| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
hirr
Morsus Mihi
   |
Posted - 2010.06.02 06:13:00 -
[31]
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 02/06/2010 06:15:46
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 02/06/2010 06:14:58
 Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
Solutions
* Highsec agents should never pick lowsec systems as destination, as lowsec missions will always be declined anyway.
* Lowsec agents should strongly favor the current system over neighbouring systems, as lowsec missionrunners will likely decline missions out of system.
So even though it's most definitely CCP's stated desire to move the general populace out of high sec and into low and null sec you want to make it easier for people to cling? Missions taking you into high sec are there intentionally to encourage you to leave high sec and see that low sec is not the big bad dangerous place people seem to imagine.
Here's a solution, move all level 4 agents above quality 0 to 0.0 outposts via a renting or sov upgrade system.
Then again you're also the CSM candidate that wants to charge players real life cash for each player they kill in the game as a form of punishment, so I would imagine listening to reason won't really be your "thing"
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 07:25:00 -
[32]
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 02/06/2010 06:15:46
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 02/06/2010 06:14:58
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
Solutions
* Highsec agents should never pick lowsec systems as destination, as lowsec missions will always be declined anyway.
* Lowsec agents should strongly favor the current system over neighbouring systems, as lowsec missionrunners will likely decline missions out of system.
So even though it's most definitely CCP's stated desire to move the general populace out of high sec and into low and null sec you want to make it easier for people to cling? Missions taking you into high sec are there intentionally to encourage you to leave high sec and see that low sec is not the big bad dangerous place people seem to imagine.
Here's a solution, move all level 4 agents above quality 0 to 0.0 outposts via a renting or sov upgrade system.
Then again you're also the CSM candidate that wants to charge players real life cash for each player they kill in the game as a form of punishment, so I would imagine listening to reason won't really be your "thing"
You dont get more people into low sec by doing this, those who want to go to low sec use a low sec agent (way saver), and those that dont want just go to motsu/dodixie/etc, so much for load balancing.
Missions that take you to low sec from high sec are especially the things that lead people to believe that low sec is a big bad dangerous place you really dont want to go. You will be at border systems that are way more dangerous than deeper low sec systems, you got a pretty decent chance you get killed as soon as you jump into low sec (yes most low sec entrances wont be camped, but still the chance it is camped is a quite realistic possibility, and how often do you think someone will return to low sec when he got killed on his first jump into low sec), and otherwise probably probed down and killed.
Until it is changed that as soon as someone has a point on a pve ship it dies, especially when in a mission, people wont go missioning in low sec, deal with it.
|
foksieloy
Minmatar
Universal Army
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 07:26:00 -
[33]
No support. Mission runners are irrelevant.
_______________________
We come for our people! |
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
hirr
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 18:11:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Furb Killer
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 02/06/2010 06:15:46
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 02/06/2010 06:14:58
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
Solutions
* Highsec agents should never pick lowsec systems as destination, as lowsec missions will always be declined anyway.
* Lowsec agents should strongly favor the current system over neighbouring systems, as lowsec missionrunners will likely decline missions out of system.
So even though it's most definitely CCP's stated desire to move the general populace out of high sec and into low and null sec you want to make it easier for people to cling? Missions taking you into high sec are there intentionally to encourage you to leave high sec and see that low sec is not the big bad dangerous place people seem to imagine.
Here's a solution, move all level 4 agents above quality 0 to 0.0 outposts via a renting or sov upgrade system.
Then again you're also the CSM candidate that wants to charge players real life cash for each player they kill in the game as a form of punishment, so I would imagine listening to reason won't really be your "thing"
You dont get more people into low sec by doing this, those who want to go to low sec use a low sec agent (way saver), and those that dont want just go to motsu/dodixie/etc, so much for load balancing.
Missions that take you to low sec from high sec are especially the things that lead people to believe that low sec is a big bad dangerous place you really dont want to go. You will be at border systems that are way more dangerous than deeper low sec systems, you got a pretty decent chance you get killed as soon as you jump into low sec (yes most low sec entrances wont be camped, but still the chance it is camped is a quite realistic possibility, and how often do you think someone will return to low sec when he got killed on his first jump into low sec), and otherwise probably probed down and killed.
Until it is changed that as soon as someone has a point on a pve ship it dies, especially when in a mission, people wont go missioning in low sec, deal with it.
Yes but CCP wont be changing things to make less avenues into lowsec. You still haven't passed that point.
|
Aeila Goch
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 19:44:00 -
[35]
Gettting sent 5 jumps for a lvl1 combat mission, or lvl2 mining mission when there are only 16 people in the current system doesnt look like load balancing, it looks more like 'waste the paying customers time'!
Get rid of the various 'waste the customers time features' like 5 mins between posts & sessions that last minutes! |
Lone Provider
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 20:09:00 -
[36]
The simplist answer to these problems is that these "Nerfs" should have never happened.
I and alot of others were quite happy with the way things were.
If CCP want to "cure" server pressure, then maybe they should fork out on upgrading them!
Personally, I've never, in 2 years, experienced game lag unless it was my own connection playing up.
An <<<<<EXPANSION>>>>> should <<<<<EXPAND>>>>> the game with cool new stuff for everyone (maybe new mission storys) not >>>>>DEFLATE<<<<<< it!
and TBH I was really looking forward to Tyrannis, and I to was totally "deflated!"
|
Delilah Wild
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 20:17:00 -
[37]
A good idea to talk about. Tentatively supported.
PS. Bellum's post is indicative of many pirates' inability to think beyond their own narrow perspective. I appreciate Ank's effort in the OP to think about the needs of both high and low sec citizens. |
Red Raider
Airbourne Demons
DeMoN's N AnGeL's
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 21:10:00 -
[38]
If people are going to move to low sec and null they are going to do it anyways. There is no good reason for high sec agents to issue missions to low sec or low sec agents to issue missions to high sec. Your standard high sec mission runner is going to decline the mission anyways so if CCP was trying to nerf the living crap out of mission running then mission accomplished.
|
AlastorTheLost
|
Posted - 2010.06.02 21:40:00 -
[39]
Roll back the lvl 5 like they where beffore
|
Spins Meats
Gallente
Metalworks
Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 04:13:00 -
[40]
Originally by: AlastorTheLost
Roll back the lvl 5 like they where beffore
Originally by: Lone Provider
The simplist answer to these problems is that these "Nerfs" should have never happened.
I and alot of others were quite happy with the way things were.
In after the "me me me" brigade sounding off. Seriously, do you guys realise how ridiculous you sound? "I'm not making as many ISKs now as I was, and I might have to go into MEAN NASTY HORRIBAD LOWSECS, therefore this change should be rolled back!"
Has it occurred to you selfish whiners that your mission running has effects on the wider game beyond your own wallet? That while it may have nerfed your highsec level 5s (and your cynical use of high quality l4 agents in 0.5 systems on lowsec borders), the broader impact on the risk:reward calculus is obviously more in line with how CCP see missions should be balanced?
Either move further into highsec and take a quality hit, or deal with the fact that you've been struck by a nerf bat. The self-righteous forum whining is pathetic.
|
|
|
Milla Jovobitch
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 04:40:00 -
[41]
Thanks Ankh...umm...pmkahsomething. +1
|
Nanita Imlae
Gallente
Original Sin.
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 06:31:00 -
[42]
Not supported, in its current form Ank. Pre-Dominion the ratio was about right between highsec agents sending players to lowsec, allowing them to decline missions if they felt like it, or taking the mission and the risk. Since Dominion the ratios have been broken. In Dominion, a really low amount of missions where in lowsec. Now, in Taranis, CCP over compensated.
|
Ban Doga
|
Posted - 2010.06.03 07:54:00 -
[43]
I'm not really sure there was such a great need to introduce/change load-balancing to send people to the neighboring system with only 5 people in instead of the current system with 10 people.
Although I must admit I haven't run a mission in one of the "big hubs" for quite some time.
Overall I find this proposal lacking of a specific solution or the presented solution is just not detailed enough:
Will highsec agents still prefer the system 4 jumps away just because there is 1 pilot less in it?
Lowsec agents sending you to their system most of the time will create "minihubs" in lowsec, very predictable.
|
Canteen Charlie
|
Posted - 2010.06.04 00:36:00 -
[44]
I don't get the belief that Level 5's should be in low sec. Why do people say this? I've been playing for over about a year and a half and got sooooooooooooo utterly out of my skull bored with level 4's once I could solo them ages. Level 5's are tough and a great challenge in my opinion. If you don't bring a 1.5b isk BS you have to really think them through. But why oh why on earth would you ever possibly do it in low sec where you're so easily scanned down and attackable by PVP players? Why? The risk reward is so heavily skewed to risk that it's silly unless your sitting on a mountain of isk and dont mind losing even a bottom barrel 200m isk battleship. Our corp LOVED running these missions in high sec. It was a great way to bring younger players along for them to see what a mission is like you have to work your way through. The isk isn't that unbelievable considering you have to split it with multiple other players, making them an even balance isk wise to a fast run level 4 solo. ALLOW THESE TO DROP IN HIGH SEC! or else DRASTICALLY increase the rewards because unless the risk reward gets into balance where you can expect youll lose 2-3 ships to complete the mission due to pvpers popping you in your PVE fit while they have PVP fits and can gate camp with no skill just numbers so even getting to the mission opens the chance of you dying its COMPLETELY not worth it. CCP has made this game so utterly boring for me now. I want casual play where I can come in, play for a couple hours and go, which is I think a large portion of the group. And if you hit 20m sp and don't want the politics of alliances what can you now possibly do in eve that's a balanced challenge and allow you make isk relative to your skill point level?
|
Brosef Fritzl
|
Posted - 2010.06.04 01:47:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Canteen Charlie
Level 5's are tough and a great challenge in my opinion. If you don't bring a 1.5b isk BS you have to really think them through.
Oh ****. Thinking? In my EVE... NEVAR!
|
arbiter reformed
Minmatar
Reverse Psychology.
HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2010.06.05 01:59:00 -
[46]
Edited by: arbiter reformed on 05/06/2010 01:59:41
im with bellum on this one. although i took full advantage oh highsec lvl5s :). my poor 100mill an hour :(
as for the lvl5 moaners, use an unprobable tengu and scimi combo
|
Crumbly George
|
Posted - 2010.06.30 15:31:00 -
[47]
Load balancing hasn't just affected high sec and low sec. Before tyrannis I could run level 4 null-sec agents and i'd get maybe 70-80% missions in the same system. Now, I think 1 mission in 20 has been in the same system. There seems to be an aversion to having missions in the same system, regardless of the absolute population of a system - if the neighbouring systems are quieter (and it's the difference between 2 people in system most of the time and 1 person next door) then you're getting sent there regardless. |
Deckington Forgecaster
|
Posted - 2010.06.30 21:24:00 -
[48]
Yes plox
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |