Elena Vherokia
Silent Service Limited
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 10:17:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Elena Vherokia on 01/09/2010 10:17:19
Originally by: Mynxee You know, I mentioned this thread at the Summit during the Low Sec discussion and a couple of other relevant times because there is so much good information here about PVE'ers attitude toward low sec. I hope someone at CCP actually notices it and gives it a good read.
<snip>
Carry on--and thanks for the really insightful replies to my questions here!
There are three flavors for PvErs being in lowsec: a. alone b. with an alt (dual account) c. with friends (corp/alliance)
about a. - is dangerous and imho should be - still current mechanics allow it to be perfectly safe if you play it smart (T3 unprobeable ships, while only doing missions/plexes in station systems to be able to travel safely) - dangerous in ships that can be probed; needs a lot of watching dir scanner all the time
about b. - perfectly safe with a cov ops alt and having your mission runner roam in travel setups - perfectly safe mission running with an alt on second computer who watches mission gate with cov ops cloak
about c. - depends on the friends - depends on your own playstyle
-----
Bottom line: - for missions low sec is not worth it. Even when having the perfectly "safe option", it takes sometimes a long time and patience. As such: time + risk >>>> reward - for exploration low sec is perfectly fine. time + risk <<<< reward - the reward really does it here
Result: - mission runners need a higher reward to go low sec - add some "hidden" pirate faction agents from lvl 1-4 and increase LP gain on lowsec missions: problem solved
--- the questions:
# How long have you been playing? more than 7 years but on and off sometimes
# Have you ever been in low sec? Almost all the time the past 5 years to lowsec and nullsec, basically this and other alts are hisec. Mains seldomly see hisec.
# Do you run missions or complexes in low sec? Yes - most of the time when not ganking mission runners or people in complexes.
# If so, what is the appeal for you? High reward, low risk.
# If not, why not? Perfectly fine - except I truly believe that current T3 ships make it too easy. Eg. they take away the need to watch directional scanner as soon as one is on an escalation. Meaning: there is no risk involved in running low sec escalations as soon as one uses an unprobeable ship.
# Are rewards in low sec in line with the risk? For missions - no, the reward is too low. For exploration - yes perfectly inline (I got my own topic on exploration, but the risk vs reward is imho perfectly fine). For escalations in exploration - no, the reward is too high for no risk.
# Is the risk in low sec over-stated? Yes it is. Up to one day ago I did lowsec alone with a main and a scan alt. I really got podded twice due to my own mistakes over 30+ days. First time: jumping through the wrong gate (I knew it was camped hence I checked the other gate with my alt but happened to follow autopilot orders to the camped gate...). Second time: an extremly good prober, I saw his/her probes once for seconds and assumed he/she is not that good - well he/she was, got me scanned with dir scanner and probing once (good one).
# Would education from savvy players about how to mitigate risk in low sec encourage folks who didn't just want to AFK L4's to operate there? Definitly
# Do you believe it is possible to make low sec changes that would allow both pirates and carebears to co-exist profitably without crippling either's play style to extinction? Why or why not? Imho there is no need for lowsec changes besides adjustment of rewards - for mission runners and - unprobeable ships doing escalations.
|