| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
ErrorS
   |
Posted - 2005.12.23 01:14:00 -
[1]
Edited by: ErrorS on 23/12/2005 01:20:37
Edited by: ErrorS on 23/12/2005 01:16:34
LV1 - Frigates / New Destroyers / New players in general
LV2 - T2 Frigates / Destroyers / New player cruisers
LV3 - Good Cruiser pilots / T2 Frigates
LV4 - Battlecruisers / T2 Cruisers
LV5 - Solo T2 Battlecruisers / Battleships - Skilled pilots only
LV6-LV10 - Different group size / skill levels required
am I wrong to think that this might be better for the game? I ditched my Crow and even Cormorant for LV2s because a few were a bit too hard (not impossible) .. so I brought my Harpy.. and of course, the only missions I've got so far have been really really easy. I can't find a proper ship for level 2 missions.
It just seems like you never know what difficulty the mission you're going into will be based on levels. I've had a couple level 2s that were harder than Level 3s I do in my Ferox. Sometimes I'll go into a LVL3 that's pretty tough in my Ferox, other times I'll say "that was it?" to myself, thinking how I could have finished it in a Destroyer.
I'm NOT complaining that missions in general are too hard or too easy. I just wish we weren't confined from level 1 to level 4, because mission difficulty seems to scale much more than the mission levels do.
So why aren't they like this? They should be set up like Complexes. The hardest being a level 10 mission that are whole corperation efforts/extremely skilled players at the very least. Level 1s for newbs and level 5 for solo BS players (with a bit less rewards than we have for current LV4s)
So yeah, they should be scaled like complexes.
________
I'm strict Caldari
"The grass is always greener on the other side" - Maybe they're not as uber as you think?
-ErrorS |
ErrorS
|
Posted - 2005.12.23 01:26:00 -
[2]
Edited by: ErrorS on 23/12/2005 01:26:23
I also suggest that the levels be based on security status, it just makes sense that less secure systems would need bigger ships for the missions.
1.0 to 0.9 - Level 1 Missions
0.9 to 0.8 - Level 2 Missions
0.7 to 0.6 - Level 3 Missions
0.5 to 0.3 - Level 4 Missions
0.3 to 0.1 - Level 5 Missions
0.1 - Level 6 missions
0.0 - Level 7 and up, 10 being on the outskirts of the universe.
I'm just thinking as people 'grow up' in Eve. Most new frigate pilots are going to stick to high security space, even new cruiser pilots wont want to go below 0.5 sec space. Solo T2 ships, battleships and small corperations should be just fine in all low sec space (this should be the most popular) and the bigger corps/alliances with better pilots might stick to the outter regions.
So?
________
I'm strict Caldari
"The grass is always greener on the other side" - Maybe they're not as uber as you think?
-ErrorS |
ErrorS
|
Posted - 2005.12.23 15:32:00 -
[3]
0.1 to 0.4 isn't THAT bad. I don't see how anyone who doesn't want to get in a fight can die in low sec in a battleship or battlecruiser to be honest.
________
I'm strict Caldari
"The grass is always greener on the other side" - Maybe they're not as uber as you think?
-ErrorS |
ErrorS
|
Posted - 2005.12.23 18:07:00 -
[4]
Just stay away from belts? You're not going to find a group of battleships tanking sentries that are able to down another BS or BC through the gate/station in low sec. Most of the time gate campers will ignore a BS or heavily tanked BC.
just basing this on personal experience, by the time i was in a battleship I didn't have to worry about 0.1 to 0.4 space.. I understand it's not like that for everyone.
So, forgetting about the security thing, would it be a waste to push to have missions work like this? more like complexes in terms of levels?
________
I'm strict Caldari
"The grass is always greener on the other side" - Maybe they're not as uber as you think?
-ErrorS |
ErrorS
|
Posted - 2005.12.24 03:21:00 -
[5]
so.. why isn't this getting very much attention?
________
I'm strict Caldari
"The grass is always greener on the other side" - Maybe they're not as uber as you think?
-ErrorS |
| |
|