|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
825
   |
Posted - 2013.09.03 00:56:00 -
[1] - Quote
There's a lot of room for improvement in the mission system, but there's a lot of unnecessary bitching also. Its great ISK compared to a lot of activities; people think that for example running a c3 makes 100 mil an hour. It does when you're running it. It doesn't when you consider how many toons you have to use, scouting, closing your static etc etc. Its basically the best activity you can do for ISK where you can sit down and make enough money to play the game another couple days in under an hour in any given situation.
Its not nearly as stagnant if you have multiple jump clones, multiple agents, and multiple ships.
If I sat down and did missions in one or 2 systems all day long, and nothing else, I would pull my ******* hair out. But as with every video game, most people only metagame. Or better yet, what they think is metagaming, or what they think is min maxing.
Personally, I think it would be great if every mission wasn't a Bruce Lee fight. 50 vs 1 and the 1 wins every sequel. I was rushing WC4 yesterday and I thought how lame it was that I was bbq'ing Rattlesnakes in my Tengu, and the Rattlesnakes were shooting freaking hybrids at me and didn't have drones. That makes zero sense.
But as mentioned, it would screw the economy if they revamped them and did a poor job. It took them a while to "fix" Incursions. The income is relatively the same now, but the number of people doing it is much less.
Eve is Real |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
833
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 04:52:00 -
[2] - Quote
I like what you did with sleepers and I like what you did with Incursions, but if you make missions too similar to them (they are essentially the same thing, one armor tanked one shield), then there will be no reason not to go do those things because they make more ISK.
The other problem is that while I said I don't like the "Bruce Lee fight" aspect of it, I rely on salvaging and looting for the basis of my entire industry toons career. A fight with a couple battleships and a few support ships would be WAY more realistic, but would screw industry over big time. And it would give miners a huge buff, which would make me hurl. I am happy they fixed the profession for the people that choose it, but taking money out of my pocket and putting it in theirs would be tragic.
And especially after the changes to marauders have been made. I would hate to do all this training having burned my yearly remap only to be wasting my time.
Eve is Real |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
841
|
Posted - 2013.09.06 14:01:00 -
[3] - Quote
Quote:People don't do lvls 5s or other things outside of high sec because no amount of reward justifies any amount of risk to folks like that.
I dunno about that. I don't do level 5's but have had WH presence since 2010. Unfortunately I just don't have time for long excursions like that and would leave the game if they made l4's similar to level 5's.
Although if they would have kept bastion mode @ 10x mass I would have just got a solo WH, would be such a time saver.
Eve is Real |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
847
|
Posted - 2013.09.07 07:40:00 -
[4] - Quote
Quote:There needs to be an infusion of Variety, Immersion and Risk.
But it needs to be scalar.
And for first year rookies the risk is immense, but so is the payout relatively. You want to quadruple the risk that I might loose one of my multi billion ISK ships without quadrupling the payout and I'll go play something else in a heartbeat. I already paid my dues.
Eve is Real |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
850
|
Posted - 2013.09.11 05:48:00 -
[5] - Quote
Quote:Small numbers and stronger NPCs? I'd love that.
As a mission runner I would love that. but as I said it would wreck industry.
Eve is Real |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
852
|
Posted - 2013.09.12 06:11:00 -
[6] - Quote
Lets face it, with the exception of randomness most of the fixes listed by players might as well be just go fly Incuriosns;
More Pvp like
resulting in PvP in omnitank
group play instead of solo
better NPC AI
More powerful NPC's
And if done on a smaller scale (smaller fleet) its the same as go run a c3 or c4 WH, with the exception of the chance of PvP.
And again, people not realizing you will kill an entire profession (rigmaking) and cripple non mining industrialists.
Sounds a lot harder to revamp missions than most people think IMHO.
Eve is Real |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
852
|
Posted - 2013.09.12 07:25:00 -
[7] - Quote
Ciaphas Cyne wrote:Cipher Jones wrote:Lets face it, with the exception of randomness most of the fixes listed by players might as well be just go fly Incuriosns;
And again, people not realizing you will kill an entire profession (rigmaking) and cripple non mining industrialists.
Sounds a lot harder to revamp missions than most people think IMHO.
I totally respect your desire to keep your profession and make money. There is nothing inherent, however, in ANY idea here that would lead to a drop off or change in your industry. Its strange to me that you single out the idea of randomness as the exception. If you can image a scenario with randomized missions and a reward per hour rate that matches your current one...why cant you extend that concept to the other ideas? The loot/ISK you get for missions can and should remain where it is. If the desired result is no change in the current economy then simply ensure the same reward per hour rate. This is a computer-simulated world so we have the luxury of being able to manipulate values like that. Sounds alot easier than most people think...
No, not at all.
I don't make rigs but I sell salvage to people that do. Shitloads of the stuff. Less ships(in missions) means less rigs. My industry alt salvages every wreck in most of my missions. Only some of the ones I blitz in Caldari space get left behind. I reprocess most of the loot. Out of bounty, LP, and loot/salvage, loot & salvage are the biggest chunk of my income. On top of that, when I produce something I get more for ISK for the minerals. A pirate faction BPC turns 170 mil worth of minerals into well over 200mil worth. Reducing the loot and salvage by reducing the amount of ships in missions will cause my hourly income to go down and my cost of production to go up.It would make my industry toon utterly suck at generating ISK.
Randomizing the missions will not do so, its the only idea I saw that is OK for industry. However, randomizing the triggers will decrease ISK/hour if they randomize them in certain missions. For example, the Assault puts out 2400 DPS if you pop the trigger in the first room. It would be a waste of time to fly that particular mission if the trigger was randomized.
Eve is Real |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
853
|
Posted - 2013.09.12 17:06:00 -
[8] - Quote
Answering in reverse order because the replies beg it.
Me getting more money for salvage that's worth more because there's less of it is in no way beneficial to me. Inflation would be seen across the board from that. Not only would the rigs I use to fit my ships cost more, so would PLEX and modules and ships.
Lowering the amount of ships in missions but retaining the same amount of salvage and loot from them would work, but then entirely new NPC's would have to be introduced exclusive to missions. Otherwise ratting would become incredibly lucrative and flood the market with with minerals and salvage. And you couldn't just use more expensive modules to compensate monetarily, that would still screw the mineral market. They had to adjust NPC drones for this very reason.
Eve is Real |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
871
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 19:36:00 -
[9] - Quote
DSpite Culhach wrote:IIshira wrote:DSpite Culhach wrote:I had expected that the EVE missions, and really, all the PvE stuff would follow the same harsh rules of the rest of the EVE universe, I was actually surprised when it did not.
A mission should not have agent penalties Are you talking about standing penalties from opposing factions or penalties if you fail a mission? The fact you take standing hits. I think this was ONLY to stop people cherry-picking missions - I don't have an issue with that - but surely we can come up with a better overall system that makes that a non issue.
I still manage.
Eve is Real |
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
871
|
Posted - 2013.09.20 21:42:00 -
[10] - Quote
Maxpie wrote:Player created missions are the way to go. There could be certain parameters (ie no more than xx mil total bounties for a lvl 4). Have a rating system upon completion. Also, allow players to make pvp missions.
FW missions for PvP.
They aint gonna rollback in Eve, and player created missions would cause a need for it as they would find an exploit for sure.
Eve is Real |
|
|
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
895
|
Posted - 2013.10.09 17:14:00 -
[11] - Quote
Bastion Arzi wrote:Also while missioning in amarr space u get the odd guristas or angels mission. Are these there to promt players into cross training or to go for amarr missile boats?
If theres no real reason for these to be there could they be removed please. It makes growing up as an amarr particularly annoying becuase these missions can be really tough becuase u simply cannot damage the enemies enough.
Im thinking of new players in particuilar with low level of sp and most of thier gunnery sp in lasers. what are they to do versus guristas and angels?
Admittedly its not so much of an issue in level 1,2 or 3 mission IF you have T2 guns. but again thinking of low sp pilots they are unlikely to have this.
And in level 4's you can forget about em/thermal damage vs guristas and angels.
New players running level 4's? Anyway, decline them and move to a different agent if you get too many declines. Same as you do in any empire where you get an odd faction mission. Run it or don't.
Eve is Real |
|
|
| |
|