| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
mrg29
   |
Posted - 2005.12.27 23:50:00 -
[1]
just completed my first lvl4 angel extravaganza since the patch. took me around 1hr 25mins to do solo and omw back to dock i checked to see what the total bounties were i had received for it.
even tho i knew bounties had been reduced i was shocked to see the total in bounties received was approx 15mill. before the cold war patch this figure would have been close to 30mill. so in only 2 patches bounties for this mission have been halved?
up to now i've been defending DS missions, especially the longer ones as i like the challenge of doing them solo but this is almost beyond a joke.
|
PKlavins
|
Posted - 2005.12.27 23:56:00 -
[2]
im agreeing with u here...the bountys have gone too low...i have done 2 duo of death's lvl4, and the two bs have only 1mill bounty. kinda low considering they were hard as hell to tank...and wats with the cruise launchers having only 55k?? thats way too low
actually im not sure wat the bounties were before RMR cause i only started the lvl4's after it came, but i have noticed bounty decreases in lvl3's that i did before RMR as well, like the extravs...
I make sigs/banners 5mill each, convo/evemail for details |
Pwny McPwnerson
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 00:19:00 -
[3]
The rat bounties in lvl 4 missions were really high to begin with. Now they're where they should be.
|
Brannor McThife
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 04:10:00 -
[4]
 Originally by: Pwny McPwnerson
The rat bounties in lvl 4 missions were really high to begin with. Now they're where they should be.
What rock have you been living under? Pre Exodus they were too high. Now they're a joke.
You cannot possibly believe they are "where they should be" considerring that the same NPC is worth sometimes tripple (sometimes more) the value in 0.0.
-G
|
Sorja
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 04:34:00 -
[5]
Ratting in 0.0 belts is 100% risk free (missions are not risk free) and yield good loot.
The problem is that ratting is repetitive and missions are (were? should be?) more entertaining.
Before the first missions nerf, missions were entertaining and rewarding.
Not as rewarding as mining or getting a free licence to print ISK (aka tech II lottery), but a dedicated player could replace his PvP losses easily.
Those times are gone.
The free licence to print ISK remains.
|
Dust Angel
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 05:08:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Sorja
Ratting in 0.0 belts is 100% risk free (missions are not risk free) and yield good loot.
The problem is that ratting is repetitive and missions are (were? should be?) more entertaining.
Before the first missions nerf, missions were entertaining and rewarding.
Not as rewarding as mining or getting a free licence to print ISK (aka tech II lottery), but a dedicated player could replace his PvP losses easily.
Those times are gone.
The free licence to print ISK remains.
ratting in 0.0 belts is risk free... mmm want some more ***** to smoke?
|
Skarraza
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 05:47:00 -
[7]
From what I have seen so far, ratting in 0.0 IS safer than L4 missions, at least if you stick to dead end off the beaten path systems.
Granted, I have only been out here a week, but I have not seen a single spawn that even remotely came close to breaking me, much less get my cap below 35%. Even the 7m faction bs spawn was cake.
GETTING out here, now that is a different story altogether.
|
President Commonwealth
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 09:29:00 -
[8]
right now is just being anoying and grinding, was fun before all this, including the bugs of agro that are awsomely anoying.
i hope all this get fixed/balanced soon. right now what keeps me online is friends, but there is always some other game to play.
sometimes paying 15$ to just use the corp chat is too much.but i got an idea lets all use MSN.
anyways i am sure they will change all that soon, but problably only when CCP start loosing accounts.
after all every new player the only thing it can do is missions. belive me 3 months ago i tryed to go low sec to mine and i lost more money than making money.
pirates and older corps own the rest of the space. and the pies and older players love to put down ppl those are the only ppl that keep paying for the game still.
happy new year i guess
|
Ralitge boyter
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 13:17:00 -
[9]
Come one both 0.0 ratting and lvl4 misions are still ok, sure killing a rat in a 0.0 belt gets you double the ISK but when you kill them fast enough you have to jump around in at least 8 systems to find some intresting rats to kill.
Lvl4's are ok they can be done in safe space as well and they do still give quite good bounties... Sure before patch they where to high and you liked that well who didn't but all good things come to an end.
So now you have to choose risk getting your ship blown up in 0.0 or in a lvl4 in the end as the previous poster says 0.0 is for the most part controled by the bigger corps and alliances who think they need to blow up all that enter their part of the vacuum. So the risk versus reward part is still there and the chance of getting away with making major ISK without risk only exists in one last part of the game which is the T2 scam.
CCP should and I hope will crush that as well making the game something worth playing for all with a equal chooice for all to make, more risk is more ISK less risk is less ISK.
-------------------------------------------
Should you disagree with me, well I guess that is because I disagree with you. If you have a problem with that please feel free not to tell me. |
mrg29
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 13:45:00 -
[10]
i'm all for the concept of risk v reward and i agree completely that lvl4s made it too east to make money in the past but if u look at whats happened over the last 6 months.
missile changes = missions take longer
bounties reduced twice now = less reward
npcs tank better = missions take longer
npcs using EW = adapted setups for mission runners = u do less damage = missions take longer
aggro changes = more risk
now as i said it was too easy to make money but the combined effect of all these changes has had a serious impact on running lvl4 missions and has possibly moved the risk v reward line too far.
|
Trelennen
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 13:54:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Ralitge boyter
So now you have to choose risk getting your ship blown up in 0.0 or in a lvl4 in the end as the previous poster says 0.0 is for the most part controled by the bigger corps and alliances who think they need to blow up all that enter their part of the vacuum. So the risk versus reward part is still there.
Well, risk is there if you're have not semi-decent diplomatic relations with the alliance controling the area, which is the case if you're in a small corp or a privateer, or are from an opposite alliance (but then you could hunt in the area you control). So, for the big corps, risk nearly inexistent, huge rewards. For the small ones, fair risk, big rewards.
Missions: huge risk, low rewards (much more risk and less reward than high sec mining )
Originally by: DarK
The cluetrain obviously doesn't stop at this station anymore...
|
Darcuese
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 14:02:00 -
[12]
Things with missions are they are predictable in the end...do the few times...lose t1 frig if you want just to see what NPC act like , etc,etc...and you will be fine with some neccesary skills.
I did all LEV 3 missions in Maller after 2 months of playing EVE...only because NPCs were predictable and I followed the patern.
0.0 hunting now have bigger bounties...true...but to say there isnt risk involved is ridicules.
To be scramed for 4 seconds (even though NPC wouldnt kill you ) could be leathal if hostile ship enter the system and have good scaner skills.
No matter in what space you are hunting.
Sure...some 0.0 space is more secure then others...but there is allways unpredictable chance for bad timing or not looking...and you might be gone.
And respawn on top of you is something you wont encounter in missions tbh...not to mention you have to fly few jumps often to get to particular hunting systems...and some ppl dont use scouts ...and they die on the way there.
So , speaking about no risk in 0.0 is 
[ 2005.12.13 23:48:43 ]--Pilot from north:"we dont want to fight due to server crash and we want a fiar fight with you guys, just dont jump in". |
Demonikan
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 14:35:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Demonikan on 28/12/2005 14:35:23
10+mill an hour in 1.0 space and you complain?
Pfft |
BOldMan
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 15:06:00 -
[14]
Just try new agro lev4 missions and tell us again about risk.
Originally by: Treacle Shazboat
Trying to buy from the market. The buy window is blank. Try to send a petition dropped me to the desktop.
|
mrg29
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 15:22:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Demonikan
Edited by: Demonikan on 28/12/2005 14:35:23
10+mill an hour in 1.0 space and you complain?
Pfft
and who is based in 1.0 space ?
try reading and understanding the point being made.
u can make more than that mining veld in 1.0 space.
|
Summersnow
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 18:23:00 -
[16]
I would have to agree that the risk vs reward should be balanced.
Of course in my veiw that means -
the new missions should offer much higher rewards, existing missions with agro bugs should offer higher rewards as well as ship reimbursements if the agro is a bug.
in addition NPC rats in alliance held 0.0 "safe" space should have there bounties amd drops reduced to "safe" levels, i.e. about what you would make killing frigs in 1.0 space.
Keep in mind, alliance "safe" space would also need to have its roids reduced to 1.0 levels to account for the safety risk vs. reward factor as well.
While all three items would be "fair" according to the risk vs. reward arguments everyone likes to use and the first should have been hotfixed last week the last two would be game breaking and should never be fully implemented.
|
Xio2
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 20:11:00 -
[17]
Im ****ed because some of the new missions (technological secrets) dont give freaking bounties at all? now why the heck would they do that? doesnt make any sense at all.
|
Jubeli
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 20:15:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Xio2
Im ****ed because some of the new missions (technological secrets) dont give freaking bounties at all? now why the heck would they do that? doesnt make any sense at all.
You probably think of the important missions where you go and for instance kill Minmatar Republic fleet if you use amarr agents...
Instead of bounties you get nice standing and often good rewards. Standing is very sweet indeed to get..
|
Pwny McPwnerson
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 20:44:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Brannor McThife
Originally by: Pwny McPwnerson
The rat bounties in lvl 4 missions were really high to begin with. Now they're where they should be.
What rock have you been living under? Pre Exodus they were too high. Now they're a joke.
You cannot possibly believe they are "where they should be" considerring that the same NPC is worth sometimes tripple (sometimes more) the value in 0.0.
-G
The complaint here is that he can 'only' make 15 mil in an hour and a half. That's where it should be for safe space dealing with an agent.
0.0 should offer higher bounties, because there is the risk of getting killed by anyone.
The point is, if you're looking for more isk, go to 0.0. 15 mil in an hour and a half is good for safe space.
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 20:48:00 -
[20]
Originally by: mrg29
i'm all for the concept of risk v reward and i agree completely that lvl4s made it too east to make money in the past but if u look at whats happened over the last 6 months.
missile changes = missions take longer
bounties reduced twice now = less reward
npcs tank better = missions take longer
npcs using EW = adapted setups for mission runners = u do less damage = missions take longer
aggro changes = more risk
now as i said it was too easy to make money but the combined effect of all these changes has had a serious impact on running lvl4 missions and has possibly moved the risk v reward line too far.
Mission rewards are now determined by average completion time. So "takes longer" is irrelevant.
|
mrg29
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 21:17:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Joerd Toastius
Originally by: mrg29
i'm all for the concept of risk v reward and i agree completely that lvl4s made it too east to make money in the past but if u look at whats happened over the last 6 months.
missile changes = missions take longer
bounties reduced twice now = less reward
npcs tank better = missions take longer
npcs using EW = adapted setups for mission runners = u do less damage = missions take longer
aggro changes = more risk
now as i said it was too easy to make money but the combined effect of all these changes has had a serious impact on running lvl4 missions and has possibly moved the risk v reward line too far.
Mission rewards are now determined by average completion time. So "takes longer" is irrelevant.
after first couple of weeks mission rewards are basically fixed within a certain range once the mission has been done a few times - it doesn't continue to change. so the fact missions take longer IS an issue.
this thread wasn't about rewards as they vary drastically depending on the quality of the agent, your own skills and the sec status of system anyway. nor was it about my ability to "only" make 15mill in 90 minutes. if it was purely about ability to make money then i could make more mining.
this thread was about the fact that mission bounties are now half what they were 2 patches ago while most other factors relating to missions mean they are either more difficult or take longer.
|
Pwny McPwnerson
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 21:40:00 -
[22]
Originally by: mrg29
this thread was about the fact that mission bounties are now half what they were 2 patches ago while most other factors relating to missions mean they are either more difficult or take longer.
i.e. balanced
|
mrg29
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 21:48:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Pwny McPwnerson
Originally by: mrg29
this thread was about the fact that mission bounties are now half what they were 2 patches ago while most other factors relating to missions mean they are either more difficult or take longer.
i.e. balanced
yeah coz u r obviously an impartial judge of what balance is.
|
Pwny McPwnerson
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 22:17:00 -
[24]
Originally by: mrg29
yeah coz u r obviously an impartial judge of what balance is.
Risk vs. Reward
Risk is higher in 0.0, reward is higher in 0.0
Therefore, it is balanced.
|
Tribunal
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 22:22:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Pwny McPwnerson
Originally by: Brannor McThife
Originally by: Pwny McPwnerson
The rat bounties in lvl 4 missions were really high to begin with. Now they're where they should be.
What rock have you been living under? Pre Exodus they were too high. Now they're a joke.
You cannot possibly believe they are "where they should be" considerring that the same NPC is worth sometimes tripple (sometimes more) the value in 0.0.
-G
The complaint here is that he can 'only' make 15 mil in an hour and a half. That's where it should be for safe space dealing with an agent.
0.0 should offer higher bounties, because there is the risk of getting killed by anyone.
The point is, if you're looking for more isk, go to 0.0. 15 mil in an hour and a half is good for safe space.
So by this logic I should get more on bounties for missions in low sec space, correct? The risk of NPCing is a whole lot less then the risk involved in running missions in 0.2 and below areas. I live with a constant group of pirates in local, so I should be seeing more in the way of reward.
|
mrg29
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 22:27:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Pwny McPwnerson
Originally by: mrg29
yeah coz u r obviously an impartial judge of what balance is.
Risk vs. Reward
Risk is higher in 0.0, reward is higher in 0.0
Therefore, it is balanced.
in alliance controlled 0.0 the risk is negligible.
belt spawns in 0.0 are nowhere near as tough as spawns in missions.
try doing some lvl4s and see.
|
Pwny McPwnerson
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 22:48:00 -
[27]
Originally by: mrg29
Originally by: Pwny McPwnerson
in alliance controlled 0.0 the risk is negligible.
belt spawns in 0.0 are nowhere near as tough as spawns in missions.
try doing some lvl4s and see.
I've done plenty of lvl 4's.
I'd rather NPC in 0.0. More isk.
|
Galk
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 23:01:00 -
[28]
Totaly agree with the two posts above.
Certain mission spawns now are absolutely deadly.
Running in low sec, there are ways to avoid most encouncers, but when a hotshot group comes in running a covert in a crowded local, sooner rather than later somebody is going to buy it.
The latest farce with npc bounty's in missions is the tag in a can....
As iv'e allready said today... you spend 30 mins belowing the spawns up, then another 30 collecting the tags from the cans to claim your 'bounty'.
It's a total farce.
The new spawns in the the mist and abound are akin to 6/10 complex spawns or harder, yet match it in reward in no way what so ever...
Today we ran two dreads to complete a mission that payed me 3.4 million in isk with 6400 points bolted on., with naff all for the other guy.
Over 4 billion in fitted ships for that, counter in time sinks of moving those hulks around, probaly on a level with making about 4 million an hour... Honestly velspar pays more:/
______
862 buses later, galks back on the road again:)
Seasons greetings, merry christmas to one and to all.
|
Marek II
|
Posted - 2005.12.28 23:31:00 -
[29]
No, no, no! the more we neuter missions the more people will happily 'exodus' to ******* space, err, umm, 0.0... or something like that...
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.12.29 01:06:00 -
[30]
Originally by: mrg29
Originally by: Joerd Toastius
Originally by: mrg29
i'm all for the concept of risk v reward and i agree completely that lvl4s made it too east to make money in the past but if u look at whats happened over the last 6 months.
missile changes = missions take longer
bounties reduced twice now = less reward
npcs tank better = missions take longer
npcs using EW = adapted setups for mission runners = u do less damage = missions take longer
aggro changes = more risk
now as i said it was too easy to make money but the combined effect of all these changes has had a serious impact on running lvl4 missions and has possibly moved the risk v reward line too far.
Mission rewards are now determined by average completion time. So "takes longer" is irrelevant.
after first couple of weeks mission rewards are basically fixed within a certain range once the mission has been done a few times - it doesn't continue to change. so the fact missions take longer IS an issue.
...what?
Look, mission payout is determined by completion time. Therefore, there must somewhere be a "desired isk/hour" value in the code. As long as you're completing missions in average time, you're earning "desired isk/hour" on your mission payouts. The length of the mission is, for payout purposes, then totally irrelevant.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |