Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rawls Canardly
Phoenix Confederation
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 15:05:00 -
[1] - Quote
Suddenly lowsec becomes popular. AMAZING. |
Naomi Knight
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
57
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 15:22:00 -
[2] - Quote
Rawls Canardly wrote:Suddenly lowsec becomes popular. AMAZING. no it doesnt work that way
make lowsec safer or ability to make it safer--> more ppl will be there |
Rawls Canardly
Phoenix Confederation
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 15:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
You're absolutely right. Wait. No you're not. Lowsec is supposed to not be safe. Edit- and by " Level 4 agents " I mean ALL of them. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
151
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 15:48:00 -
[4] - Quote
Rawls Canardly wrote:...Lowsec is supposed to not be safe... Actually the lower the security the lower the safety .. yet null is generally accepted as being the safest place in Eve .. go figure, so there goes your whole argument down the drain. Naomi's concept of giving us tools to up the protection network is a lot more in the spirit of Eve and has a lot more going for it than your delusional ditto.
If you want to hurt high-sec mission runners (and that IS your goal, yes?) then you increase the negative system security payout modifier and/or decrease loot/salvage as security increases. Allows for casual's to keep doing their thing (albeit with lower income) and encourages use of low-sec agents .. mind you it won't be enough due to aforementioned safety concerns, without ability to improve conditions the agents will for the most part still be quite lonely.
|
Jenn Makanen
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
71
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 15:51:00 -
[5] - Quote
Rawls Canardly wrote:Suddenly lowsec becomes popular. AMAZING.
Or suddenly people stop subscribing, as they can't be bothered with the risk. |
Rawls Canardly
Phoenix Confederation
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 16:03:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jenn Makanen wrote:Rawls Canardly wrote:Suddenly lowsec becomes popular. AMAZING. Or suddenly people stop subscribing, as they can't be bothered with the risk. Strangely, I'm ok with that. |
Goose99
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
224
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 16:27:00 -
[7] - Quote
Rawls Canardly wrote:Jenn Makanen wrote:Rawls Canardly wrote:Suddenly lowsec becomes popular. AMAZING. Or suddenly people stop subscribing, as they can't be bothered with the risk. Strangely, I'm ok with that. CCP isn't. |
Gerrick Palivorn
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 17:08:00 -
[8] - Quote
Rethink missions and make it more competitive. If mission running corps are competing for the same missions it can only enrich the game. Who knows, war decs might be used besides for griefing. |
Tahna Rouspel
BWE Special Forces Rage Alliance
16
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 17:20:00 -
[9] - Quote
Alright, lets play the what if game.
If there was a boost of population in low sec - every gate would be camped to catch people. It would be impossible to do pve without some way to run the blockade.
Doing level 4 missions in low sec is only viable if either the gate isn't camped or you have a way to run/break the gate camp. PvE is meant to earn isk, not lose it; that's why your idea is flawed. Level 4 missioners would be caught too easily by gate camps.
The only PvE I would do in low sec; -An empty system -A system controlled by my alliance -A cloakie scanning ship for sites |
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
174
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 17:23:00 -
[10] - Quote
Rawls Canardly wrote:Jenn Makanen wrote:Rawls Canardly wrote:Suddenly lowsec becomes popular. AMAZING. Or suddenly people stop subscribing, as they can't be bothered with the risk. Strangely, I'm ok with that.
Ya know, I am ok with it as well. Cause of something that I remembered...
Subscription Rates Increase
Read the letter to the EverQuest community from SOE President John Smedley.
Due to the increased costs of running the EverQuest game service, we will be increasing our subscription rates in June. Effective June 12, 2005, the new monthly subscription rate will be $14.99/month. While this announcement may be unpleasant, the cost of operating a top tier MMO has increased significantly over the past three years and this change will help us achieve our goal of seeing that every player has a consistently enjoyable experience in the world of EverQuest. We will continue to offer discounts from the new rate plan on multi-month subscriptions. The new price for a 3-month subscription will be $41.97, a 6-month subscription will now be $77.94 and a 12-month subscription will now be $143.88. The 24-month subscription will continue to be $199.95. You don't have to do a thing; you will automatically be migrated to the new billing structure under your current subscription plan when your current subscription plan expires. Subscription rates are subject to tax and value-added taxes, as applicable. These price increases will not affect the SOE Station AccessGäó subscription rate.
New EverQuest rates as of June 12, 2005: GÇó$14.99 per Month GÇó$41.97 for 3 Months GÇó$77.94 for 6 Months GÇó$143.88 for 12 Months GÇó$199.95 for 24 Months
Additionally we'd like to thank our current EverQuest players by offering a 6 and 12-month limited time promotional offer. For a limited time only, you can take advantage of 6 or 12-month promotional subscriptions and reap great savings. Between May 12th and June 11th, 2005, we're offering a special discount on the new monthly subscription price
Now, I could of sworn it happened a few years earlier then that as I remember EQ started at 9.99 USD then went to 14.99. But back on topic, I wouldn't mind if the subscription went up cause I would of already canceled it. What happens is there will be an exodus of players leaving (like I don't know the bitching forum rebels that got 20% of CCP fired (<-- pics and it did happen bro) and super caps nerfed...I don't know but I bet it could happen) and now you are paying more to make up the difference when many people can't be bothered and couldn't care to play anymore so you can pretend to be the lone wolf to a flock of sheep. It doesn't bother me one ******* bit that your wallet will now be dinged more and the consequences of your suggestion bite you in the ass making you think...is it worth it to continue playing the game when the cost goes up? F*** yeah move them to low sec, I can hit that cancel button faster then self destruct and know your gaming experience got more expensive. |
|
Miriiah
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 17:38:00 -
[11] - Quote
Rawls Canardly wrote:Suddenly lowsec becomes popular. AMAZING.
Sure, when they make rats have a chance to attack anyone who warps into the mission pocket, and gives any ship "buildt in pvp modules" so a pve ship actually stand any sort of chance to fight the pvp fit player
Your idea is mucho idiot x_x |
Mephice
Wolfsbrigade
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 20:26:00 -
[12] - Quote
If you move lvl 4 to low sec then everyone will do incursions. The point is that it's safe not that it's a lvl 4 agent. They all ready moved/ always had lvl 5 agents in low sec and see how popular they are? I think it would be self defeating. |
Mephice
Wolfsbrigade
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 20:40:00 -
[13] - Quote
In Fact I believe that 70% of paying account holders NEVER leave High sec. If you're not happy and you quit playing it hurts a lot less than if they leave. It's about money at this point. If you want to PVP there is plenty of Goonswarm and PL that would haply smite you with 100 time as many ships as you bring. Which is what you want to do to mission runners, correct? I pvp but on my own terms, and it is on their terms that they will come pvp with you. Every mission corp. wants to get into low sec and 0.0 space. So don't worry about that. It's just that they get killed at the gate by over egger pvp'rs and lose interest. If you really have to have some care-bear / hulk kill mails then go gank them in high sec. It is easily possible and actually nothing wrong with it but there is a price you will pay. |
el alasar
The Scope Gallente Federation
76
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 23:34:00 -
[14] - Quote
you could make agent payouts dynamic, pay based on how much they were farmed over the last days. make it a running 3-day average. would also favor spreading people out, away from major missioning hubs.
if you pve in null then you preferably choose a cynojammed system. having "1000km bubbles" around gates buys time to warp to safety and cloak up if someone pops up in local. in low, this is not possible. also, if it was more populated you could not afford to stop missionioning if anyone else entered your system. purely watching the scanner also does not help - and alt might scan you down, leave, 10 minutes later his friends drop on you without scanning. the more money you can make in low would be eaten up by the time you loose taking precautions additionally to your increased ship loss ratio.
pve fits stand no chance against pvp fits. this is another very core problem. pvp fits being mostly buffer-based is a problem.
more little ideas that need your support: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=261507#post261507 enjoying the order cancellation confirmation? sometimes CCP listens - there is hope after all :) www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1431503 |
cyndrogen
Night's Shadows TriMark Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 00:11:00 -
[15] - Quote
Stop killing noobs in lowsec, suddenly lowsec becomes popular.
I didn't say everyone I said players under 4 months. |
grazer gin
Raving Rednecks
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 18:16:00 -
[16] - Quote
Ok move L4s to lowsec
Then move lowsec explo sites to nullsec
Remove nullsec explo sites completely along with officer spawns and we might be getting some nice balance
As of now nullsec carebears running nullsec sites in blue space with free intel in local AND intel channels is 100% reward with 0% risk
|
Obsidiana
White-Noise
17
|
Posted - 2011.11.26 22:13:00 -
[17] - Quote
And this worked so well for level 5 agents, right?
If you move L4s to low sec then the mast majority will just go to Incursions or L3s. They fly in safe space so that they can use expensive modules so that they can max out ISK/hr. Even if they went to lowsec they would not continue to do this for obvious reasons. The lower demand for high-end modules would devalue them, making nullsec less profitable. This would cut into PLEX trade and CCPGÇÖs bottom line.
Furthermore, argue if you like, but Marauders would be worthless.
Never forget that there is a symbiotic relationship between highsec, lowsec, and nullsec. I agree that lowsec and nullsec do need a buff, but it needs to be done in a balanced way.
|
Xpaulusx
Hosti1e Traff1c Control
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 13:06:00 -
[18] - Quote
Rawls Canardly wrote:Suddenly lowsec becomes popular. AMAZING.
Suddenly Unsubscribing becomes popular again, that is exactly what we don't want. I agree lowsec needs to be fixed as it is a huge chunk of the game that sees little or no action, in fact it needs more attention than null at this point. There are ways of fixing lowsec, but this ain't one of them. |
CobaltSixty
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 14:09:00 -
[19] - Quote
A less financially dangerous option for CCP would be to improve the gradient for NPC pirate spawns so that there are often battlecruisers and the occassional battleship spawn in lowsec asteroid belts. This would afford those who dislike the monotony of missioning a source of PvE income that's more free-form yet fraught with its own risks. While not as potentially lucrative as nullsec, it comes with none of the overhead that maintaining a presence in nullsec entails and gets more people into lowsec which is good for the local markets as well as any pirates who wish to prey on these individuals. Assault Ships - Retribution Fix and Balancing Proposal for Upcoming 4th Bonus |
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
53
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 23:02:00 -
[20] - Quote
Oh, look, it's this thread again I A/F/K cloak in Jita. Does that count? |
|
Tamiya Sarossa
Hedion University Amarr Empire
104
|
Posted - 2011.11.29 23:55:00 -
[21] - Quote
I'd actually support more lvl IV agents in lowsec - I mission there frequently and a couple more hubs with multiple agents in the same system would be nice.
With mwd-cloak traveling through gates in lowsec is trivially easy, but I'd still like the option to decline anti-faction missions more often by using multiple agents like my highsec amigos. Make more lowsec systems with multiple agents! |
Nephilius
Pillage and Plunder Salvage Co.
57
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 00:45:00 -
[22] - Quote
Rawls Canardly wrote:Jenn Makanen wrote:Rawls Canardly wrote:Suddenly lowsec becomes popular. AMAZING. Or suddenly people stop subscribing, as they can't be bothered with the risk. Strangely, I'm ok with that.
I don't buy that answer for a second. This isn't even really about hurting the income of mission runners, but rather a way to try to force pilots into losec so you'll have some juicy targets. But once you've killed all of them what then? Do you honestly believe that people would keep coming into losec to do Level 4s when the chances that they'll get past the gates is slim to none?
The general population of losec is due to a blood thirsty attitude and an unrelenting quest for moar KMs, nothing more. I've been seeing this nonsense about moving L4s into losec since I first started playing three years ago, and if it had been a good idea, CCP would have implemented it. But they haven't cause it's not. It doesn't even resemble a solution to the problem of losec, and if anything, would create a greater problem overall.
Besides, doesn't losec have level 5s? Has no one thought of protection rackets, to help enable more of the PvE type to brave losec? Look at what the mafia did, take a few lessons from their histories, use the methods they did and you'll at the very least make some money. You might even get more pew out of the deal when rivals try to ome in and blow up the people you're paid to protect. Losec has possibilities, why no one uses them to their advantage is beyond me. If you bring down a giant, you're a hero. If you kill something weak-even if it has to die-then you will endure contempt. |
DooDoo Gum
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 01:15:00 -
[23] - Quote
Tahna Rouspel wrote:Alright, lets play the what if game.
If there was a boost of population in low sec - every gate would be camped to catch people. It would be impossible to do pve without some way to run the blockade.
Doing level 4 missions in low sec is only viable if either the gate isn't camped or you have a way to run/break the gate camp. PvE is meant to earn isk, not lose it; that's why your idea is flawed. Level 4 missioners would be caught too easily by gate camps.
The only PvE I would do in low sec; -An empty system -A system controlled by my alliance -A cloakie scanning ship for sites
Very true, you only need to look at the statistics of a low/null system when there is an incursion on an 'island' and pilots need to pass through it
camped and bubbled like crazy |
Jazz Styles
Sileo In Pacis
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 04:36:00 -
[24] - Quote
The real problem here is that you're asking people with pve ships to fight pvp fit ships, which just does not work. I have a potential fix for this at the following link.
mission system overhaul |
Rina Asanari
State War Academy Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 06:32:00 -
[25] - Quote
*with an announcer's voice*
"And with our esteemed OP we have another one who is too stingy to suicide gank in hisec and a failure at real PvP. So he's asking to force mission runners, with mission fitted ships, to enter lowsec. Will he succeed where the concept of L5 missions purely in lowsec and 0.0 mostly failed?"
In other words: I cannot think the OP's posting to be a honest proposal. |
Durzel
The Xenodus Initiative.
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 10:58:00 -
[26] - Quote
Goose99 wrote:Rawls Canardly wrote:Jenn Makanen wrote:Rawls Canardly wrote:Suddenly lowsec becomes popular. AMAZING. Or suddenly people stop subscribing, as they can't be bothered with the risk. Strangely, I'm ok with that. CCP isn't. I fear the OP wouldn't be ok with paying 300m for Vagabonds, etc since the bears have dried up and aren't contributing towards the industrial machinery.
There is a symbiotic relationship between hunters and the hunted, anyone who doesn't appreciate that is pretty stupid really.
Why force a change on a group of people who wouldn't go to lowsec anyway? You'll just make them quit with the inevitable consequence of the market adjusting itself accordingly. |
Talia Nachtigall
Insanely Twisted
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 11:34:00 -
[27] - Quote
Level-4 agents are just fine how they are right now. If you can't find PVP either in low security or in null security at the moment then you're not trying hard enough. CCP is not going to move the level-4 agents to low security so you're literally beating a dead horse here. Give it up, move on, and find something else to ***** about. Don't pray for my soul. ;) |
Jaketh Ivanes
Incursive Intentions Inc
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 13:46:00 -
[28] - Quote
Jazz Styles wrote:The real problem here is that you're asking people with pve ships to fight pvp fit ships, which just does not work. I have a potential fix for this at the following link. mission system overhaul
I think this is an interresting idea and does make a lot of sense. Why shouldn't mission prepare pilots for PvP, even if it's just the basics. That said, there already is a lot of EWAR in missions. Sansha uses tracking disruptors, Serpentis dampens, Gurista jams, Angels paint and Blood nos/neut... But it's not in the ordered way you sugggest.
@OP: Short answer, no. If you move lvl4's to low sec, I would just run lvl3's and incursions. If you want people to do low sec missions so you can get your KM fix, then the low sec missions needs to change in a way they can be done with GTFO setups and ships (thinking cruisers and down). Or they could make it so, that the NPC's will switch to you, the pirate. |
Sun sue
Creative Export
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 15:11:00 -
[29] - Quote
Tahna Rouspel wrote:Alright, lets play the what if game.
If there was a boost of population in low sec - every gate would be camped to catch people. It would be impossible to do pve without some way to run the blockade.
Doing level 4 missions in low sec is only viable if either the gate isn't camped or you have a way to run/break the gate camp. PvE is meant to earn isk, not lose it; that's why your idea is flawed. Level 4 missioners would be caught too easily by gate camps.
The only PvE I would do in low sec; -An empty system -A system controlled by my alliance -A cloakie scanning ship for sites
Ummmm T3 tengu or any t3 really. if it works for null sec missions then it can work in low sec. Other then that Bash the camp don't be a carbear 24/7. |
Fidelium Mortis
Quantum Cats Syndicate
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.30 16:02:00 -
[30] - Quote
I would like to see more L1-L3 missions in low sec that have a better reward. Also the gate restrictions should be reviewed probably in line with the system currently used in FW. Essentially, L1 missions are restricted to T1 frigs, L2 are T2 frigs, dessies, and T1 cruisers, L3 are T2 cruisers and BC. T3 cruisers really need to be reevaluated for these restrictions, probably relegated to only L4 missions if at all =P The pirate faction ships also tend to be an issue from a balance perspective.
This way the average joe has a legitimate chance of running a mission without getting facerolled, and also encourages more small ship warfare in low sec. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |