Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |

Baphommet
Sonoran Sun Legion Eternal Strife
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:32:00 -
[1] - Quote
I made a reply on another thread, and I though the subject required more attention. So instead of coming up with ideas on highsec careers like in the other thread, I'd like to have your opinion on weather my points are valid and reasonable.
Here was my post:
I despise level 4 missioning.
-It's easy. -It's very low risk. -It's boring and repetitive. -It's extremely lucrative. -It has a variety of benefits in addition to ISK gain, such as sec status gain, faction standing gain, corp standing gain, access to free implants, etc. -It makes mining in any space much less profitable (recycling is silly). -It requires only combat related skills, most of which are useful in many other fields of work.
In fact, I hate highsec missioning so much that I'm almost genuinely upset about it.
Mining is a big part of why highsec is overpopulated and low/nullsec is not worth the trouble, income-wise.
Missions should be a side job, a way to earn income for pure combat pilots. NOT a huge source of resources.
AMEN - RAWR - RANT - OTHER THINGS!
Baphommet (quote me)
Mustache |

T' Elk
Clearly Compensating The Dark Triad
79
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:39:00 -
[2] - Quote
This thread should be posted in the Missions and Complexes topic. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=topics&f=248 God wears-áRay Ban Aviators. |

The Apostle
The Black Priests
732
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
Baphommet wrote:I made a reply on another thread, and I though the subject required more attention. So instead of coming up with ideas on highsec careers like in the other thread, I'd like to have your opinion on weather my points are valid and reasonable.
Here was my post: (The idea is that lvl 4s are way OP) ------------ Has it ever occurred to anybody that some people only play BECAUSE of level 4's?
And anyway, why is it neccessary to move carebears to get PvP? Is it because they will make low/0.0 target rich?
PvP'ers are the ones complaining about lowsec etc. so why don't YOU move out there?
I've already said - and this is why I post on it, if highsec targets are taken away (either by assured safety OR by complete reversal of highsec safety), then people will move out by default.
PvP'ers DON'T want to leave highsec because they are SAFE there. It's not a "carebear" created problem.
Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo!
|

Baphommet
Sonoran Sun Legion Eternal Strife
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:51:00 -
[4] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:Baphommet wrote:I made a reply on another thread, and I though the subject required more attention. So instead of coming up with ideas on highsec careers like in the other thread, I'd like to have your opinion on weather my points are valid and reasonable.
Here was my post: (The idea is that lvl 4s are way OP) ------------ Has it ever occurred to anybody that some people only play BECAUSE of level 4's? And anyway, why is it neccessary to move carebears to get PvP? Is it because they will make low/0.0 target rich? PvP'ers are the ones complaining about lowsec etc. so why don't YOU move out there? I've already said - and this is why I post on it, if highsec targets are taken away (either by assured safety OR by complete reversal of highsec safety), then people will move out by default. PvP'ers DON'T want to leave highsec because they are SAFE there. It's not a "carebear" created problem.
My general feeling is that this game would be more interesting if there was either some sort of conflict, or a good deal of organization need to get to the best income. So you CAN stay in highsec to make isk, but just running boring, old, soloable, easy missions won't get you nearly as much income as fighting for resources or building a great prodoction chain with ten other people from the ground up. Get my drift? Carebears can still have income, just not nearly as much as people willing to fight for the bounties of dangerous space, or the great industrial leader organizing a whole corp.
PS- If level 4s are the only reason to play EVE of a person, then I'll be baffled. Missions are by design boring. Mustache |

Baphommet
Sonoran Sun Legion Eternal Strife
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
Doublepost Mustache |

The Apostle
The Black Priests
733
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:55:00 -
[6] - Quote
Baphommet wrote:The Apostle wrote:Baphommet wrote:I made a reply on another thread, and I though the subject required more attention. So instead of coming up with ideas on highsec careers like in the other thread, I'd like to have your opinion on weather my points are valid and reasonable.
Here was my post: (The idea is that lvl 4s are way OP) ------------ Has it ever occurred to anybody that some people only play BECAUSE of level 4's? And anyway, why is it neccessary to move carebears to get PvP? Is it because they will make low/0.0 target rich? PvP'ers are the ones complaining about lowsec etc. so why don't YOU move out there? I've already said - and this is why I post on it, if highsec targets are taken away (either by assured safety OR by complete reversal of highsec safety), then people will move out by default. PvP'ers DON'T want to leave highsec because they are SAFE there. It's not a "carebear" created problem. My general feeling is that this game would be more interesting if there was either some sort of conflict, or a good deal of organization need to get to the best income. So you CAN stay in highsec to make isk, but just running boring, old, soloable, easy missions won't get you nearly as much income as fighting for resources or building a great prodoction chain with ten other people from the ground up. Get my drift? Carebears can still have income, just not as much as people willing to fight for the bounties of dangerous space. PS- If level 4s are the only reason to play EVE of a person, then I'll be baffled. Missions are by design boring. Yeah. I'm not refuting the logic but lowsec/0.0 is underpopulated because of several reasons OTHER than the quantity/quality of missions.
The type of person that does missions all day (rightly or wrongly) is also not the type of person to head to lowsec/0.0 to make their coin.
You must keep in mind that 0.0 and L5's in lowsec are much more profitable than L4's, so using your logic, why haven't they moved? It's not the isk, it's the safety.
Same reason why PvP'ers stay in highsec. Mitigation of risk. Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo!
|

Kengutsi Akira
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:55:00 -
[7] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:Baphommet wrote:I made a reply on another thread, and I though the subject required more attention. So instead of coming up with ideas on highsec careers like in the other thread, I'd like to have your opinion on weather my points are valid and reasonable.
Here was my post: (The idea is that lvl 4s are way OP) ------------ Has it ever occurred to anybody that some people only play BECAUSE of level 4's? And anyway, why is it neccessary to move carebears to get PvP? Is it because they will make low/0.0 target rich? PvP'ers are the ones complaining about lowsec etc. so why don't YOU move out there? I've already said - and this is why I post on it, if highsec targets are taken away (either by assured safety OR by complete reversal of highsec safety), then people will move out by default. PvP'ers DON'T want to leave highsec because they are SAFE there. It's not a "carebear" created problem.
why do YOU play? Other than to QQ out of curiosity...
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=255722#post255722
My well known stance on WiS |

Baphommet
Sonoran Sun Legion Eternal Strife
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 00:59:00 -
[8] - Quote
The Apostle > You must keep in mind that 0.0 and L5's in lowsec are much more profitable than L4's
Level 5s maybe, but 0.0?
I'm still feeling that 4s are way overpowered. Overpowered enough to make dangerous ventures not worth it. Fives may reward more, I don't really have much to say on that. Mustache |

The Apostle
The Black Priests
733
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:00:00 -
[9] - Quote
Kengutsi Akira wrote:The Apostle wrote:Baphommet wrote:I made a reply on another thread, and I though the subject required more attention. So instead of coming up with ideas on highsec careers like in the other thread, I'd like to have your opinion on weather my points are valid and reasonable.
Here was my post: (The idea is that lvl 4s are way OP) ------------ Has it ever occurred to anybody that some people only play BECAUSE of level 4's? And anyway, why is it neccessary to move carebears to get PvP? Is it because they will make low/0.0 target rich? PvP'ers are the ones complaining about lowsec etc. so why don't YOU move out there? I've already said - and this is why I post on it, if highsec targets are taken away (either by assured safety OR by complete reversal of highsec safety), then people will move out by default. PvP'ers DON'T want to leave highsec because they are SAFE there. It's not a "carebear" created problem. why do YOU play? Other than to QQ out of curiosity... To be perfectly honest, atm I have no idea. I've done it all and part of my problem I think is I have too much isk and doing anything just doesn't hold any appeal.
I WANT to go to back to 0.0 but I have no interest in the politics, the BS and the lack of incentive working for someone else. I also have no opportunity to get started - so I am "stuck".
PS: I can do QQ with a plex a month for the next 20 years without ever logging  Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo!
|

Baphommet
Sonoran Sun Legion Eternal Strife
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:03:00 -
[10] - Quote
Kengutsi Akira wrote:The Apostle wrote:Baphommet wrote:I made a reply on another thread, and I though the subject required more attention. So instead of coming up with ideas on highsec careers like in the other thread, I'd like to have your opinion on weather my points are valid and reasonable.
Here was my post: (The idea is that lvl 4s are way OP) ------------ Has it ever occurred to anybody that some people only play BECAUSE of level 4's? And anyway, why is it neccessary to move carebears to get PvP? Is it because they will make low/0.0 target rich? PvP'ers are the ones complaining about lowsec etc. so why don't YOU move out there? I've already said - and this is why I post on it, if highsec targets are taken away (either by assured safety OR by complete reversal of highsec safety), then people will move out by default. PvP'ers DON'T want to leave highsec because they are SAFE there. It's not a "carebear" created problem. why do YOU play? Other than to QQ out of curiosity... Know what I say? make deadspace areas akin to 0.0 No CONCORD, no sec etc
---
EDIT : I just realized the question wasn't aimed at me , I'll leave my answer anyways
I play for fun I don't really fell like QQ'n much, right now I just have access to the forums and not my client , so I though I'd share something on my mind. To answer your question more completely, I enjoy small gang lowsec pvp alot and I margin trade for ISK Mustache |
|

The Apostle
The Black Priests
733
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:04:00 -
[11] - Quote
Baphommet wrote:The Apostle > You must keep in mind that 0.0 and L5's in lowsec are much more profitable than L4's
Level 5s maybe, but 0.0?
I'm still feeling that 4s are way overpowered. Overpowered enough to make dangerous ventures not worth it. Fives may reward more, I don't really have much to say on that. Belt ratting alone in 0.0, if chained right can pull coin better than L4's. Throw in a Commander ocassionally and bang, instant billionaire.
Sanctums etc. are 40+/hr. if you can score a 10/10 you can often pull 2b+ on a drop. A single Vindi BPC well net 700m for an hours work.
0.0 cash is much,much easier cash - but the price you pay for the politics and the campers is just too high some days. Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo!
|

Vyl Vit
Cambio Enterprises
83
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:06:00 -
[12] - Quote
It doesn't take a "whether" man to tell which way the wind blows. Do level 5s.
To her it doesn't matter much.-á It's chasms have been leapt, and she leans upon the skepticism of her chosen fate. |

The Offerer
Republic University Minmatar Republic
36
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:10:00 -
[13] - Quote
The thing about posting a new topic with the same subject, especially when you put your reply as the thread content is that it is ineffective and unproductive. If you want to see my thoughts on the subject, then please do so in the original thread. |

Barbelo Valentinian
The Scope Gallente Federation
96
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:13:00 -
[14] - Quote
Baphommet wrote:The Apostle wrote:Baphommet wrote:I made a reply on another thread, and I though the subject required more attention. So instead of coming up with ideas on highsec careers like in the other thread, I'd like to have your opinion on weather my points are valid and reasonable.
Here was my post: (The idea is that lvl 4s are way OP) ------------ Has it ever occurred to anybody that some people only play BECAUSE of level 4's? And anyway, why is it neccessary to move carebears to get PvP? Is it because they will make low/0.0 target rich? PvP'ers are the ones complaining about lowsec etc. so why don't YOU move out there? I've already said - and this is why I post on it, if highsec targets are taken away (either by assured safety OR by complete reversal of highsec safety), then people will move out by default. PvP'ers DON'T want to leave highsec because they are SAFE there. It's not a "carebear" created problem. My general feeling is that this game would be more interesting if there was either some sort of conflict, or a good deal of organization need to get to the best income. So you CAN stay in highsec to make isk, but just running boring, old, soloable, easy missions won't get you nearly as much income as fighting for resources or building a great production chain with ten other people from the ground up. Get my drift? Carebears can still have income, just not nearly as much as people willing to fight for the bounties of dangerous space, or the great industrial leader organizing a whole corp. PS- If level 4s are the only reason to play EVE of a person, then I'll be baffled. Missions are by design boring.
What you're running up against is, I think, the following problem:-
EVE is the best-made space game out there.
Lots of people who want to play a space game aren't very interested in PvP.
The number of people who are interested in MMORPG-style PvP isn't very much, probably not enough to sustain a whole MMO (of course MMORPG style PvP is very different from other kinds of PvP - it requires time, it's based on who has more sp/better numbers on their side, rather than twitch skill - that' why you get perennial whining on these boards from people who want to cut out the time element and make EVE an instant-action PvP game in which anyone can fly really powerful stuff from the get-go). Or, if there are enough PvP-ers to sustain an MMO, they're not likely to stick with it - they'll move onto the next available game once they master the challenges.
So EVE actually has to cater to a whole bunch of PvE-ers - in fact, it's probably the PvE-ers who are paying most of the subs. These are PvE-ers who have accepted the devil's bargain of EVE - you can have your PvE, so long as you are prepared to occasionally lose stuff to the antics of silly PvP-ers.
IOW, it's people who want a relaxing bit of trance-inducing PvE at the end of a day's work, who are probably paying most of EVE's subs, and probably also paying for PLEX to play too. A bit of a challenge to master (for someone playing an hour or two a day), but not too much of a challenge, not "hardcore".
So CCP is unlikely to do anything other than tweak L4s a bit here and there. That they are reasonably lucrative and not too challenging is, I think, by design.
|

Kelsi Corynn
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:23:00 -
[15] - Quote
If level 4 missions were as lucrative as you seem to think they are, I'd actually be doing a lot of them. But between trading, Incursions, and industry, level 4s are at the bottom of the barrel for time spent/isk earned. You can easily make more in high sec incursions with a cheapo tech 2 fit than with even the most ridiculously min-maxed/pimped ship missioning project. If you can't pull that off, it's time to take a second look at who you're flying with. |

Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:25:00 -
[16] - 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. |

Ashley SchmidtVonGoldberg
The Lazarus Initiative
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:39:00 -
[17] - Quote
yeah that was in my thread
The truth is that there are a lot of herbivores in this game that you cannot make into carnivores as they dont have the teeth for it.
They want casual play and nothing is more casual than level 4 missions
second it allows then to play for plex which they could not do if they lose that isk flow (they could do other things but they would not be as casual or profitable) |

The Apostle
The Black Priests
733
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:40:00 -
[18] - Quote
Embrace My Hate wrote: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. 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. Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo!
|

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:42:00 -
[19] - Quote
Baphommet wrote: -It's easy. -It's very low risk. -It's boring and repetitive.
All PvE in eve is very static and easily mastered.
Baphommet wrote:-It's extremely lucrative. -It has a variety of benefits in addition to ISK gain, such as sec status gain, faction standing gain, corp standing gain, access to free implants, etc. It's the 2nd highest lvl of mission. Making it not pay well would not make sense. I see no issue with status gain with an NPC entity for working for them or doing things they reward.
Baphommet wrote:-It requires only combat related skills, most of which are useful in many other fields of work. To get the most of the benifits you list, it also requires social and industrial skills, some of which only relate to missioning.
Baphommet wrote:Level 4s are big part of why highsec is overpopulated and low/nullsec is not worth the trouble, income-wise. Any activity that can be done in highsec has more people doing it there than elsewhere. Despite that doing the same mission pays more in low/null. The relative safety, which allows them to be farmed more effectively, is what keeps people there.
Baphommet wrote:Missions should be a side job, a way to earn income for pure combat pilots. NOT a huge source of resources. Remove meta 0 loot maybe? Low meta items with little work may still be reprocessed frequently. Taking them out would most likely destroy the meta 1-4 market. |

Apollo Gabriel
Mercatoris Etherium Cartel
112
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:47:00 -
[20] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:Baphommet wrote:I made a reply on another thread, and I though the subject required more attention. So instead of coming up with ideas on highsec careers like in the other thread, I'd like to have your opinion on weather my points are valid and reasonable.
Here was my post: (The idea is that lvl 4s are way OP) ------------ Has it ever occurred to anybody that some people only play BECAUSE of level 4's? And anyway, why is it neccessary to move carebears to get PvP? Is it because they will make low/0.0 target rich? PvP'ers are the ones complaining about lowsec etc. so why don't YOU move out there? I've already said - and this is why I post on it, if highsec targets are taken away (either by assured safety OR by complete reversal of highsec safety), then people will move out by default. PvP'ers DON'T want to leave highsec because they are SAFE there. It's not a "carebear" created problem.
Hey man, I don't want Missioners to go to pvp, I am HAPPY if they PvE, I have an issue with the missions being easier than pac man. Let them stay in high sec, we can't pvp all the time, just add some challenge to it.
New Player "boost" https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=243993#post243993 Mining + War Decks = yummy! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=25608&find=unread |
|

Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 01:55:00 -
[21] - 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? |

The Apostle
The Black Priests
735
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:03:00 -
[22] - Quote
Embrace My Hate wrote: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? 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.
Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo!
|

Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
156
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:06:00 -
[23] - Quote
LVL 4s would be profitable for me if i wasnt losing a ship every two weeks in one. |

The Apostle
The Black Priests
735
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:21:00 -
[24] - Quote
Nova Fox wrote:LVL 4s would be profitable for me if i wasnt losing a ship every two weeks in one. Do you use eve-agents.com?
L4's only kill ships if you pull triggers before cleaning up.
Also, primary is scrambling frigs - always. Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo!
|

Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
156
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:24:00 -
[25] - Quote
naw its just I disconnect from eve and come back to a pod mid mission. |

Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:28:00 -
[26] - 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.
|

Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:31:00 -
[27] - Quote
Baphommet wrote:The Apostle > You must keep in mind that 0.0 and L5's in lowsec are much more profitable than L4's
Level 5s maybe, but 0.0?
I'm still feeling that 4s are way overpowered. Overpowered enough to make dangerous ventures not worth it. Fives may reward more, I don't really have much to say on that.
Well at the time long passed i used to make 600+mil per day doing sanctums just on bounties. + occassional faction loot , personally i really liked guristas invuls ...
at empire missioning i need two accounts to make somewhat similar income.
Its not like lvl IVs are bring of all isk, they simply are not .. thats what incursions are for or so i heard.
And for someone who mentined make all missions / deadspace 0.0 no CONCORD whatever. Why are you in empire ??? Seems like wrong place for you.
|

Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:36:00 -
[28] - Quote
Embrace My Hate wrote: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.
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
|

Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
47
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:37:00 -
[29] - Quote
Baphommet wrote:I made a reply on another thread, and I though the subject required more attention. So instead of coming up with ideas on highsec careers like in the other thread, I'd like to have your opinion on weather my points are valid and reasonable.
Here was my post: (The idea is that lvl 4s are way OP)
I despise level 4 missioning.
-It's easy. -It's very low risk. -It's boring and repetitive. -It's extremely lucrative. -It has a variety of benefits in addition to ISK gain, such as sec status gain, faction standing gain, corp standing gain, access to free implants, etc. -It makes mining in any space much less profitable (recycling is silly). -It requires only combat related skills, most of which are useful in many other fields of work.
In fact, I hate highsec missioning so much that I'm almost genuinely upset about it.
Level 4s are big part of why highsec is overpopulated and low/nullsec is not worth the trouble, income-wise.
Missions should be a side job, a way to earn income for pure combat pilots. NOT a huge source of resources.
AMEN - RAWR - RANT - OTHER THINGS!
Baphommet (quote me)
-------------------------- Level 4's need tweaked a little. I suggest lowering bounties and taking away mod drops, but greatly increasing the loyalty point reward as a result. That should help with the ISK (inflation) and mineral problems.
-"access to free implants." Please explain this.
- It's only "extremely lucrative" if you know what you're doing. That usually comes as a result of a significant investment of a player's time and energy. |

Kengutsi Akira
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:40:00 -
[30] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:Embrace My Hate wrote: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. 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.
What I aleays hear about the sanctum nerf is that the sanctums were putting out more isk than lvl IV so they had to get the nerf bat
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=255722#post255722
My well known stance on WiS |
|

Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:41:00 -
[31] - 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. |

Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:42:00 -
[32] - Quote
Embrace My Hate wrote: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.
true however with recent changes to anomalies i dont really see huge chunk of us carebears moving there any time soon.
|

Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
47
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:42:00 -
[33] - Quote
Kengutsi Akira wrote:The Apostle wrote:Baphommet wrote:I made a reply on another thread, and I though the subject required more attention. So instead of coming up with ideas on highsec careers like in the other thread, I'd like to have your opinion on weather my points are valid and reasonable.
Here was my post: (The idea is that lvl 4s are way OP) ------------ Has it ever occurred to anybody that some people only play BECAUSE of level 4's? And anyway, why is it neccessary to move carebears to get PvP? Is it because they will make low/0.0 target rich? PvP'ers are the ones complaining about lowsec etc. so why don't YOU move out there? I've already said - and this is why I post on it, if highsec targets are taken away (either by assured safety OR by complete reversal of highsec safety), then people will move out by default. PvP'ers DON'T want to leave highsec because they are SAFE there. It's not a "carebear" created problem. why do YOU play? Other than to QQ out of curiosity... Know what I say? make deadspace areas akin to 0.0 No CONCORD, no sec etc
I'm going with 2/10 on this one.
The good: -Proposal of a bad idea is always a good laugh.
The bad: -Very little effort. -Unoriginal. -Boring. -Grammar, spelling, etc.
I suggest baiting the person into a ridiculous conversation. That is usually much more effective.
|

Rocky Deadshot
In The Goo EVE Trade Alliance
49
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:43:00 -
[34] - Quote
low/null is having issues because of ITS problems.
And anyone still running lvl 4s for anything over than sec status is behind the times on money making. |

Igualmentedos
Shadow Veil Industrial Shadow Directive
47
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:45:00 -
[35] - Quote
Baphommet wrote:Overpowered enough to make dangerous ventures not worth it. Fives may reward more, I don't really have much to say on that.
-No -I also ignore the fact that level 5's are more rewarding.
|

Kengutsi Akira
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:45:00 -
[36] - Quote
Make lvl IVs PVP friendly. No CONCORD, no Sec, free for all.
I think I said that once but I could be wrong Im kinda tired lol https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=255722#post255722
My well known stance on WiS |

Barbelo Valentinian
The Scope Gallente Federation
96
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:50:00 -
[37] - Quote
Embrace My Hate wrote: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?
Yeah you're making sense, but it seems that CCP have decided they have to have a bit of themepark in their sandbox to capture some of the casual and/or solo players who make up the bulk of the population of most MMOs. Evidently there aren't enough hardcore sandboxers around, or many of them have played EVE and left already.
And to forestall the "but MMO means multiplayer" argument, some people (like me) like to play solo in MMOs just because the background to one's virtual adventures feels more real when there are other people around. Plus there's a chatbox too. |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 02:53:00 -
[38] - Quote
Kengutsi Akira wrote:Make lvl IVs PVP friendly. No CONCORD, no Sec, free for all.
I think I said that once but I could be wrong Im kinda tired lol 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. If I may ask, why suck hate for the solo players? |

Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:01:00 -
[39] - 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. |

Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation
54
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:04:00 -
[40] - Quote
I get the feeling that significantly nerfing L4s might actually have a very negative effect on the game in general, alot of general highsec folks seem to pay for their subs entierly off the backs of L4 missions and without them may not actually be able to play the game at all, and nobody wants that.
If people are legitimately concerned about how much money people can make running L4s in an NPC corp then it might be better to focus on the NPC corps rather than missions. Raising the tax rate on the non-school NPC corps significantly and putting a maximum time limit on being in a starting corp might address that a little. |
|

Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:06:00 -
[41] - Quote
Embrace My Hate wrote: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.
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 ? |

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:11:00 -
[42] - Quote
Embrace My Hate wrote: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. 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. |

Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:14:00 -
[43] - 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 -
[44] - 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". |

Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
26
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:24:00 -
[45] - Quote
Embrace My Hate wrote: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.
True, however its necessary evil. Accordingly to some statistics i read somewhere there is really an huge chunk of people living in high sec comparing to the null/low.
Some of them dont have time convenience to actually be bothered with other aspects of the game. And as i pointed out before the "recent" changes to anomalies will not get those with time and somewhat passive attitude into nullsec any time soon.
And missions can be done in groups you know, you can do fleet of ten people and do lvl IVs problem is the human attitude which incline to the part when you want better isk/hr ratio. There are some far more viable options for isk/hr ratio most of it doesnt even require you to undock 
Yes lvl IVs can be viable ISK maker and yes it doesnt require group but so does any other activity actually if you know how and got at least two accounts you can actually do anything solo. Only restriction for some professions is having an blue nullsec possibly with your corporation/alliance owning an sovereignty .
I dont log to game as frequently as i used to and sometime i just log in and just reading chats, offering help time to time with lvl II missions, bought an Omen for it.
The human interaction cannot be forced, if someone try it the people who actually play the game for its possibility to do stuff alone will not get into ganks and start doing other things they will most likely un-sub. Would less subscriptions be better to EVE ? I guess not.
If someone wants to do the stuff you mentioned and wants to be part of something "greater" than his own need for best isk/hr ratio he will get into it. |

Marcus Janus
82nd Assault Fleet
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:26:00 -
[46] - Quote
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. |

Embrace My Hate
Black Horizon. Test Friends Please Ignore
16
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:32:00 -
[47] - 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. |

Ladie Harlot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
544
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 03:35:00 -
[48] - 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. Thanks for not reading the thread and then mucking it up with your bad posting.
The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet. |

Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 04:08:00 -
[49] - Quote
Eve in a nutshell
- terrible FPS in space. How do you counter its an MMO sandbox when 99% of the community wants to shoot you first thing on site once you load grid. Yeah, very much like when you see a Soldier9313 lugging around a shotgun, LMS, or assault rifle you blast his ass as it comes around the corner. So much for a MMORPG, swear to god EVE is a "ground breaking FPS since 2003" 
- terrible cost of risk vs reward. Sorry bro, my sub pays for my time. Not to entertain you. For that monthly sub, I choose to not be screwed over by you, your dog, your aunt, and cousin....just because you can. I have better things to do then let my trust get used by you, to benifit you, and waste the time paid for by my money so you can steal my assets and pod the crap out of me.
- terrible ROI vs time. I gave up on lowsec a long time ago, from the top two reasons. No matter how much time I spent looking, scouting, checking maps and Dotlan I was always caught within 3 jumps for the hours I spent looking. For the days and weeks spent training for a ship, it goes boom in minutes - why, FPS syndrome. So much for MMO interaction, amirite? Would I pay ransom, **** no cause "I can" get podded by you after paying cause "You do what ever you want" in this sandbox FFS.
Lack of respect, FPS mentality, and general "do what ever the hell I want, so long as it causes trouble to someone else" attitude is why I prefer level 4 and 11% tax to virtual coffers. Its a sandbox, your choice to play how you want and my choice of how I want to play. You want to take my reason for playing and chatting with others, sure I agree with it so long as highsec PVP is taken away from you to become 100% carebear land - No attacking, No wardecs, CONCORD on your ass and Podding you should you drop below 0 sec status while traveling .5 space in just a pod (NPC would shoot and pod you on site + loose SP regardless if your clone was updated if I had my way, but I don't work for CCP). I loose something, you loose something, no one wins. |

Kengutsi Akira
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
133
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 04:15:00 -
[50] - Quote
Igualmentedos wrote:Kengutsi Akira wrote:The Apostle wrote:Baphommet wrote:I made a reply on another thread, and I though the subject required more attention. So instead of coming up with ideas on highsec careers like in the other thread, I'd like to have your opinion on weather my points are valid and reasonable.
Here was my post: (The idea is that lvl 4s are way OP) ------------ Has it ever occurred to anybody that some people only play BECAUSE of level 4's? And anyway, why is it neccessary to move carebears to get PvP? Is it because they will make low/0.0 target rich? PvP'ers are the ones complaining about lowsec etc. so why don't YOU move out there? I've already said - and this is why I post on it, if highsec targets are taken away (either by assured safety OR by complete reversal of highsec safety), then people will move out by default. PvP'ers DON'T want to leave highsec because they are SAFE there. It's not a "carebear" created problem. why do YOU play? Other than to QQ out of curiosity... Know what I say? make deadspace areas akin to 0.0 No CONCORD, no sec etc I'm going with 2/10 on this one. The good:-Proposal of a bad idea is always a good laugh. The bad:-Very little effort. -Unoriginal. -Boring. -Grammar, spelling, etc. I suggest baiting the person into a ridiculous conversation. That is usually much more effective.
But its so easy to get him to reply....
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=255722#post255722
My well known stance on WiS |
|

Thorn Galen
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
125
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 04:49:00 -
[51] - Quote
CCP know that if they mess around with Highsec and missions there, it will cost them a lot of real cash, they're not ignorant as to the needs of a large portion of "casual" players.
One can speculate about changing Missions/payouts/drops etc, but the fact remains it all works for CCP. They're not about to kill a cash-cow.
In any case, level 4 missions are not as lucrative as they are being made out to be. There are very few where there are decent bounties and good payouts.
Older, better players may also lose sight of the fact of their superior skills at pew-pew, whereas newer players still sweat and battle to do missions.
The question regarding players who prefer solo in an MMO/Sandbox, again, we lose sight of this fact - it is a sandbox. Many people play how they can, when they can. We do not all have all the time in the world to play Eve, as much as we would like to.
It's long past time where we as players get on with the game and stop pointing fingers at Missioners for the alleged problems they cause in the markets. That is utter nonsense.
Change the Highsec Mission dynamics and you will break Eve beyond repair. CCP knows this.
Peace out.
The universe is an ancient desert, a vast wasteland with only occasional habitable planets as oases. We Fremen, comfortable with deserts, shall now venture into another. - STILGAR, From the Sietch to the Stars. |

The Apostle
The Black Priests
750
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 05:01:00 -
[52] - Quote
Kengutsi Akira wrote: quote=Aqriue]Eve in a nutshell
- terrible FPS in space.
um its not a First Person Shooter[/quote] That's why it's a terrible FPS 
Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo!
|

Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
27
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 05:05:00 -
[53] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:Kengutsi Akira wrote: quote=Aqriue]Eve in a nutshell
- terrible FPS in space.
um its not a First Person Shooter That's why it's a terrible FPS  [/quote]
well he was referring to mind set of the "PvP" players
true its not FPS in FPS you are at somewhat leveled field. In EVE you get roflstomped by someone far more experienced / SP wise / and better equipped for fight.
Altho he takes the losses to seriously 
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=3680304
just something to have an good laugh, most epic fit of stabber / excuse 6 day old i was.
|
|

CCP Spitfire
C C P C C P Alliance
376

|
Posted - 2011.10.28 06:56:00 -
[54] - Quote
Moved from "EVE General Discussion".
CCP Spitfire | Russian Community Coordinator @ccp_spitfire |
|

Pent'nor
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 07:34:00 -
[55] - Quote
The Apostle wrote:
The type of person that does missions all day (rightly or wrongly) is also not the type of person to head to lowsec/0.0 to make their coin.
You must keep in mind that 0.0 and L5's in lowsec are much more profitable than L4's, so using your logic, why haven't they moved? It's not the isk, it's the safety.
Same reason why PvP'ers stay in highsec. Mitigation of risk.
I am one of those casual players that will never leave highsec except on rare occasions when I'm loaded with isk and don't care if I die. I understand that I can make loads more isk in low/null but thats not going to get me out there. I like the low risk of highsec and when I have the isk and time, i'll pop out to lowsec for some dumb get rich quick hulling scam to see if I can make it past the gate camps, but only when I have the isk because at any point I enter lowsec for what ever reason, I expect to die. I would think that many others act this way. So there is the catch, I think the mission payouts are fine because if it takes me so long to make that isk, then I would never venture out to lowsec.
Although I would say that I find the missions are very boring. I'd love to pep them up a bit with a different missioning system. |

TrollFace TrololMcFluf
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 10:21:00 -
[56] - Quote
Oh lookie here another L4 mission tearbaby
Dose the wittel low/nullsec carebear not like missions so you come here and cry your eyes out about it
AWWWWW
let me guess you think that if ccp nerfs everything darling dosnt like it will make eve better
YES NERF NERF NERF thats the answer to everything
I swear parasites like the OP really get my goat |

Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.28 15:57:00 -
[57] - Quote
TrollFace TrololMcFluf wrote:Oh lookie here another L4 mission tearbaby
Dose the wittel low/nullsec carebear not like missions so you come here and cry your eyes out about it
AWWWWW
let me guess you think that if ccp nerfs everything darling dosnt like it will make eve better
YES NERF NERF NERF thats the answer to everything
I swear parasites like the OP really get my goat
Read before post. Thanks in advance.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |