|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon.
Test Friends Please Ignore
16
   |
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
I think we got off topic. The argument isn't trying to move people to 0.0 or lowsec. The biggest problem with level 4 missions is that they don't encourage multiplayer interaction in a game driven by multiplayer interaction. I have no problem with there being very lucrative things in highsec and I do not expect people to be forced to move into less safe space. I happen to agree with the OP when he states that the most lucrative things in high sec should take at the very least a minimal amount of teamwork and coordination beyond what currently exists.
As for 0.0 ratting/plexing whatever. I works just like EFT, on paper it sounds wonderful and there's shiny pots of gold everywhere. Realistically for the average null-sec player it is far more difficult. Most systems are **** and the ones that aren't **** are already in heavy use by other players. You can still make a lot of ISK in null no doubt but its not always the ISK printing machine some people make it out to be. |
Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon.
Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:55:00 -
[2] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:
You're absolutely right and it comes back the same ol'. Did the significant shift to highsec occur after the Sanctums nerfs?
The high population in the "good" systems (as you said) took away the isk potential so much so that moving to highsec gave you similar income without the risk - particularly Incursions.
Although, granted, Incursions require solid fleet discipline and multiplayer ethos but the coinage is superb for relatively low risk.
I'm pretty sure CCP have the numbers and the Sanctum nerf may well be reversed if what we're saying has any truth in it.
For mine, L4 missions ain't the problem, they're the result.
I think the point I'm trying to make is that in order to do anything in 0.0 lot's of things have to happen. There needs to be sov/upgrades. Some stuff needs to be scanned, most are to difficult to do without multiple players. You need to be aware of hostile players etc, etc.
As for level 4 missions there is very little to no interaction. Even disregarding how much ISK you actually make doing it it is just a very poor mechanic that fosters a very un-eve like mentality. Missions are sort of the theme park in a sandbox world they just don't really fit. Am I making any sense lol? |
Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon.
Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:
Yes, yes you do. I did L4's for quite a time using 3 of my own chars in my own corp. 1 tengu, a claymore and a noctis. made millions. No effort, no need to put any social aspect into what I did.
It does fly in the face of a "multiplayer" environment but having said that, solo ratters in 0.0 do that all day also. The "co-operative bit" only applies in case on home defense/CTA's....
Someone did suggest making L4's "sleeper" style making co-operation more neccessary but then the rewards need to escalate to be commensurate - otherwise may as just go shoot WH rats all day.
At least in Nullsec you have to join a corp, in an alliance and either show up to CTA's/Home defense or avoid getting ganked. If level 4 missions even had this extent of social interaction we would probably be having a different discussion.
I would be in favor of removing missions completely rather than try to fix such a messed up mechanic. From the new player experience onward we should be providing training into actual professions rather than robots. It would be more productive and sandboxish to enable players and provide them with the tools to start mining/building/researching/hauling/trading/pvping from the get go rather than clicking red crosses all day.
|
Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon.
Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:41:00 -
[4] - Quote
Jaroslav Unwanted wrote:
Hmm interesting.
just few differencies
blue null / local consisted of few people in system / intel chanell you know about possible aggresor even before he reach same constelation you are in. When he comes all skill you really need is to warp under FF
empire
you are there with dozens somewhere even houndreds of people in local/ every one of them is possible danger and can mobilize and shot you/destroy your ship / you dont know jack about when it will come / you cant defend against it once they decide to destroy you.
Seems like blue null is actually far more secure than an empire
I never claimed any one was more secure than the other. I was only preaching that null-sec even at its most individual level requires SOME amount of social interaction as opposed to running missions.
If the most social interaction you get out of missioning is the lottery chance of a loss mail then you only prove my point in that missions in general are just very un-eve like. |
Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon.
Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:01:00 -
[5] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
The last thing needed is a 1 sided gank-based solution. While this is an MMO, it is nice to have solo things to do when you can't reliably be a part of a group dynamic. I mission when I have to take frequent breaks from the keyboard. Otherwise I do incursions for PvE.
Having a soloable option when you cannot at the time play as a part of a group, especially for those smaller groups out there is absolutely necessary. What we have with missions though is not just something soloable to do when no one is on but an entire way of life in EVE. Some players never do anything except missions in game.
Some people create alts just to do misisons to make ISK. When you have to make an alt to mission run because your main in his or her corp can't generate an income there is something seriously wrong with situation. |
Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon.
Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:14:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jaroslav Unwanted wrote:[
well but that doesnt have to be an problem with level IV mission, does it ?
It could be problem on the other part of the train, aka why he is not able to make isk at the place he is now. I probably know the answer, however he made that choice, its his way how he wants to play.
Changing the entire gameplay for many in order to deny something from them is not gonna make the guy who made an alt to do lvl IVs mission any happier, will it ?
The problem is that running missions regardless of the ISK made is the easy way out.
Would EVE be a better game if more people traded/built/researched/explored etc.? It couldn't hurt it
Would you in the long run make more ISK in other ventures in highsec? According to posters in this thread yes.
Essentially all missions have become is a place to make relatively easy ISK with small investment and absolutely zero social interaction in a sandbox game. |
Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon.
Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:20:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
The only issue is that this creates a catch-22. if it's doable by someone semi-AFK and worth doing in any way, someone will attentively min/max it for maximum profit. Changing the game to try to force them out isn't very "sandboxy" and makes it less viable solution to those who do not "abuse" the system. That being said, with faction items, implants, meta mods, standings and so much else tied to missions, I can't help but wonder if they were intended to be viable playstyle by themselves.
Good post lol. I'm still thinking of a counter-argument but in the mean time enjoy the "like". |
Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon.
Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:32:00 -
[8] - Quote
Marcus Janus wrote:So what've I've gotten from this translates to the following.
OMG PEOPLE PLAY DIFFERENT THAN ME NERF IT NAO!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's not just your sandbox to play in, if you want to make it more dangerous for them suicide ganking is very possible.
It has actually been nothing like that. It has been a good discussion with valid points raised. Quit shitting it up. |
|
|
| |
|