You want to run lvl 5s do it out of HS

Hisec islands already have a purpose, this doesn't add any content to it... Simply just gives us another isk faucet.

The problem is that low-sec already has few reasons to PVE in. This would just further increase that.

L5s themselves should stay out of high though IMO. They should be offered in more systems, and low should also have a full distribution of ores like null.

You sound like someone who would like to shoot PvE mission runners. Granted it's subtle, so I'll spell out how this actually makes your life better.

This suggestion would change the process of earning level 4/incursion-style income to have MORE RISK than it currently does.

With a paired nerf to level 4/incursion income, players earning ISK through PvE activity would want to run these level 5's in highsec islands to maintain income levels. This is something they'll actually do, as they are not risk averse in the general sense, they are simply risk averse while flying blingy PvE ships in the middle of missions. Putting them in high sec islands means the actual PvE activity remains a soloable, low-attention affair, just like it is now.

HOWEVER, logistics and supplies are now at significantly increased risk. That's OK; PvE players are more than happy to outsource their risky transportation/logistics to other groups and/or do it themselves in separate ships at separate times when they are in different moods.

The net-effect of this change would be to put the high-income PvE players at MORE RISK of losing their stuff while trying to move it to/from market. You will have more juicy targets to shoot in the pipes.

The mistake in just about any other approach is thinking that 1) mission runners will EVER respond to any incentive to run missions in anything but soloable, low-attention, high-sec safety (they won't) while 2) conflating their risk averseness during mission content with a generic unwillingness to put anything at risk ever, which isn't true.

High-sec islands provide the perfect mechanism to add risk in a way acceptable to most mission runners because it leaves the core mission activity itself unchanged and no more risky than now (and in particular soloable and low attention), while still adding risk at a separate stage of the process to justify the income levels.

Yeah, honestly this suggestion isn't about L5's specifically. I don't care what the content is called; nerf incursion income, buff L4 income a bit, and move L4's exclusively to high-sec islands while leaving L5's where they are. Sure, whatever. The basic point is simply that putting the most lucrative high-sec PvE content in high-sec islands exclusively is something that will actually resonate and fly with mission runners while adding some risk to help justify the income levels.

And in general PvE whether its L4s or incursions could use a nice Isk buff to make it more attractive and draw more people in.

High-sec mission runners will never run missions in low-sec. Not ever. No amount of incentive not bordering on ridiculous will ever change that.

This will not add risk moving through the LS to the island since that will mostly just be done in T2 trans ports like it currently is for anyone who has spent time in an island.

If you wanna run Lv 5 mssion got to lowsec.

-1

Then they don't get to do low sec content and get the reward.

They already get the reward; it's called running level 4's/incursions in perfect safety with essentially no risk. So you are saying that you are on record as being perfectly fine with the current zero-risk PvE high-sec ISK fountain? Good to know.

I'm not sure if this is a proposal for limited high-sec L5s, relocating L4s out of high-sec or nerfing incursionsGǪ It would be nice to have a discussion and simply leave Incursions out of the equation for once. L5s in high-sec "islands" would be an interesting idea, although the LP reward would probably be 1/2 or less than that available from a typical low-sec system and typically less than most Faction Warfare missions - so the idea has some merit. Whether or not there is enough risk vs. reward to trek across low-sec remains to be seen...

There certainly is risk....incursion ships blow up to rats....mission ships blow up to rats.....people get suicide ganked.

Forcing everyone to go relocate to miserable islands because you hope a few people will be stupid enough to die on the way there is ridiculous. I mean I guess I would understand if you wanted to remove all L3 and L4 missions and mining from highsec to force everyone into low/null. I mean I would oppose it, but at least it is a logical idea. But to waste everyone's time and make them relocate to islands for literally no benefit? You must be kidding.

They already get the reward; it's called running level 4's/incursions in perfect safety with essentially no risk. So you are saying that you are on record as being perfectly fine with the current zero-risk PvE high-sec ISK fountain? Good to know.

So not to take any sides. But lvl5s are actually not a ISK faucet but a sink. This is due to them having insane LP rewards, which the LP store is a sink.

IF you were to nerf LP rewards for lvl5s in highsec and reduce the bounties. These would be great group content for those who don't want to do lvl4s. You would not be able to blitz LVL5s with carriers in high sec so they would be naturally harder.

There certainly is risk....incursion ships blow up to rats....mission ships blow up to rats.....people get suicide ganked.

I have been pushing to improve reward outside of high sec for years, putting level 5s into high sec does not help matters.

As I mentioned, not really about L5's (I know, that's my bad; I should never have mentioned them). It's about a method of adding risk to existing high-sec PvE content in a way that would actually be palatable to the people consuming that content.

That's very different than improving rewards outside of high-sec -- we all know improving rewards outside of high-sec will do nothing to draw mission runners out of high-sec. That would just put the game back in a balance where low- and null-dwellers don't have to run high-sec L4/incursion alts just to access some of the most lucrative solo/simple ISK-making activities in the game.

Improving income outside of high sec is not to try to drag out the spineless mission running bears. Its to give people like me a reason to earn my isk in null rather than high sec.

Yes, the economic semantics are not relevant here. The basic gist is : move the most lucrative high-sec PvE content from contiguous to island high-sec. Leave all else unchanged. I wish I hadn't even mentioned L5s at this point honestly, it's just confusing the important point for people :)

The fact that LP stores are sinks rather than faucets, etc. are also not important details to the impact this would have. I'm using faucet in the non-technical and EVE-colloquial sense of "repeatable/farmable content that allows a person to earn a ton of ISK", not in the technically correct "activity that generates new ISK out of server code" sense.

Just for your interest, Goins last week where run by over 100 Incursion pilots, every day had 3-4 VG fleets, 0-1 AS fleet and almost always a HQ fleet up by the channels Helix, DIN, The Vanguard Project, IIC pub, D-Inc, TDF and OIC and the fleets out there where nearly 100% pirate BS or Marauder(only exception was TDF bouncing back and forth every day, that only did use a few BS and mostly T3s).

I have been pushing to improve reward outside of high sec for years, putting level 5s into high sec does not help matters.

we know incursion/mission runners are not going to run stuff in anything but high-sec; no amount of incentive will pull them to a place where their PvE boats are vulnerable while running the content.

This assumes all people always transport all things "the right way". This is demonstrably false. I still see officer fit incursion ships getting ganked while traveling AFK on autopilot in hisec. There's no reason to think these same folks suddenly grow wise when transporting their officer mods through the pipe to their island mission hub.

Exactly this. I'm certain that if islands were the ONLY place to find this content, the vast % of high-sec "carebears" would happily sort out the logistics of making it happen. In fact they might even enjoy it more as a result. And frankly I suspect few if any of them would begrudge the pirates and privateers camping the low-sec pipes trying to foul up those logistics. Frankly they'd probably think more highly of those folks than they do of the average gank fleets incursion and mission runners are used to dealing with.

This suggestion is absolutely about acknowledging that high-sec PvE players are not "risk averse carebears" as they are so often labeled. It addresses directly the fact that what they want is a way to consume their PvE content either alone (L4's) or with a group (incursions) in relative peace and "ungriefed" by the PvP ambitions of other players 24/7.

That does NOT mean they feel that they are entitled to that activity/ISK with absolutely no risk at all; just that the risk needs to be added in a way that is different than the low/null perspective of risk, which is "getting shot at by strangers at any moment". That's fun for some people some of the time, but it's not an approach to risk that will ever fly with most high-sec PvE players.

That said it may be worth making sure each of these islands has decent Security/Mining L4s and a place to do Industry. Highsec islands are great and fostering small communities in them is a worthwhile goal.

Exactly this. I'm certain that if islands were the ONLY place to find this content, the vast % of high-sec "carebears" would happily sort out the logistics of making it happen. In fact they might even enjoy it more as a result. And frankly I suspect few if any of them would begrudge the pirates and privateers camping the low-sec pipes trying to foul up those logistics. Frankly they'd probably think more highly of those folks than they do of the average gank fleets incursion and mission runners are used to dealing with.

This suggestion is absolutely about acknowledging that high-sec PvE players are not "risk averse carebears" as they are so often labeled. It addresses directly the fact that what they want is a way to consume their PvE content either alone (L4's) or with a group (incursions) in relative peace and "ungriefed" by the PvP ambitions of other players 24/7.

That does NOT mean they feel that they are entitled to that activity/ISK with absolutely no risk at all; just that the risk needs to be added in a way that is different than the low/null perspective of risk, which is "getting shot at by strangers at any moment". That's fun for some people some of the time, but it's not an approach to risk that will ever fly with most high-sec PvE players.

Personally I think that highsec should have L5s, and that all highsec PvE could use a buff to make it on par with wormholes and npc null, where the rewards can often be staggering.

I guess I just don't see what all this accomplishes.

Personally, I see only downsides in the island idea.

I'm definitely not taking any kind of risk in getting my ship to an island - I'm just going to pay someone to do it. I could care less about the whole pirate, pvp, blah blah, whatever stuff, it's just another one time cost I pay and never think about again. Being on an island makes loot even more sucky, so now I'm super incentivized to blitz missions and ignore loot, which makes them even more boring.

I guess I'm saying if you really think the risk/reward of L4's and incursions in highsec is out of whack (and personally I don't - I think they need a buff), then forcing everyone to islands isn't going to change that, because the mission runners will outsource the risk, and the risk/reward will stay the same....except for some one time fees paid to JF pilots.

This is flat out untrue. People who are willing are doing so even now and reaping the rewards. Your suggestion simply gives the 'risk-averse bears' a way to move once to somewhere with a stocked market and enjoy a bump in earnings. Nothing is solved, Black Frog might see a few more contracts but nothing really changes either.

Move level 4 missions into one of these "islands" and I for one will just quit playing. Wondering how many others would do that same and wondering how that adds content to the game?

As the phrase goes been there done that and have no desire to do it again. Move level 4 missions into one of these "islands" and I for one will just quit playing. Wondering how many others would do that same and wondering how that adds content to the game?

This thread initially started out (see OP edit) to establish L5s in high-sec "islands" and has now progressed to nerfing Incursions and relocating high-sec L4 missions to high-sec "islands" as well. While I appreciate that the discussion is evolving, at this point I'm going to give it a flat-out "no". -1 for me.

That is why I like your idea, Lena Lazair, as it would preserve my ability to do relaxed mission-running when I am in mission-running mood while at the same time giving me more potential targets when I am in pvp mood and that in direct vicinity to my mission-running pocket :)

I do see one weak point in your proposal though.
Most such pockets are within 5 ly to continuous high sec so even with the upcoming changes it will be possible to do logistics with jf completely avoiding the risky low-sec-passage.

There are not enough hisec islands to make this work at all well.

-1

no.

The thread is now and always was about putting the most lucrative PvE content exclusively into high-sec islands.

You may consider this adding content, I call it just a plain old bad idea for the game as a whole. We do not need more ways to pour ungodly amounts of ISK into the wallets of the largest alliances in the game and I fear that would be the ultiamte outcome of this idea. More ISK for ferry servies, more ISK for the ship replacements, more ISK from the ammo.

Missioning is probably the second-lowest form of income in high-sec, right above mining. Salvaging just took a 50% reprocessing hit and most Faction LP has a 1:2 ISK-conversion ratio. I could also point out that a good chunk of mission salvage also feeds the resale item market and if that were to disappear you'd see corresponding prices on items jump considerably.

Your fundamental contention that high sec mission runners are not risk averse is incorrect. We are and shall remain so. We have made this point in arguments in discussions like this repeatedly and more importantly in our actual game play.

"lifeless" ? Where do people get off making this assertion?
Your bias becomes obvious when you say this. What's the point?
Bad mouthing HS and acting like it's not there won't make it go away.
In fact, HS isn't going away. If you want an uncluttered discussion...
get real.

Osmon is a massive ganker hub. As are the incursion hubs. Concentrated PvE play ALREADY happens in massive quantities, so saying that islands would somehow increase this is, IMO, both untrue and inconsequential.

In the past 3 days is Osmon there have been....wait for it....0 suicide ganks of mission runners. Gankers barely ever bother with mission runners.

Can't speak for others but I travel fit the heck out of my ship in highsec when going to incursions, and there is an extremely small risk of gankers bothering me. So yes, I think mission runners are (properly) risk averse.

Ways to circumvent the risks are plentiful. So no.

JF to out gate, jump to HS.

Risk = Gone.

Uh... if your L4 mission income was drastically affected by the salvage nerf, you're not doing it effectively in the first place. High-sec L4 mission income is dictated almost entirely by LP blitzing rates. Most people min/maxing these things don't bother with loot or salvage at all. I've also seen absolutely no indication that the LP conversion rates have changed fundamentally. Sure there have been the usual market fluctuations as meta changes and ship/item balance passes ripple through the markets, but that's not even remotely new.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not implying people who like to loot/salvage are "doing it wrong"; whatever floats your boat. Just that it's not a valid argument when talking about the current state of L4 income risk/reward balance because it's nowhere near optimal or representative of how people use L4's to generate ISK.

D'aww, I struck a nerve. Look how quickly OP got defensive and downright condescending. That's really cute. Go ****post somewhere else.

High-sec missions runners are risk averse while running high-sec mission content, yes. For reasons that actually have very little to do with risk and everything to do with what constitutes enjoyable gameplay dynamics for them. Every time they undock from Jita or fly a blingy boat to an incursion hub, however, it proves that they are no more risk averse than anyone else in EVE and most nullsec carrier ratters. Flying around space is a risky endeavor and high-sec mission runners are just as likely to take on the reasonable and necessary risks that entails.

My contention that high-sec mission runners are not risk averse is simply a statement that they are no more risk averse than anyone else playing EVE. Their desire to enjoy high-sec PvE content in unmolested peace has very little to do with risk at all, in fact. Like everyone else in EVE they are more than happy to accept risk in general as a basic part of overall gameplay. Just don't screw with the leisure and enjoyment they derive from the peaceful process of running high-sec PvE content specifically.

But you are entirely wrong is my point. Your contention that those in wh, low and null are equally risk averse as high sec mission runners is so absurd as to leave me at a total loss for words as to how even to respond.

This seems totally pointless. Force everyone to pay JF pilots or carrier pilots to move their stuff to annoying islands. This helps Eve how exactly? I'm obviously not going to risk moving my battleship through lowsec, I'm just going to pay someone to do it for me. It's just a jobs plan for JF pilots - no thanks.

If anything we should just move L5 missions to regular highsec so that everyone has access to them, not just the folks in the nullsec mafias. Lowsec is too dangerous to do much missioning in. And in general PvE whether its L4s or incursions could use a nice Isk buff to make it more attractive and draw more people in.

Osmon is a massive ganker hub. As are the incursion hubs. Concentrated PvE play ALREADY happens in massive quantities, so saying that islands would somehow increase this is, IMO, both untrue and inconsequential.