| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
tankarmor
   |
Posted - 2011.03.05 02:22:00 -
[91]
 Originally by: Tarasina
Edited by: Tarasina on 11/02/2011 01:44:41
One BIG improvement would be:
Being able to accept and turn in missions remotely(unless mission requires an item).
1. Remove courier missions from combat-oriented agents.
2. Ramdom amount of NPCs and random shipclass for NPCs (within certain limits) would be another improvement.
Personal opinion: Changing NPC behavior just seems to make it more boring and tedious. For example if NPCs neut and tracking disrupt.
Doing the same mission for the hundredth time, when you know what ships there are, where they are and what they do ... boring.
What I would like to see in missions is the possibility to use smaller ships more (more efficiently). The whole inty/assault ship line is pretty obsolete in missions. I guess I'm asking for a new branch of missions, sort of like the pirate epic arcs. I've done them both and it was decent fun.
My goal from the start was to fly ONLY small ships but that is not feasible in PVE, no path or career past lv2s.
get into nullsec and stop missioning and boring. That's the SAVE, :)
|
Rykuss
|
Posted - 2011.03.05 04:59:00 -
[92]
Originally by: XXSketchxx
Make all missions in high sec anti faction.
Remove bounties from all 0.0 rats.
|
Rykuss
|
Posted - 2011.03.05 05:17:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Liang Nuren
several suggestions
While I agree with most of what you are saying, it will not work until all the faction and corp LP stores have equipment worth purchasing and the value of Lp is approximately equivalent between the different stores.
My suggestions:
- redo the LP stores inventory so that every faction and corp has worthwhile equipment to sell;
- revise agent distribution, quantity and quality so that:
* every faction/corp has approximately the same proportion of high quality combat agents;
* every faction/corp has access to good quality non combat agents in high sec;
* courier agent hubs in low sec disappear (currently they are used almost exclusively by macro and sweatshops workers, it seem);
* every corp (maybe barring Interbus) has at least 1 storyline agent, currently some of them lack them;
* there is a good spread (but not hubs) of agents in low sec;
- revise the loot tables. Before the nerf to large T1 modules some NPC group had bad bounties but a good value in loot drops thank to the mineral content, now they have low bounties and a low value in loot drops;
- when you add new mission please don't add 90% of them to level 1-3 and those for level 4 only to some obscure corporation;
- on the long run: upgrade NPC AI, NPC ships and adjust rewards to the new difficulty.
This. It's a huge pain in the ass looking up the next agent in the progression chain to find there isn't one for that division. Either that or the next level agent for that division is a level four when you need a level three. Some corps for example have one agent for the command divison and that one agent is a level one. Why? Some of the corps, I look at them and what they offer and wonder why anyone would mission for them. Agent quality, some corps have such poor quality agents and if they do have a decent agent, he/she is deep in null, low-sec or even another faction's space.
|
Jno Aubrey
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 15:00:00 -
[94]
Please add the ability to copy and share mission bookmarks. When I am helping someone do L4's or grind faction standing it would be nice to not have to be there to warp him to the mission location.
__________________________________________________
Name a shrub after me; something prickly and hard to eradicate. |
XXSketchxx
Gallente
Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 15:02:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Rykuss
Originally by: XXSketchxx
Make all missions in high sec anti faction.
Remove bounties from all 0.0 rats.
You are literally ******ed.
|
grumpyguts1
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 18:49:00 -
[96]
Allow us to shoot ninja salvages..  Game can mark wrecks as abandoned 30 mins after handing in.
|
Danghor
Amarr
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 23:24:00 -
[97]
The 4 hours delay is way too much
|
syphurous
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 23:46:00 -
[98]
Add the Massive Attack, back to Massive Attack. 3 low level BS and pile of single volley crusiers ? seriously ? I know you wanted to remove the number of rats in missions to help with server resources, but seriously just remove the BS/HAC/CS rats was the fix for this mission ?
Most people will read this thinking it's part of my post, when its actually my sig :P
|
Revii Lagoon
The Foreign Legion
Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 08:01:00 -
[99]
You are not a game developer, CSM is not meant for amateur game developers. Stop trying to come up with a mystical proposal which CCP will flat out ignore because you are incompetent with game development. Even if you have had some experience developing video games, have you developed a MMO as complex and diverse as EVE?
|
Tarasina
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 09:08:00 -
[100]
Originally by: tankarmor
Originally by: Tarasina
Edited by: Tarasina on 11/02/2011 01:44:41
One BIG improvement would be:
Being able to accept and turn in missions remotely(unless mission requires an item).
1. Remove courier missions from combat-oriented agents.
2. Ramdom amount of NPCs and random shipclass for NPCs (within certain limits) would be another improvement.
Personal opinion: Changing NPC behavior just seems to make it more boring and tedious. For example if NPCs neut and tracking disrupt.
Doing the same mission for the hundredth time, when you know what ships there are, where they are and what they do ... boring.
What I would like to see in missions is the possibility to use smaller ships more (more efficiently). The whole inty/assault ship line is pretty obsolete in missions. I guess I'm asking for a new branch of missions, sort of like the pirate epic arcs. I've done them both and it was decent fun.
My goal from the start was to fly ONLY small ships but that is not feasible in PVE, no path or career past lv2s.
get into nullsec and stop missioning and boring. That's the SAVE, :)
I roam lowsec mostly nowadays, searching for plexes. I go to nullsec rarely, only if plex escalates. Living in nullsec is a logistical nightmare if you solo.
I don't like corps because their goals are never my goals. I do what I want, when I want.
|
|
|
Zuper Zpy
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 09:23:00 -
[101]
Remove virtually all mineable asteroids into mission sites. The higher the level the higher the ore type.
Oooops sry that wouldnt work cos all the mining bots would become obsolete and CCP would need to increase the wages of its staff to compensate.
|
GankuVerymuch
|
Posted - 2011.03.15 01:28:00 -
[102]
1. Make missions remotely acceptable. I proposed this idea a few months ago and all I got was flames.
Though I didn't suggest moving the missions from where they would actually spawn. Therefore actually needing to travel to do the mission still.
2. Make the missions harder. Such as sleeper drone AI in all mission npc's, Smaller npc fleets that camp gates in missions, Having to fight a npc hac gang with ewar.
3. Make the missions really reflect the true intent of the game. PVP!!! Make the missions so you have to use the same fits you would to go PVP in. Therefore learning to PVP and making all the 0.0 carebear haters stand up and give some attention to the fact the carebears are going to learn how to come into their space and really fight.
In the last few years CCP has thrown just about the entire gamut at missioners trying to force them into lowsec and null. But missioners aren't getting the proper training to go out and handle it. Seems they just want some noobs to shoot in low sec. well if the missions actually taught you how to fight, one might be prepared for actually getting into some PVP.
PVP stimulates the market and the mission running isk faucet gets turned off.
The real question is "Why in a so called PVP game are there any missions in the first place?" Hints to the game actually being made for ALL players. So why no mission love? If all they want is for us to PVP, which it seems. Why not just dump the missions? They haven't changed in ages, implying they thought we would get tired of the same old crap and go do something else. Well we haven't and still represent a large percentage of the EVE community and market share. Missions need a real looking at.
I also love the null sec guys that always come into the mission pages yelling about you guys are all losers cause you are scared to come to null. If the alliance structure was changed and all the "blue everyone" monkeys in null would be made to learn tactics instead of blob you might get a fight. But what dumbass is gonna come flying into null knowing the whole region is going to hotdrop them? Because 4000 ppl are blue to each other. Circlejerk if you ask me.
|
Kamikaze jihawt
|
Posted - 2011.03.15 09:30:00 -
[103]
Originally by: XXSketchxx
Originally by: Goose99
Originally by: Lady Aja
Originally by: XXSketchxx
Make all missions in high sec anti faction.
oh my!
mah hero!!! <3
Bad idea. Even now, most tag types are already at npc buy order level. Each faction rat drops multiple tags exceeding in npc buy order value compared to bounty of pirate rat counterpart. All missions being antifaction will result in all tags bumped down to npc buy order level, resulting in massive isk faucet.
Seeing as they would completely replace bounties in high sec
I'm okay with this. Anti faction would make people have to balance standings more and maybe limit travel for a lot more people.
While you're at it, add low sec borders between regions.
Actually this would really result in more people saving the tags to buy items from the lp store and then converting that into isk, rather than looting them and selling them to the cheap skates at the market hub. Thus making tag prices climb. All faction missions would be a mistake. How about allowing the players to toggle an option for "All faction missions", or "No faction missions"? This will allow mission runners to choose whether they want to mass exodus their faction standings or not. I personally think it would be better to lower bounties, and then increase mission, bonus, and lp payout significantly.
|
Kamikaze jihawt
|
Posted - 2011.03.15 09:39:00 -
[104]
Originally by: GyokZoli
Originally by: Goose99
Take away tag consumption for all LP shop items, while drastically increase isk consumption for those items. The extra isk sink, amplified by people liquidating LP buildup, will be good for the economy.
Sure, and then CCP can just throw away the level 5 missions.
What? Did you just say that? He's talking about tags not lp. LVL 5 missions would still be awesome.
|
Kamikaze jihawt
|
Posted - 2011.03.15 09:55:00 -
[105]
Edited by: Kamikaze jihawt on 15/03/2011 09:56:21
Here is the big issue with no bounties, and more tags dropped that apparently NO ONE will adress so I guess I WILL HAVE TO DO IT. It will literally get rid of mission blitzing, therefore significantly nerfing missions to those mission runners that are veterans and can complete missions at a faster pace. It will cause blitzers to have to stop what they are doing to go out and collect all of the tags in order to push a decent profit. Of course marauders in a sense will have a huge comeback for running missions but overall tags replacing bounties would be the biggest mistake in this game, and would further nerf lvl 4 missioning as we know it. THE BEST SOLUTION IS TO INCREASE LP PAYOUT IF YOU INSIST ON GETTING RID OF BOUNTIES! Endo story.
|
Headlong
Katzbalger Industries
|
Posted - 2011.03.15 10:26:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Kamikaze jihawt
Of course marauders in a sense will have a huge comeback for running missions but overall tags replacing bounties would be the biggest mistake in this game, and would further nerf lvl 4 missioning as we know it. THE BEST SOLUTION IS TO INCREASE LP PAYOUT IF YOU INSIST ON GETTING RID OF BOUNTIES! Endo story.
Not really, more LPs will just water down the LP / ISK ratio which in the end changes really nothing at all. I agree that the idea of spawning tags is a stupid one cause it really puts missions on the same level as spamming sanctums (kill'em mentality). In the end the tags are either another kind of isk faucet or just a way to slow down mission runners since it forces them to loot in order to convert their lps. In a very real way the loot nerf was a really twoedged sword - it didn't really have that much impact on the mineral market but it created even more incentives to blitz since the gap between a blitzing and a do it all guy in a marauder or bs/noctis kombo just widened.
In the end, if there is one facet in the whole mission running aspect of the game that is really not easy to quickfix that would be the question how to balance rewards without having unwanted secondary effects.
|
Kamikaze jihawt
|
Posted - 2011.03.15 11:08:00 -
[107]
actually you are right. The best way to do it is to find a way to get rid of bounties while at the same time making the lp rewards more rewarding. Perhaps lowering lp cost on many items, and/ or making certain faction modules better. This is of course IF we decide to get rid of bounties. I'm not convinced that removing bounties is the way to go personally, I just think it is a way for people to further nerf missions overall, and ccp will go along with it because they are in the business of selling more plex cards.
|
Danghor
Amarr
|
Posted - 2011.03.15 23:05:00 -
[108]
Come on man, removing the bounties, really ?
Let see... instead of getting lots of isk, you'll either get a bunch of people salvaging and looting, for selling purposes, or flooding the market with LP store items. Prices will go down and everbody's wallet will go down too. So everyone will be depending on their sales to get something from the market. You'll slow down sales rate, which is really bad for the economy.
|
Liang Nuren
|
Posted - 2011.03.16 00:01:00 -
[109]
Edited by: Liang Nuren on 16/03/2011 00:04:30
Originally by: Kamikaze jihawt
Here is the big issue with no bounties, and more tags dropped that apparently NO ONE will adress so I guess I WILL HAVE TO DO IT. It will literally get rid of mission blitzing, therefore significantly nerfing missions to those mission runners that are veterans and can complete missions at a faster pace.
No, it will not. If you are truly blitzing missions then you are making your ISK off of LP, not bounties or mission reward or mission bonus. It would actually be a much smaller nerf to mission blitzers than the people running missions in faction battleships and not looting.
Quote:
THE BEST SOLUTION IS TO INCREASE LP PAYOUT IF YOU INSIST ON GETTING RID OF BOUNTIES! Endo story.
No, that is not the best solution. That would simply make each LP worth less as the LP market gets "flooded".
Quote:
Not really, more LPs will just water down the LP / ISK ratio which in the end changes really nothing at all.
This is true.
Quote:
I agree that the idea of spawning tags is a stupid one cause it really puts missions on the same level as spamming sanctums (kill'em mentality).
I don't agree. People would be much more like to do "half blitzes" where they don't even bother shooting the frigs they don't intend to loot. It also stands a strong chance of further encourage blitzing as the average mission completion time goes up from more people looting.
Quote:
In the end the tags are either another kind of isk faucet or just a way to slow down mission runners since it forces them to loot in order to convert their lps.
No, it forces them to loot TO COLLECT THEIR BOUNTIES. There's a really big difference.
-Liang
--
Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire
On Twitter
|
Kamikaze jihawt
|
Posted - 2011.03.16 02:35:00 -
[110]
liang you are full of crap, certain missions with high bounty battleships are worth the little effort it takes for a blitzer to destroy them before completing the objective. Of course some arent, not to mention those missions that cannot be blitzed... Getting rid of bounties and replacing them with tags is a **** idea.
|
|
|
Songbird
Gallente
T.I.E. Inc.
|
Posted - 2011.03.17 06:23:00 -
[111]
The only anti faction missions should be the one given out by the faction warfare.
How does killing serpentis pirates for gallente make me look bad in the eyes of the amarr - stop that nonsense.
Why does a transportation company want me to kill gallente?
I'm tired of juggling standings.
At the very least remove the 4 hr delay for anti faction missions.
Reintroduce ded agents - have em give out incursion missions you can do with your buddies - this is a multiplayer game after all.
|
PewPewLaser
|
Posted - 2011.03.17 10:08:00 -
[112]
I want to play, I hate viewing a mission, seeing that it's a courier mission from a command agent, declining it, just to get another damn courier mission. It's stupid, I want to play the game, I dont want to have to run around through gates to my other agent, I dont want to have to go 4 jumps to do a combat mission, I just want to play the damn game and shoot ****. None of this garbage. Lowsec mission running is ******ed because of how strong gatecamping is, how easy it is to probe out and warp in with a cloaky. Removing bounties is only going to hurt the majority of average players, the rich people are already rich, and they will find other ways to make money. I hate getting faction missions also, absolutely ******ed.
|
Mara Rinn
|
Posted - 2011.03.18 09:48:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Rykuss
It's a huge pain in the ass looking up the next agent in the progression chain to find there isn't one for that division.
For R&D corps, it's the relative unattractiveness of their mission agents that makes the corp more profitable to build standings with.
Originally by: Rykuss
Either that or the next level agent for that division is a level four when you need a level three.
For everywhere else, the relative unattractiveness of available agents is one of the foundations of the player-run standings-for-ISK industry.
I do agree with the general principle of making sure that all corporations have something of interest to sell. I want to see LP stores being differentiated somehow, though. Have +5 implants only available through R&D corps, for example. Have blueprints only available through corps that specialise in technology, while the prebuilt modules become available through corps that specialise in hardware, with ammunition and ships become available only through navy/internal security corporations.
--
A vote for NC candidates is a vote for RMT
[Aussie players: join ANZAC channel] |
operationsresearch
|
Posted - 2011.03.20 15:21:00 -
[114]
I would also like to propose specific suggestions, however, thus far I find the following to be the most imperative relative to the magnitude of benefit and number of players effected.
1
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |