Dweller on 13/12/2009 17:12:41 I like how these ppl have a problem with lvl 4's and not a problem with moon mining passive isk.
Lvl 4's- at best 50 mill an hour- limited by how many hours you mission, your skills, ship, fit all play a part- you can be ganked/other problems may arise
moon mining- sometimes tens of billion per month (PER MOON), nap fest everyone and the risk is near zero
|
Tippia
Reikoku IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:11:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Asuri Kinnes
Originally by: Tippia Or simply having a "mission hijacking" mechanic, where whomever brought the mission items back or killed the completion ship got all the rewards.
Can't see that being abused at all...
Of course it will be. That's the whole point.
Quote: Enough less for what, exactly? IMHO - yes, it is enough.
To make up for the vastly reduced effort. 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 |
Takseen
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:18:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Empire Dweller Edited by: Empire Dweller on 13/12/2009 17:12:41 I like how these ppl have a problem with lvl 4's and not a problem with moon mining passive isk.
Lvl 4's- at best 50 mill an hour- limited by how many hours you mission, your skills, ship, fit all play a part- you can be ganked/other problems may arise
moon mining- sometimes tens of billion per month (PER MOON), nap fest everyone and the risk is near zero
1) Didn't CCP nerf moon mining income in Dominion? Precisely because of the complaints about them. 2) There's still a limited number of moons, and those alliances have to invest resources to keep them secure from other alliances. There's no such scarcity or competition in level 4 missions.
|
Asuri Kinnes
Caldari The Bastards The Bastards.
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:21:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Tippia
Quote: Enough less for what, exactly? IMHO - yes, it is enough.
To make up for the vastly reduced effort.
Reduced effort? Isn't the boredom enough? And to what end, to what goal? Nerfing them for the sake of nerfing them?
Trading and exploration are already more rewarding than lvl 4's - 4's are just more consistent.
Over time, Exploration pays just as well (if not much better).
|
|
Empire Dweller
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:27:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Takseen
Originally by: Empire Dweller Edited by: Empire Dweller on 13/12/2009 17:12:41 I like how these ppl have a problem with lvl 4's and not a problem with moon mining passive isk.
Lvl 4's- at best 50 mill an hour- limited by how many hours you mission, your skills, ship, fit all play a part- you can be ganked/other problems may arise
moon mining- sometimes tens of billion per month (PER MOON), nap fest everyone and the risk is near zero
1) Didn't CCP nerf moon mining income in Dominion? Precisely because of the complaints about them.
A common misconception- moon mining income was not "nerfed"- it was simply spread out more among the moon minerals. Instead of having a few making huge amounts- you have more making near huge amounts. The overall income would be the same- assuming you own more then one moon anyway.
Originally by: Takseen 2) There's still a limited number of moons, and those alliances have to invest resources to keep them secure from other alliances. There's no such scarcity or competition in level 4 missions.
Limited number my ass- there are huge amounts of moons in systems- and now that moon minerals prices are spread more "evenly" (see explaination for 1.) competition has been decreased because availability of decent moons have increased. As for "investing resources"- yes they can be taken away- you have to fight to hold your territory. So what? my lvl 4 can be invaded- my loot, my salvage stolen. My bounties can be stolen- my ship can even be ganked. Theres risk in both- dont see what the problem is in that regard.
My point was simply that missioning is an active task- and moon mining is a passive task. How can you think ones a problem and not think the other is as well?
|
Tippia
Reikoku IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:28:00 -
[72]
Edited by: Tippia on 13/12/2009 17:31:39
Originally by: Asuri Kinnes Reduced effort? Isn't the boredom enough?
Apparently not. Also, the boredom is a direct (and much wanted) result of the vastly reduced effort – not a counter-balancing penalty.
Quote: And to what end, to what goal?
Like I said: variety.
Quote: Trading and exploration are already more rewarding than lvl 4's - 4's are just more consistent.
…and are entirely PvP-based and don't add oodles of ISK to the economy (well, exploration might add some, but in strictly limited amounts). 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 |
Takseen
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:36:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Empire Dweller
My point was simply that missioning is an active task- and moon mining is a passive task. How can you think ones a problem and not think the other is as well?
Because the two aren't in direct competition with each other? One is an incentive for 0.0 empires to take and hold space, and allows them to finance their expensive toys that get used for making cool Youtube videos. The other is a personal source of income for many many players of all kinds, that impacts lots of other areas as described elsewhere in the thread. You may as well say that we shouldn't argue against level 4 missions without discussing how overpowered ECM is in Pvp.
|
Empire Dweller
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:37:00 -
[74]
Edited by: Empire Dweller on 13/12/2009 17:40:11 Its already been proved that missioning removes more isk then it injects into the game (because of the lp store)
As for the argument- "lvl 4 missions are boring" so should be changed. I like missioning- others like missioning. Just because some dont like missioning doesnt mean it should be nerfed so less ppl mission.
The whole argument is moot anyway tbh Every activity in hisec with a nullsec counterpart- is more profitable in nullsec/lowsec.
If you dont like the idea of ppl enjoying themselves missioning in hi sec- gank them.
Its an option- just throwing it out there.
Originally by: Takseen
Originally by: Empire Dweller
My point was simply that missioning is an active task- and moon mining is a passive task. How can you think ones a problem and not think the other is as well?
Because the two aren't in direct competition with each other? One is an incentive for 0.0 empires to take and hold space, and allows them to finance their expensive toys that get used for making cool Youtube videos. The other is a personal source of income for many many players of all kinds, that impacts lots of other areas as described elsewhere in the thread. You may as well say that we shouldn't argue against level 4 missions without discussing how overpowered ECM is in Pvp.
you basically said- moon mining is to finance things you enjoy and missioning is to finance things i enjoy. Stop being so hypocritical- ppl should play how they want to play.
|
Takseen
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:48:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Empire Dweller
you basically said- moon mining is to finance things you enjoy and missioning is to finance things i enjoy. Stop being so hypocritical- ppl should play how they want to play.
I'm less than 3 months in the game, have never been to lowsec, don't like PvP and have never scored a successful kill on another player. In short, assume much?
|
Empire Dweller
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:52:00 -
[76]
Edited by: Empire Dweller on 13/12/2009 17:52:21
Originally by: Takseen
Originally by: Empire Dweller
you basically said- moon mining is to finance things you enjoy and missioning is to finance things i enjoy. Stop being so hypocritical- ppl should play how they want to play.
I'm less than 3 months in the game, have never been to lowsec, don't like PvP and have never scored a successful kill on another player. In short, assume much?
I assumed you knew something about what you were talking about. Thanks for pointing out that your a clueless 3 month old- ill disregard your uneducated ramblings from now on.
|
Tippia
Reikoku IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 17:55:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Empire Dweller Its already been proved that missioning removes more isk then it injects into the game (because of the lp store)
No. It has only been claimed, not proved. 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 |
Takseen
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 18:07:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Empire Dweller [
I assumed you knew something about what you were talking about. Thanks for pointing out that your a clueless 3 month old- ill disregard your uneducated ramblings from now on.
Your entire thesis in this thread is that only 0.0 dwellers and pirates want level 4 empire missions nerfed. Its only logical that you'd resort to insults when I pointed out that you are incorrect in your assumption(again).
|
Empire Dweller
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 18:26:00 -
[79]
Edited by: Empire Dweller on 13/12/2009 18:28:22
Originally by: Takseen
Originally by: Empire Dweller [
I assumed you knew something about what you were talking about. Thanks for pointing out that your a clueless 3 month old- ill disregard your uneducated ramblings from now on.
Your entire thesis in this thread is that only 0.0 dwellers and pirates want level 4 empire missions nerfed. Its only logical that you'd resort to insults when I pointed out that you are incorrect in your assumption(again).
I assumed you were in a player corp yes. An assumption because its usually the case. It wasnt an insult- you yourself said your a three month old toon. There is no way you could possible have any firsthand knowledge of lvl 4 missions, their effects on the economy, and how they compare with other forms of income. At three months old- you barely have the skills to even survive a lvl 4 mission. Much less understand the complexities of the economic forces behind them.
As for who wants lvl 4's nerfed- i have yet to see a serious mission runner who thinks this is a good idea. At most we get ppl who have ran a few, think theyre boring, and could care less if theyre nerfed.
Show me someone who enjoys missioning who thinks they should be nerfed- prove its not just lowsec/nullsec ppl who want this.
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 18:33:00 -
[80]
If pirates and PVPers want more people in lo/null sec then ask CCP to make probing challenging again, not the easy 30-seconds-or-less gank fest it has become.
If pirates and PVPers want more people in lo/null sec then ask CCP to nerf gate camps or fix the bottleneck entry points to lo/null sec.
If pirates and PVPers want more people in lo/null sec then ask CCP to give PVE ships a surviving chance against PVP fits.
If pirates and PVPers want more people in lo/null sec then ask CCP to create more carebear-friendly tools to stabilize lo sec. What happened to the viceroy idea for lo sec? What happened to the tradeable kill rights idea?
If pirates and PVPers want more people in lo/null sec then ask CCP to boost gate guns and station guns. Ask them to add ECM turrets (that jammers, scramblers, target painters, webbers).
And the answer is: "NOOOOO! NEVARRR!11 ADAPT OR DIE N00B!1! gO BAcK TO WOW!1!"
If you really want to change the perception of lo and null sec you'll need to do your part. Stop asking CCP to make the game harder to your targets while keeping your game play easy for you.
Reminds me of the saying:
"I'm rock. Scissors is fine. But paper needs a nerf."
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
|
Tippia
Reikoku IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 18:36:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Empire Dweller Show me someone who enjoys missioning who thinks they should be nerfed- prove its not just lowsec/nullsec ppl who want this.
That would be me then. 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 |
Patri Andari
Thukker Tribe Antiquities Importer
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 18:41:00 -
[82]
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 If pirates and PVPers want more people in lo/null sec then ask CCP to make probing challenging again, not the easy 30-seconds-or-less gank fest it has become.
If pirates and PVPers want more people in lo/null sec then ask CCP to nerf gate camps or fix the bottleneck entry points to lo/null sec.
If pirates and PVPers want more people in lo/null sec then ask CCP to give PVE ships a surviving chance against PVP fits.
If pirates and PVPers want more people in lo/null sec then ask CCP to create more carebear-friendly tools to stabilize lo sec. What happened to the viceroy idea for lo sec? What happened to the tradeable kill rights idea?
If pirates and PVPers want more people in lo/null sec then ask CCP to boost gate guns and station guns. Ask them to add ECM turrets (that jammers, scramblers, target painters, webbers).
And the answer is: "NOOOOO! NEVARRR!11 ADAPT OR DIE N00B!1! gO BAcK TO WOW!1!"
If you really want to change the perception of lo and null sec you'll need to do your part. Stop asking CCP to make the game harder to your targets while keeping your game play easy for you.
Reminds me of the saying:
"I'm rock. Scissors is fine. But paper needs a nerf."
This.
Patri
I'll Roshambo you for that Titan? |
Carniflex
Fallout Research Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 18:45:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Emperor Cheney
Originally by: Wet Ferret
Even missions. You can make double to three times the ISK running missions in 0.0... if you can control the space. Can't cut it out there? Well who's problem is that?
By my count, according to eve-agents.com, there are two (2) NPC stations in nullsec offering pirate level 4's. Both are in extremely contested areas. And you absolutely don't make "double to three times," that's absurd. I ran lowsec level 4's in a hub of 3 q20 agents and was making maybe 30 percent over medium quality highsec hubs.
There is considerably more of those stations. Stain is full of them for example. Get your missionrunner in any of the stainwagon alliances. Sys-k, Stain Empire, Coven, romulans or klingons and I think there is few more entities in the wagon. Move to 6qbh. Profit. There is occasional goon or brick hitsquad passing thru and sometimes 2-3 red afk cloakers, but most of the time you can grind those missions to your hearts content. Granted, I would not say that you get 2-3x more than in empire, as many missions drop tags and collecting those tags drags down the isk/h a bit compared to the empire where you can ignore loot. Oh and you would need ofc your own carrier or be in corp that can provide you with carrier jumps as moving your ships up there conventional way is not very reasonable thing to do. Or you can use local market that is also relatively healthy most of the time.
|
Empire Dweller
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 18:49:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Empire Dweller Show me someone who enjoys missioning who thinks they should be nerfed- prove its not just lowsec/nullsec ppl who want this.
That would be me then.
You enjoy missions now? because a quick look through your post history suggests otherwise. Just out of curiosity- how many missions do you do per week? Whats your lifetime total income from missions (roughly)
To be fair i can tell by your standings that you have some experience with missions. Though you probably spend a lot of time doing other activities.
so maybe my comment should have read... Show me someone who enjoys missioning more then any other aspect of the game who thinks they should be nerfed.
Not to say missions are perfect as is- id love to see some fairly drastic changes. AI personality of a sleeper for instance. The adjustable reward based on how many ppl use the agent has merit.
A blanket across the board cut into isk per hour is not the solution. Moving all lvl 4 agents into lowsec is not the solution. Unfortunately these are the two most common "fixes" i hear proposed.
Im willing to hear proposals for actual changes- but when someone presents it as "nerf lvl 4's" and they consider that a post. How am i not supposed to laugh at their absurdity?
|
Tippia
Reikoku IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 18:54:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Empire Dweller You enjoy missions now? because a quick look through your post history suggests otherwise.
A slightly longer look would have shown you that I've never said that I didn't, and it would have clued you in to the fact that I've been saying the same thing ever since my SAK days.
Quote: so maybe my comment should have read... Show me someone who enjoys missioning more then any other aspect of the game who thinks they should be nerfed.
Still me, then. 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 |
Empire Dweller
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 19:00:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Empire Dweller You enjoy missions now? because a quick look through your post history suggests otherwise.
A slightly longer look would have shown you that I've never said that I didn't, and it would have clued you in to the fact that I've been saying the same thing ever since my SAK days.
Quote: so maybe my comment should have read... Show me someone who enjoys missioning more then any other aspect of the game who thinks they should be nerfed.
Still me, then.
But still nothing specific about how you would like to see lvl 4's changed? (not even going to ask about the nap train your alliance represents and how someone who enjoys missioning so much would be enticed by that)
|
Tippia
Reikoku IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 19:06:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Empire Dweller But still nothing specific about how you would like to see lvl 4's changed?
Plenty of that, but it gets downed every time by the "onoz, you're an ebil piewat alt/lowsec ganker/alliance sycophant" babble from people who cannot look past their own preconceptions and comforts, who think that there's only two sides to the story, and that disagreeing with them is a psychological illness… 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 |
Empire Dweller
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 19:14:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Tippia Edited by: Tippia on 13/12/2009 19:06:58
Originally by: Empire Dweller But still nothing specific about how you would like to see lvl 4's changed?
Plenty of that, but it gets downed every time by the "onoz, you're an ebil piewat alt/lowsec ganker/alliance sycophant" babble from people who cannot look past their own preconceptions and comforts, who think that there's only two sides to the story, and who will cling for dear life to the illusion that disagreeing with them is a psychological illnessà
Nice- a whole paragraph to say yes without actually answering the question with specific ideas.
|
Takseen
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 19:17:00 -
[89]
Edited by: Takseen on 13/12/2009 19:17:29
Tippia is right though, there's been suggestions for changing level 4 missions in this thread that you completely ignored in favour of your moon mining and anti-pirate posts.
|
Tippia
Reikoku IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.12.13 19:17:00 -
[90]
Edited by: Tippia on 13/12/2009 19:19:43
Originally by: Empire Dweller Nice- a whole paragraph to say yes without actually answering the question with specific ideas.
Actually, I did. It just requires understanding what I said.
edit: Bah! Ninja-exposed! Damn you Takseen!
…oh, and this is not the only thread on the topic as you may have noticed Mr. Dweller. 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 |
|
|
|
|
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 |