EVE Search - Increase mission rewards and standings for fleets

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Increase mission rewards and standings for fleets

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 98	Posted - 2015.06.13 01:02:11 - [1] - Quote Can we just get a boost for it please. Even if the bonus to missions comes from yet another social/leadership skill to train. The mission should also give a standings boost for the fleet. Pros: Encourages players to cooperate. Incentive for fleets, leadership skills, EVE Voice. Opportunity to learn from veteran players.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 879	Posted - 2015.06.13 01:30:01 - [2] - Quote Please give me and my alts more isk. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 98	Posted - 2015.06.13 01:54:33 - [3] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Please give me and my alts more isk. All forms of EVE can be played with alts. No need to punish the non puppeteers. Besides plenty of people multibox PVE content as it is. Why should real players suffer?
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 879	Posted - 2015.06.13 02:08:31 - [4] - Quote I am mostly trying to point out that any content which scales linerarly or better will be multi-boxed all to hell. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 98	Posted - 2015.06.13 02:27:38 - [5] - Quote James Baboli wrote: I am mostly trying to point out that any content which scales linerarly or better will be multi-boxed all to hell. Thats okay. Incursions, Cosmic anomalies already are. What you are saying isn't news.
Market Wizard Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2015.06.13 04:05:00 - [6] - Quote Aza Ebanu wrote: James Baboli wrote: I am mostly trying to point out that any content which scales linerarly or better will be multi-boxed all to hell. Thats okay. Incursions, Cosmic anomalies already are. What you are saying isn't news. Do it the other way then, the less players you have the more it scales. Start at five people with current rewards for each person and work your way to solo increasing rewards as you drop fleet size. Won't reward social interaction at vet level when you have the skill points and ship to solo for life but would give someone who is being active a boost in isk over the very inactive miners of high sec. Incursions are another topic all together which should be moved to low and null only solely because of the amount of isk that can be made per day rivals the amount a FW alt sitting in an empty system closing plexes all day. Yes there will be tears but Incursions don't seem to follow the isk vs reward system everything else is based on.
Hopelesshobo Tactical Nuclear Penguin's 486	Posted - 2015.06.13 04:22:22 - [7] - Quote Market Wizard wrote: Incursions are another topic all together which should be moved to low and null only solely because of the amount of isk that can be made per day rivals the amount a FW alt sitting in an empty system closing plexes all day. Yes there will be tears but Incursions don't seem to follow the isk vs reward system everything else is based on. The Risk/Reward system from incursions is just stemmed more towards the risk from the PVE side instead of the PVP side. Don't get me wrong, there is still risk in getting suicide ganked, but if you are not going to bring up the PVE risk, then I will complain that your FW alt sitting in an empty system closing plexes all day doesn't have enough PVE risk to be entitled to its isk. But back to the OP; The increase in mission reward comes from you being able to complete the sites faster. If you got more reward from people just being in your fleet, you could just have your alts stay docked up where there is literally 0 risk, and print more isk. Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 98	Posted - 2015.06.13 04:27:49 - [8] - Quote Market Wizard wrote: Aza Ebanu wrote: James Baboli wrote: I am mostly trying to point out that any content which scales linerarly or better will be multi-boxed all to hell. Thats okay. Incursions, Cosmic anomalies already are. What you are saying isn't news. Do it the other way then, the less players you have the more it scales. Start at five people with current rewards for each person and work your way to solo increasing rewards as you drop fleet size. Won't reward social interaction at vet level when you have the skill points and ship to solo for life but would give someone who is being active a boost in isk over the very inactive miners of high sec. Incursions are another topic all together which should be moved to low and null only solely because of the amount of isk that can be made per day rivals the amount a FW alt sitting in an empty system closing plexes all day. Yes there will be tears but Incursions don't seem to follow the isk vs reward system everything else is based on. Nope. CCP should reward fleet behavior like they always have. There is a reason why larger operations are more successful in EVE. Now its time to apply that to the most frequently solo'd player activity. Reward those who worked hard to coordinate the fleets to complete missions.
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 98	Posted - 2015.06.13 04:35:32 - [9] - Quote Hopelesshobo wrote: Market Wizard wrote: Incursions are another topic all together which should be moved to low and null only solely because of the amount of isk that can be made per day rivals the amount a FW alt sitting in an empty system closing plexes all day. Yes there will be tears but Incursions don't seem to follow the isk vs reward system everything else is based on. The Risk/Reward system from incursions is just stemmed more towards the risk from the PVE side instead of the PVP side. Don't get me wrong, there is still risk in getting suicide ganked, but if you are not going to bring up the PVE risk, then I will complain that your FW alt sitting in an empty system closing plexes all day doesn't have enough PVE risk to be entitled to its isk. But back to the OP; The increase in mission reward comes from you being able to complete the sites faster. If you got more reward from people just being in your fleet, you could just have your alts stay docked up where there is literally 0 risk, and print more isk. It doesn't scale really well in its current form. People are already using alts/multiboxes to farm PVE content. CCP is not worried about them, neither am I. CCP could: 1. scale the missions based on fleet size 2. Design fleet specific missions agents (for all levels) 3. Give other rewards like ships, BPC, Faction gear. 4. Give fleet exploration coordinates for cosmic anomolies 5. Give the full mission reward to each participant
Market Wizard Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2015.06.13 06:07:32 - [10] - Quote Hopelesshobo wrote: Market Wizard wrote: Incursions are another topic all together which should be moved to low and null only solely because of the amount of isk that can be made per day rivals the amount a FW alt sitting in an empty system closing plexes all day. Yes there will be tears but Incursions don't seem to follow the isk vs reward system everything else is based on. The Risk/Reward system from incursions is just stemmed more towards the risk from the PVE side instead of the PVP side. Don't get me wrong, there is still risk in getting suicide ganked, but if you are not going to bring up the PVE risk, then I will complain that your FW alt sitting in an empty system closing plexes all day doesn't have enough PVE risk to be entitled to its isk. But back to the OP; The increase in mission reward comes from you being able to complete the sites faster. If you got more reward from people just being in your fleet, you could just have your alts stay docked up where there is literally 0 risk, and print more isk. Dont get me wrong, Im with you on two of those points in a manner of speaking. To stay on topic, as far as getting more isk from PvE the simple truth is lvl 4s are not the end of the line. If you want more isk go to low sec and do lvl 5s, I hear they are hard and most of the time they do require fleets to run. Which then goes into the Risk vs reward system. Far as the FW plexing goes Im with you, nerf that sh** into the ground, they make far too much isk for the low amount of effort and low risk that comes with it. The plexes were made to give people a place to fight away from gate/station guns, not for people to grind isk like bears in high sec. I wont even begin to acknowledge the false statement that there is risk in Incursions do to PvE rats. Every ship that is ever lost is due to a huge mistake that came from negligence on the part of the FC or one of the fleet members. Otherwise, the only thing they will ever fear is getting ganked when they are moving from one area to the next chasing Incursions. Even that can easily be avoided with simple tactics that most probably dont even think about.
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 98	Posted - 2015.06.13 06:18:48 - [11] - Quote Market Wizard wrote: Dont get me wrong, Im with you on two of those points in a manner of speaking. To stay on topic, as far as getting more isk from PvE the simple truth is lvl 4s are not the end of the line. If you want more isk go to low sec and do lvl 5s, I hear they are hard and most of the time they do require fleets to run. Which then goes into the Risk vs reward system. Far as the FW plexing goes Im with you, nerf that sh** into the ground, they make far too much isk for the low amount of effort and low risk that comes with it. The plexes were made to give people a place to fight away from gate/station guns, not for people to grind isk like bears in high sec. I wont even begin to acknowledge the false statement that there is risk in Incursions do to PvE rats. Every ship that is ever lost is due to a huge mistake that came from negligence on the part of the FC or one of the fleet members. Otherwise, the only thing they will ever fear is getting ganked when they are moving from one area to the next chasing Incursions. Even that can easily be avoided with simple tactics that most probably dont even think about. Level 4's could/are also be ran in low sec and null. The point is to reward the fleet. Really make it worth it so the new player experience as well as the older player experience can be shared in spirit of cooperation and profit.
Iain Cariaba 1519	Posted - 2015.06.13 06:42:10 - [12] - Quote You are already rewarded for doing missions with a fleet simply due to the fact that you can run them much, much faster, allowing you to run more missions in the same allotted time frame. There does not need to be a mechanic to increase pay out based on fleet participation, as it will only be farmed and abused by those with the ability to do so. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Will troll for a t-shirt.
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 100	Posted - 2015.06.13 07:48:26 - [13] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: You are already rewarded for doing missions with a fleet simply due to the fact that you can run them much, much faster, allowing you to run more missions in the same allotted time frame. There does not need to be a mechanic to increase pay out based on fleet participation, as it will only be farmed and abused by those with the ability to do so. Not really there are more steps involved. Managing a fleet is a lot more time sensitive than soloing. I think that should be accounted for at least. Just give it a buff. It will help retain players through better social interactions. Plus with the extra isk, it will make veteran players desire to take on more newer players. It is a good thing to reward these leaders.
Haatakan Reppola Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 38	Posted - 2015.06.13 07:51:17 - [14] - Quote Market Wizard wrote: I wont even begin to acknowledge the false statement that there is risk in Incursions do to PvE rats. Every ship that is ever lost is due to a huge mistake that came from negligence on the part of the FC or one of the fleet members. Otherwise, the only thing they will ever fear is getting ganked when they are moving from one area to the next chasing Incursions. Even that can easily be avoided with simple tactics that most probably dont even think about. If you run incursions with "safe" fleets you make around 100m/hr, if you run them with fleets where you have to pay attention you can get 250m/hr. Your also very likely to loose any contest with a "safe" fleet. When everything align against you, a ship last only seconds and logi may not be able to lock before your already in structure and logi can be alphaed off the field. With many fleets in the same system there is a huge diffrence in isk/hr for the fleets that go for added safety over added dps. I would not be suprised if high sec incursion losses total more htan other high sec PvE losses, ofc community that give you back dropped mods and help eachother get back into ships help make those losses easier to handle :P
Celthric Kanerian Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation 324	Posted - 2015.06.13 10:06:14 - [15] - Quote Missions are already an insane isk faucet... It doesn't need anything more since the real payout from them is LP and bounties.
Iain Cariaba 1519	Posted - 2015.06.13 17:01:45 - [16] - Quote Aza Ebanu wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: You are already rewarded for doing missions with a fleet simply due to the fact that you can run them much, much faster, allowing you to run more missions in the same allotted time frame. There does not need to be a mechanic to increase pay out based on fleet participation, as it will only be farmed and abused by those with the ability to do so. (Post edited to highlight various points) 1. Not really there are more steps involved. 2. Managing a fleet is a lot more time sensitive than soloing. I think that should be accounted for at least. 3. Just give it a buff. It will help retain players through better social interactions. 4. Plus with the extra isk, it will make veteran players desire to take on more newer players. It is a good thing to reward these leaders. 1. There are only more steps involved if you're multi-boxing the fleet yourself. If you have other actual humans involved, the only thing that could be considered additional steps is making sure you tag the triggers, and the extra dialog box at the end for splitting rewards (or not). 2. So basically you're argument here is that it takes you two minutes to setup a fleet, so you need to get paid for that? 3. "Think of the newbies" is nothing more than a fall back argument used to try and prop up bad ideas. 4. No, what will happen is the vets will bring in their alts to collect the additional reward. They can already solo the mission, so why do they need to babysit some newbie when they can just use an alt? The players that help newbies do so because they like helping newbies, not because they get extra isk out of it. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Will troll for a t-shirt.
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 101	Posted - 2015.06.13 18:06:54 - [17] - Quote Celthric Kanerian wrote: Missions are already an insane isk faucet... It doesn't need anything more since the real payout from them is LP and bounties. ISK has no value. If there are already trillions of isk in unsubbed accounts that aren't in the EVE economy, so the rest of us need to pick up the slack. Besides there could be tons more ISK in the economy and the game would be fine because market interaction isn't necessary for many things.
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 101	Posted - 2015.06.13 18:14:51 - [18] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: Aza Ebanu wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: You are already rewarded for doing missions with a fleet simply due to the fact that you can run them much, much faster, allowing you to run more missions in the same allotted time frame. There does not need to be a mechanic to increase pay out based on fleet participation, as it will only be farmed and abused by those with the ability to do so. (Post edited to highlight various points) 1. Not really there are more steps involved. 2. Managing a fleet is a lot more time sensitive than soloing. I think that should be accounted for at least. 3. Just give it a buff. It will help retain players through better social interactions. 4. Plus with the extra isk, it will make veteran players desire to take on more newer players. It is a good thing to reward these leaders. 1. There are only more steps involved if you're multi-boxing the fleet yourself. If you have other actual humans involved, the only thing that could be considered additional steps is making sure you tag the triggers, and the extra dialog box at the end for splitting rewards (or not). 2. So basically you're argument here is that it takes you two minutes to setup a fleet, so you need to get paid for that? 3. "Think of the newbies" is nothing more than a fall back argument used to try and prop up bad ideas. 4. No, what will happen is the vets will bring in their alts to collect the additional reward. They can already solo the mission, so why do they need to babysit some newbie when they can just use an alt? The players that help newbies do so because they like helping newbies, not because they get extra isk out of it. 1. doesn't matter, some people are better at multiboxing than others. 2. Argument is that there is greater effort involved in generating conten, which EVE should support to provide players with "rich experiences". 3. This idea is not just limited to new players, and there are so many definitions of "new players" in EVE Online, I wouldn't discriminate against what you would call (older players?). 4. Alts are a part of the game. Alts have been used in wonderful scams and other forms of gameplay. There is nothing wrong with alts. To answer the second part: the social interaction is better for the game.
Iain Cariaba 1520	Posted - 2015.06.13 19:26:38 - [19] - Quote Aza Ebanu wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: Aza Ebanu wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: You are already rewarded for doing missions with a fleet simply due to the fact that you can run them much, much faster, allowing you to run more missions in the same allotted time frame. There does not need to be a mechanic to increase pay out based on fleet participation, as it will only be farmed and abused by those with the ability to do so. (Post edited to highlight various points) 1. Not really there are more steps involved. 2. Managing a fleet is a lot more time sensitive than soloing. I think that should be accounted for at least. 3. Just give it a buff. It will help retain players through better social interactions. 4. Plus with the extra isk, it will make veteran players desire to take on more newer players. It is a good thing to reward these leaders. 1. There are only more steps involved if you're multi-boxing the fleet yourself. If you have other actual humans involved, the only thing that could be considered additional steps is making sure you tag the triggers, and the extra dialog box at the end for splitting rewards (or not). 2. So basically you're argument here is that it takes you two minutes to setup a fleet, so you need to get paid for that? 3. "Think of the newbies" is nothing more than a fall back argument used to try and prop up bad ideas. 4. No, what will happen is the vets will bring in their alts to collect the additional reward. They can already solo the mission, so why do they need to babysit some newbie when they can just use an alt? The players that help newbies do so because they like helping newbies, not because they get extra isk out of it. 1. doesn't matter, some people are better at multiboxing than others. 2. Argument is that there is greater effort involved in generating conten, which EVE should support to provide players with "rich experiences". 3. This idea is not just limited to new players, and there are so many definitions of "new players" in EVE Online, I wouldn't discriminate against what you would call (older players?). 4. Alts are a part of the game. Alts have been used in wonderful scams and other forms of gameplay. There is nothing wrong with alts. To answer the second part: the social interaction is better for the game. 1. This point makes no sense, and is counter to your prior statement. 2. It is up to the player to create content, CCP merely provides the tools. 3. You further reinforce "think of the newbies" as the farce it is. The whole, "but what is a newbie?" bit doesn't fly. 4. Your idea does not actually promote increasing levels of social interaction. What it does promote is older, established missioners simply including their alts. Unless the payout is a linear multiplier based on number of people in fleet, there is no actual added incentive to fleet missioning provided by this idea. If the payout is a linear multiplier based on the number of people in fleet, then its potential for abuse by fleets of alts is far greater than some imaginary increase in social interaction. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Will troll for a t-shirt.
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 101	Posted - 2015.06.13 19:36:30 - [20] - Quote Like I said. Fleets need better incentives for missions. They are putting forth effort to expand the game. This would be a wonderful tool to expand game conetent for older players and newer players. It would increase "richer experiences". There is complaints about alts, but people are going to use alts for PVP/PVE as long as EVE Online lives. Don't punish others for what other might do.
Iain Cariaba 1520	Posted - 2015.06.13 19:47:22 - [21] - Quote Aza Ebanu wrote: Like I said. Fleets need better incentives for missions. They are putting forth effort to expand the game. This would be a wonderful tool to expand game conetent for older players and newer players. It would increase "richer experiences". There is complaints about alts, but people are going to use alts for PVP/PVE as long as EVE Online lives. Don't punish others for what other might do. You totally miss the point here. Yes, people will still use alts, that is not the point. The point is that your idea is nothing more than an isk farm to increase the profits of solo mission runners by using alts. The only "richer experiences" that will be had are by those, like myself, who will put 4+ alts into a fleet, solo the mission anyway, and simply rake in all the extra loot, making my experience a whole lot richer. If there was a way to only reward those fleets that actually had multiple humans in it, I'd actually support this idea. Until that happens, however, there is no need to reward multi-boxing game play beyond its current level. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Will troll for a t-shirt.
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 101	Posted - 2015.06.13 19:54:55 - [22] - Quote Increased missions rewards will lead to richer game experiences, as much of the game's population does missions. Encouraging fleets is the best way to retain players.
Iain Cariaba 1520	Posted - 2015.06.13 20:09:25 - [23] - Quote Aza Ebanu wrote: Increased missions rewards will lead to richer game experiences, as much of the game's population does missions. Encouraging fleets is the best way to retain players. Simply repeating the same line over and over does not make it true. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Will troll for a t-shirt.
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 101	Posted - 2015.06.13 20:14:00 - [24] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: Simply repeating the same line over and over does not make it true. should take your own advice then buddy EVE should have a new feature that rewards fleets for missions. Increased isk payout, scaling missions, better standings. All sorts of increased rewards to thank players for creating content and developing "richer experiences".
Iain Cariaba 1521	Posted - 2015.06.13 22:08:42 - [25] - Quote Aza Ebanu wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: Simply repeating the same line over and over does not make it true. should take your own advice then buddy EVE should have a new feature that rewards fleets for missions. Increased isk payout, scaling missions, better standings. All sorts of increased rewards to thank players for creating content and developing "richer experiences". PvEers do not create content. They *are* content. There is more then enough isk faucets already in the game. We don't need to add more. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Will troll for a t-shirt.
Lyra Gerie Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 53	Posted - 2015.06.13 22:14:34 - [26] - Quote I would like to see this. There have been plenty of times I've tagged along or had someone tag along on a mission and despite being depressingly boring we were disappointed to find little got added or shared. It would be nice to sign up for a joint mission or having someone tag along would raise the profit a bit. Something like 190% for two players, 265% for three, 320% for four ect. the percentage gets smaller for each individual you add to the mission. This means that one player doing a mission with a reward for 2 million will make 2 million. Two players will make 3.8 mil or 1.9m each. Three players would make 5.3 mil or 1.76m each and so on until say 10 players where the bonus would be something like a flat 700% or 14m total/1.4m each. Over ten (or maybe even just five) the number would no longer increase. It would make it more lucrative for each individual but only slightly and it would still heavly depend on their speed at finishing the missions. This process could also be used for LP rewards from missions.
Iain Cariaba 1521	Posted - 2015.06.13 22:21:49 - [27] - Quote Lyra Gerie wrote: I would like to see this. There have been plenty of times I've tagged along or had someone tag along on a mission and despite being depressingly boring we were disappointed to find little got added or shared. It would be nice to sign up for a joint mission or having someone tag along would raise the profit a bit. Something like 190% for two players, 265% for three, 320% for four ect. the percentage gets smaller for each individual you add to the mission. This means that one player doing a mission with a reward for 2 million will make 2 million. Two players will make 3.8 mil or 1.9m each. Three players would make 5.3 mil or 1.76m each and so on until say 10 players where the bonus would be something like a flat 700% or 14m total/1.4m each. Over ten (or maybe even just five) the number would no longer increase. It would make it more lucrative for each individual but only slightly and it would still heavly depend on their speed at finishing the missions. This process could also be used for LP rewards from missions. And I would put three alts in fleet with myself, solo the mission, and collect the 6.4mil reward all for myself. See the issue yet? EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Will troll for a t-shirt.
Lyra Gerie Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 54	Posted - 2015.06.13 22:42:26 - [28] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: Lyra Gerie wrote: I would like to see this. There have been plenty of times I've tagged along or had someone tag along on a mission and despite being depressingly boring we were disappointed to find little got added or shared. It would be nice to sign up for a joint mission or having someone tag along would raise the profit a bit. Something like 190% for two players, 265% for three, 320% for four ect. the percentage gets smaller for each individual you add to the mission. This means that one player doing a mission with a reward for 2 million will make 2 million. Two players will make 3.8 mil or 1.9m each. Three players would make 5.3 mil or 1.76m each and so on until say 10 players where the bonus would be something like a flat 700% or 14m total/1.4m each. Over ten (or maybe even just five) the number would no longer increase. It would make it more lucrative for each individual but only slightly and it would still heavly depend on their speed at finishing the missions. This process could also be used for LP rewards from missions. And I would put three alts in fleet with myself, solo the mission, and collect the 6.4mil reward all for myself. See the issue yet? lol you dont see how your wasting your time and isk/hour with that at all? If your going to multi box why would you run one mission with four earning 320% isk when you can run four missions with each earning 100% for each or 400% total profit. Then again if you think you can run them faster with four in one mission then it's on you to try and optimize it and vise versa. This actually opens up missioning gameplay depth by giving players MORE options to try and make better isk, even if we're just talking about a multiboxer. Some might like the ease of running just one site with a few ships while others will want to maximize and pay a little more attention as they control three alts and their main at four separate missions.
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 106	Posted - 2015.06.13 22:47:49 - [29] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: Lyra Gerie wrote: I would like to see this. There have been plenty of times I've tagged along or had someone tag along on a mission and despite being depressingly boring we were disappointed to find little got added or shared. It would be nice to sign up for a joint mission or having someone tag along would raise the profit a bit. Something like 190% for two players, 265% for three, 320% for four ect. the percentage gets smaller for each individual you add to the mission. This means that one player doing a mission with a reward for 2 million will make 2 million. Two players will make 3.8 mil or 1.9m each. Three players would make 5.3 mil or 1.76m each and so on until say 10 players where the bonus would be something like a flat 700% or 14m total/1.4m each. Over ten (or maybe even just five) the number would no longer increase. It would make it more lucrative for each individual but only slightly and it would still heavly depend on their speed at finishing the missions. This process could also be used for LP rewards from missions. And I would put three alts in fleet with myself, solo the mission, and collect the 6.4mil reward all for myself. See the issue yet? Whats wrong with that? Isn't that what miners and multiboxers do today? Might as well let everyone else benefit.
Iain Cariaba 1523	Posted - 2015.06.14 03:36:00 - [30] - Quote Lyra Gerie wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: Lyra Gerie wrote: I would like to see this. There have been plenty of times I've tagged along or had someone tag along on a mission and despite being depressingly boring we were disappointed to find little got added or shared. It would be nice to sign up for a joint mission or having someone tag along would raise the profit a bit. Something like 190% for two players, 265% for three, 320% for four ect. the percentage gets smaller for each individual you add to the mission. This means that one player doing a mission with a reward for 2 million will make 2 million. Two players will make 3.8 mil or 1.9m each. Three players would make 5.3 mil or 1.76m each and so on until say 10 players where the bonus would be something like a flat 700% or 14m total/1.4m each. Over ten (or maybe even just five) the number would no longer increase. It would make it more lucrative for each individual but only slightly and it would still heavly depend on their speed at finishing the missions. This process could also be used for LP rewards from missions. And I would put three alts in fleet with myself, solo the mission, and collect the 6.4mil reward all for myself. See the issue yet? lol you dont see how your wasting your time and isk/hour with that at all? If your going to multi box why would you run one mission with four earning 320% isk when you can run four missions with each earning 100% for each or 400% total profit. Then again if you think you can run them faster with four in one mission then it's on you to try and optimize it and vise versa. This actually opens up missioning gameplay depth by giving players MORE options to try and make better isk, even if we're just talking about a multiboxer. Some might like the ease of running just one site with a few ships while others will want to maximize and pay a little more attention as they control three alts and their main at four separate missions. Because it is far, far, far easier to put my shopping alt, my freighter pilot, and the freighter alt's webber into a single fleet with a mission runner, have them do what they do, while I also solo missions and get 320% isk. Once again, the many ways players of this game will utterly abuse this idea greatly outweighs any potential benefits. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Will troll for a t-shirt.
Lyra Gerie Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 56	Posted - 2015.06.14 04:33:40 - [31] - Quote You would fly all those down to accept a mission at a station just to make a bit more isk, seems like opportunity cost to me. Not everyone will be willing to sacrifice the movement of their alts just to make a bit more running missions unless they set up their routes to make it convenient. Further the missions could scale to be approximately 1.15x harder or 1.25x harder per additional person running it. This would basically make it so that you couldn't solo it anymore without making it too hard to complete for the money. Harder in this case could simply mean more EHP on enemy ships as to slow progress without additional fleet members present.
Zan Shiro Alternative Enterprises 665	Posted - 2015.06.14 06:41:27 - [32] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: Aza Ebanu wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: Simply repeating the same line over and over does not make it true. should take your own advice then buddy EVE should have a new feature that rewards fleets for missions. Increased isk payout, scaling missions, better standings. All sorts of increased rewards to thank players for creating content and developing "richer experiences". PvEers do not create content. They *are* content. There is more then enough isk faucets already in the game. We don't need to add more. This.... OP, watch damn neer any video ccp has made. At least from apoc which was the first videos I saw. Google butterfly effect....still in my top 5 movies ever made by ccp in my book. CCP is giving the less than subtle guide in most videos that the content you seek is not in pve and not even in empire. Few exception videos (recall the ghost sites one being pve focused) but by and large when a player tires of rescuing the damsel, yawns running even AE bonus room ccp has shown the way to new areas to try out. WH, low or 0.0. Plus the abuses already well covered. But to be fair to the op....a caveat shall be presented. these new missions exist only out of empire. Some will say umm, level 5's exist. Correct. We just have CCP modify level 5's to payout all instead of the claimer primarily...voila. Reuse of old material....why make new code when you can tweak the old stuff. Bears get what they want. The pvp'ers get what they want. if 4 bears run the level 5 and not die to ,say, tusker roams.....they should be rewarded well. Even better than incursions I may even grant.
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2517	Posted - 2015.06.14 07:09:16 - [33] - Quote I enjoy group PvE, but having them pay out better than existing missions whilst providing little in the way of risk just enables ISboxers. I'd tell you to day trip into low sec for group PvE, but Hi-sec missions even eclipse most low-sec rewards atm. They are just too good. So whilst extra money gets a no from me, group missions which provide big boosts to corp standing would be cool. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Zan Shiro Alternative Enterprises 666	Posted - 2015.06.14 13:05:06 - [34] - Quote Daichi Yamato wrote: So whilst extra money gets a no from me, group missions which provide big boosts to corp standing would be cool. This actually a fair middle ground. Its a reward that isn't game breaking really. that it can't be money is certain. Right amount of isk on the table I can wake up alts real fast. The many threads before this beat that poor horse to death. Time to let them rest really lol. that and as mentioned in the many threads before there are ways people can get paid to share that level. Run them wolf pack style with say frigates. When you spam a level 4 with several pro pve BS' boredom should be expected. And the payout will suck as its a mere small percent of the ship(s) involved. DO af spam it gets interesting and say a mission like wc which can pay out 30 mil in bounty and agent reward...split even 5-6 players is 5ish mil a player. 5 mil a decent percentage to cost of the af. vice 5 mil to cover thier billion dollar shiny fit BS. Put 4-6 af's on a bs target....she is gonna drop. fast and hard. So all get a piece of the bounty on it. the interesting part to this what attracted me in the past. When I had alt accounts active I ran odd ball combo's. Why I was sad to see NPC aggro shift come in some ways tbh. Used to drop in the meat shield bs like rattler with the alt and when the main on breaks from 0.0 I'd have him run the stealth bomber (torp spec'd ofc) for a change of pace. Now on just one account...I'll af a level 3 from time to time for giggles. Want to make eve interesting, make it interesting. No law says it has to pay well to do this. It not being SSDD crush the rats in an uber ship can be its own reward. But thats me. IN rl if a fellow net admin has a really cool project I am not on but looks kick ass is working a bit after hours I will hang around and help out...for free, no hours charged. An hour of exposure to new technologies being implemented the reward to me.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 881	Posted - 2015.06.14 13:46:17 - [35] - Quote Haatakan Reppola wrote: Market Wizard wrote: I wont even begin to acknowledge the false statement that there is risk in Incursions do to PvE rats. Every ship that is ever lost is due to a huge mistake that came from negligence on the part of the FC or one of the fleet members. Otherwise, the only thing they will ever fear is getting ganked when they are moving from one area to the next chasing Incursions. Even that can easily be avoided with simple tactics that most probably dont even think about. If you run incursions with "safe" fleets you make around 100m/hr, if you run them with fleets where you have to pay attention you can get 250m/hr. Your also very likely to loose any contest with a "safe" fleet. When everything align against you, a ship last only seconds and logi may not be able to lock before your already in structure and logi can be alphaed off the field. With many fleets in the same system there is a huge diffrence in isk/hr for the fleets that go for added safety over added dps. I would not be suprised if high sec incursion losses total more htan other high sec PvE losses, ofc community that give you back dropped mods and help eachother get back into ships help make those losses easier to handle :P High sec incursion losses, per pilot hour, are well above any other area of high sec PvE. Mission runners beat out incursions because of the much larger number of mission runners vs. incursion runners. Right now I think the total number of fairly active incursion runners is down to about 600-800 players across all timezones and communities, while there are that many mission runners per major mission hub. And I'm sorry, but with DPS hitting high points where you need 30k worth of total tank, and 3k gj neuts on grid and and and, incursions aren't able to get much harder without being able to call in capitals. Even without the influence, if the boosters are killed, a TCRC suddenly requires 8 logistics ships out of 40, if everyone is running the fairly close to universal (shield) t2 setup of 2 adaptives, a C type EM mod and thermal rig with DC2. Neut someone out, and suddenly they take 12 logi to keep alive. Name me anything else that requires that level of tank. The real reason incursions are as safe as they are is early sacrifices to sansha to learn how much DPS incursions had, and then the learning period to figure out how to run safe fleets. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1091	Posted - 2015.06.14 13:50:29 - [36] - Quote Daichi Yamato wrote: So whilst extra money gets a no from me, group missions which provide big boosts to corp standing would be cool. I could get behind this - but aren't standings relatively pointless apart from market alts? As a new player, over eight years ago, just running missions by myself, I could gain standings faster than my skills could enable me to run more difficult missions. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." So, why do I post here? Because of this: http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2519	Posted - 2015.06.14 16:08:19 - [37] - Quote Corp standings rather than player standings. Standings arent utilised very much no. They are only relevant to a few NPC services (maybe there should be more). But these missions can payout level 4 like iskies AND corp standings. Alternatives could be LP payouts to the corp. Help your corp get a 'flag ship' or faction doctrine :3 EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 88	Posted - 2015.06.14 19:05:51 - [38] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Daichi Yamato wrote: So whilst extra money gets a no from me, group missions which provide big boosts to corp standing would be cool. I could get behind this - but aren't standings relatively pointless apart from market alts? As a new player, over eight years ago, just running missions by myself, I could gain standings faster than my skills could enable me to run more difficult missions. Standings= jump-clones.
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 124	Posted - 2015.06.14 19:56:09 - [39] - Quote Yeah. Missions need to reward fleets. ISK is probably one of the best ways to reward them. They can spend it on whatever they need, and better align their corp to fleet activities. It gives incentives for veteran and newer players to come together and stay together.
Mike Voidstar Voidstar Free Flight Foundation 753	Posted - 2015.06.15 06:58:39 - [40] - Quote This is going to be met with a lot of resistance on the forums because of the vocal PvP crowd not wishing to see groups of PvE pilots doing anything in combat ships. Most of your players that enjoy fleet type things have their own alliance forums and such they discuss the game in. The largest vocal group here are the solo PvP bears that, as the one guy above posted, consider PvE pilots to be content, not enjoying content. Some devs should really take a look at that statement and understand just exactly how toxic for the game it really is. As to the subject of the thread... I agree that missions and other activities should scale with fleets. Even if it was nothing more than seeing extra triggered waves within standard missions which would equate to a bit more ISK and microscopic standings changes per mission. Possibly a system that led to escalations and other activities that were more suited to fleets. Some of that could lead to other areas of space---though honestly the PvP folk need to give up the dream that anyone interested in PvE and not already there can be enticed there by a little more ISK. You can pay me to be your content directly with ships and ISK for my time, but I'll not volunteer to do it on my dime. PvE can certainly use the love and attention of the Devs for a little while. We pay most of the bills, we deserve some of the spoils.
Aza Ebanu HC - Serenity 165	Posted - 2015.06.15 07:11:15 - [41] - Quote Mike Voidstar wrote: This is going to be met with a lot of resistance on the forums because of the vocal PvP crowd not wishing to see groups of PvE pilots doing anything in combat ships. Most of your players that enjoy fleet type things have their own alliance forums and such they discuss the game in. The largest vocal group here are the solo PvP bears that, as the one guy above posted, consider PvE pilots to be content, not enjoying content. Some devs should really take a look at that statement and understand just exactly how toxic for the game it really is. As to the subject of the thread... I agree that missions and other activities should scale with fleets. Even if it was nothing more than seeing extra triggered waves within standard missions which would equate to a bit more ISK and microscopic standings changes per mission. Possibly a system that led to escalations and other activities that were more suited to fleets. Some of that could lead to other areas of space---though honestly the PvP folk need to give up the dream that anyone interested in PvE and not already there can be enticed there by a little more ISK. You can pay me to be your content directly with ships and ISK for my time, but I'll not volunteer to do it on my dime. PvE can certainly use the love and attention of the Devs for a little while. We pay most of the bills, we deserve some of the spoils. I completely support a change like this. Well done!
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1103	Posted - 2015.06.15 09:21:34 - [42] - Quote Mike Voidstar wrote: As to the subject of the thread... I agree that missions and other activities should scale with fleets. Even if it was nothing more than seeing extra triggered waves within standard missions So long as the content required the pilots to be on field, with their ships potentially at risk, I would support adding additional waves for having more pilots in the mission. In other words, if it worked like WH space. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.