Pages: 1 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 09:26:00 -
[1]
One of the frequently stated intentions is to spread out players in high security space, and prevent large clusters of mission-runners to occupy a system.
Unfortunately, CCP's approach has been to add more agents for overused corps/factions. This gives these corporations an advantage over others, causing more players to flock to systems with agents beloning to these factions.
In my opinion, the correct approach to this problem is to make other corporations more attractive for mission running and balancing the agent distribution between the factions.
This can be done in several ways: * Bringing agent quantity and type inline between the big four: Caldari currently has an absurd advantage over the other factions due to the overabundance of good combat agents. * Adding agents for factions which are not the big four: Sisters of Eve, Khanid Kingdom, Ammatar Mandate, Interbus. * Changing the standing matrix to make factions such as Thukker Tribe and Intaki Syndicate more attractive. * Adding more (LP shop) incentives to run missions for lowsec/0.0 factions such as ORE, Mordus Legion, Intaki Syndicate. * Rebalancing mission hubs, players should have to choose between either a single high-quality agent or multiple low-quality agents, not both.
|
hired goon
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 09:54:00 -
[2]
-omg-
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 12:20:00 -
[3]
Your ideas aren't bad in themselves, in fact I quite like them. But they're putting lipstick on a pig: the fact that the missions themselves are utterly predictable, boring, virtually all the same and one-dimensional.
|
Furb Killer
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 12:31:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Furb Killer on 27/05/2010 12:31:29
Originally by: Malcanis Your ideas aren't bad in themselves, in fact I quite like them. But they're putting lipstick on a pig: the fact that the missions themselves are utterly predictable, boring, virtually all the same and one-dimensional.
Missions would at least be alot better with sleeper ais and some randomness.
I would like to see dynamic agent quality (does not need to be fully dynamic, but partially at least), so one agent can be Q10, but when used alot it drops to Q0, while the other is Q-5, but when used barely it increases to Q5. Serious it cannot be that hard to implement that and that would really help spreading mission runners.
And when busy upgrade quality of all lvl 4 agents in low sec to at least zero (if possible while keeping their old standing requirements, but that is probably not possible), it is ridiculous that if you want to do lvl 4 missions in low sec there are plenty of Q-17 agents.
|
Ankhesentapemkah
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 15:12:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 27/05/2010 15:12:24
Originally by: Malcanis Your ideas aren't bad in themselves, in fact I quite like them. But they're putting lipstick on a pig: the fact that the missions themselves are utterly predictable, boring, virtually all the same and one-dimensional.
I was getting to that.
|
Gabriel Darkefyre
Shadows Of The Federation
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 15:19:00 -
[6]
Supported.
Think one potential Fix to help spread out Mission Runners would be a complete Overhaul of the LP Store system.
At the moment, there's a lot of duplication between the LP Stores for Corporations in the Same faction meaning that there's not as much point running missions for those smaller Corporations as the Items you can get there, you can also get from, for example, the Factional Navy LP Store as well as a lot of other items that you can't get at the smaller Corp Stores.
So, to make it more worthwhile to run missions for the Smaller Corps, there needs to be a lot more Unique Offers. If I wanted to get a hold of an "Hardwiring - Eifyr and Co. 'Gunslinger' AX-2", For Example, I should need to be Running Missions for Eifyr and Co to get a hold of one (Or Be willing to pay someone who Runs missions for that Corp to get one for me). Alternatively, it should be More Expensive, in LP and ISK, to get a hold of LP Store Items from Corporations other than the one who produces it making it more worthwhile to go to the Manufacturer if you're looking for something Specific. ---------------
Image from Crumplecorn's DesuSigs |
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange Nabaal Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 16:48:00 -
[7]
Yeah, I've been saying this for a while. That said, one buff Caldari needs when it comes to missions - can we get some CN L4 Q20 agents in lowsec like the other empires have? I know they don't see a lot of use, but they should exist.
|
Radgette
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 18:50:00 -
[8]
|
Red Raider
Airbourne Demons DeMoN's N AnGeL's
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 19:02:00 -
[9]
Agreed!
I also support missions receiving sleeper AI and LP store diversity.
|
Marlona Sky
D00M. RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 19:08:00 -
[10]
It would be nice if the agents did some traveling once in a while to some of their other corp stations too.
|
|
Slimy Worm
Sons of Viagra
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 19:11:00 -
[11]
Spreading missioners out will nerf ninja-salvaging, but otherwise you have good ideas. Lowsec needs some love and missions are quite boring. Your idea of dynamic missions is pretty new and would make ninja-salvaging more challenging.
|
T'Amber
www.shipsofeve.com
|
Posted - 2010.05.27 19:14:00 -
[12]
Edited by: T''Amber on 27/05/2010 19:17:20
Looks good, although I'd like to see some sort of Dynamic agent quality and available mission balancing.
- ie, the amount of players utalising an Agent reflects on the amount of overall available missions and the quality of the agent (although there would still be base qualities to work at).
This idea would help some server balancing, but it may have an adverse effect on some mini professions and possibly raise item prices for regions.
-T'amber
SHIPS OF EVE FIVE
|
Tasty Morsel
|
Posted - 2010.05.28 22:41:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Tasty Morsel on 28/05/2010 22:42:10 Good ideas. On top of what's been mentioned, this change from Tyrannis needs to be redone:
Quote: The load balancing mechanism for missions in Dominion incorrectly prioritized high-load systems over low-load systems when selecting the location for mission objectives. Agents now prefer to send players to less loaded systems.
It should be changed so high sec agents always give their missions in high sec (likewise for lowsec and nullsec). The current effect of this change is that missionrunners who don't want to go into lowsec will just move to a system surrounded by highsec, effectively negating the (assumed) intention of this change in the patch because those systems will become more crowded.
|
Ogogov
|
Posted - 2010.05.29 00:15:00 -
[14]
|
Syekuda
|
Posted - 2010.05.29 00:55:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Syekuda on 29/05/2010 00:58:17
Quote: * Adding more (LP shop) incentives to run missions for lowsec/0.0 factions such as ORE, Mordus Legion, Intaki Syndicate.
Here are some things that might help to spread out mission runners in high-sec and at the same time, get those people or new ones in low sec.
IN HIGH-SEC: - agents gives missions 1-3 jumps away. Never the same system. This approach will lower the load on a given system and probably load at CCP servers. Payout is 10% increased because of that. From reward to bounty. Seems fair enough.
- You can talk to your agent remotely, just like in the epic arc missions. This means go to a dead end system where theres no one and do your mission there as long as its in the same region as your agent is.
IN LOW SEC : - agents gives mission in same system. No travel increases chance of getting more mish runners here. - Rewards are increased 30% including bounty. That seems fair but it could increase. - You can talk to your agent remotely, no need to go in station
AGENT STANDINGS: - from -20 to +10: all the agents (level 4 and 5, lvl3 ?) will be in high sec and mission destination will be in high sec. - from +11 to +20: all agetns will be in low-sec (lvl4 and 5) will give missions in low sec
The isk payout from high-sec to low sec will have to be changed and since we now what agents gives x mission and x system it should make CCP easier to say this agent gives better payout for those who are in low sec and less in high-sec. that seems pretty straigh forward.
that was the "quick" fix. The long fix which I would like to be implemented is the new AI in every mission. But if thats the case, the ISK payout would have to be increased because of the risk involved
|
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2010.05.29 10:54:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Yeah, I've been saying this for a while. That said, one buff Caldari needs when it comes to missions - can we get some CN L4 Q20 agents in lowsec like the other empires have? I know they don't see a lot of use, but they should exist.
I have done a bit of a survey today (using Cribba EVE agents).
Gallente have 89 l4 q20 agents in low sec/0.0, Caldari 5 (all from expert distribution BTW).
The fun part is that the 81 out of 89 Galletne agents are from division giving out a lot of courier missions and only 8 from combat divisions and some station get 4 q20 courier agents all in the same station.
Caldari get 1 combat agents out of 5 in and the best station has 3 agent (2 courier 1 combat).
Gallente low sec mission hubs seem custom made for isk farmers working for RTM rings (and probably is the reason why most of the courier missions are done for Gallente corps).
The whole distribution of agents need to be redone.
Sadly I agree with Malcanis that it will be mostly a cosmetic change.
We really need someone in the CSM to push for changes in the PvE part of the game.
I think that the guys saying "Working on PvE? Horror, CCP should work for PvP first and exclusively" are damaging not only the PvE players but themselves too as the current implementation in missions, mission scanning, NPC behaviour and so on train player to avoid any chance of doing PvP while doing PvE as it automatically mean failure (note necessarily destruction but at least sharply decreased efficiency).
The problem is that, especially when doing something about PvE, CCP first decide what is the source of problem, then what is the solution, then search for the proof that the source of the problem is the one they have already chosen, disregarding any different data.
So the "solution" always fit perfectly to the "perceived" source of the problem, but rarely to the real source of the problem.
Hoping for some better development in this part of the game, /supported
|
Syekuda
|
Posted - 2010.05.29 15:55:00 -
[17]
I also believe that if CCP makes mission runners in low sec a bit harder to get probed out ONLY in low sec that would encourage them to go in low sec. Not impossible but just harder that is.
for example, you would need more than 4 probes to successfully get a 100% scan strenght instead of the easy 3-4 probes like now. This method takes less than 2 minutes with good experience. |
Mara Rinn
|
Posted - 2010.05.31 01:43:00 -
[18]
I like your thinking, Ankhesentapemkah.
Reducing the variety of items sold through any one corporation's LP store & reducing the proximity of high-quality agents for any corporation should be enough to spread mission-runners out to some degree.
Improved possibility for trade is good too: by creating scarcity of items, the need for trade is generated.
[Aussie players: join ANZAC channel] |
Bellum Eternus
Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2010.05.31 08:36:00 -
[19]
Supported. -
Originally by: Bellum Eternus That is the beauty of Eve, it's a crucible in which great minds are formed and the rest are ground to dust.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 :: [one page] |