EVE Search - Former lowsec runners

All Channels

Missions & Complexes

Former lowsec runners

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Zed Nash	Posted - 2006.12.08 02:49:00 - [1] A question to those lowsec runners who moved to highsec to avoid the bloodbath.......... CCP has announced a "fix" for probing out deadspace missions in the scheduled 12/13 patch. My question to you is: What will CCP have to implement to get you to return to lowsec for all your mission-running needs? This isn't a "PvP vs non-PvP" debate, if you don't run missions you have no reason to post here. "Maya Rkell is my online stalker."
Zacha Nioto	Posted - 2006.12.08 03:24:00 - [2] As a mission runner, I believe it should take longer, and the mission runner should have better opportunities to detect that he is being probed. Perhaps leave some kind of trace in space that can be picked up with a special module, or even the regular scanner if there is a random chance that the trace will be visible and/or for how long it will remain in space. As a prober who wasn't too satisfied with the new "it's so simple I can't believe it's probing" system, I believe that there should be at least some player skills (as opposed to character skills) necessary, without being the total PITA it was pre-Revelations. I wouldn't be entirely against some more skills to affect probing, or at least how effectively you can hide your probing attempt from the probee. Oh, I probably also should add that this is mostly directed at probing out mission runners. Even with the system as it looks today, it's still too hard to probe someone that has time to use his scanner to actively look for signs of probing. Tbh, I wouldn't mind the introduction of "covert probes" that doesn't show up on scanner and doesn't require a covert.ops. to uncloak when you drop them, if it was balanced properly by perhaps increasing the scan time, decreasing the strength and increasing the scan deviation. Oh, and of course not be able to find ships in deadspaces.
Contralto Binary Fringe inc	Posted - 2006.12.08 03:25:00 - [3] I left my 0.3 mission hub after 6 months intensive and profitable mission running and one big loss at a gate gank while on a mission. I foresaw the present situation 2 months ago when the new probe system was announced. I decided to move out then and find alternate employment rather than be frustrated after the patch. I would consider going back if DS gates were only open to key holders and the keys were issued by the agents. If the "Greifers" were fast they could still be camping the gate by the time I got there but thats up to me to be faster.
Zacha Nioto	Posted - 2006.12.08 04:04:00 - [4] Originally by: Contralto I left my 0.3 mission hub after 6 months intensive and profitable mission running and one big loss at a gate gank while on a mission. I foresaw the present situation 2 months ago when the new probe system was announced. I decided to move out then and find alternate employment rather than be frustrated after the patch. I would consider going back if DS gates were only open to key holders and the keys were issued by the agents. Woohoo, completele safety for mission runners in low-sec 4tw! \o/ ... or not. Originally by: Contralto If the "Greifers" were fast they could still be camping the gate by the time I got there but thats up to me to be faster. I'm pretty sure it's not possible to probe out anything in the deadspace itself, including the gate leading into it. So no, they can't come to your mission gate before you do.
Esaka Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.08 04:09:00 - [5] Probing would have to revert back to nearly pre-revelation state, as in alot more time consuming and harder to do. -------------------------------------- Agent & Mission-Info: http://www.eveinfo.com Evewide Market-Info: http://eve-central.com/
Mik Nostrebor Minmatar ORKS	Posted - 2006.12.08 04:31:00 - [6] How about looking at the problem from a different angle. If there are improved probes should there not be improved probe defences? Some ideas: 1. Signature scrambling - fit a mid slot mod that has a scramble strength to defeat the weaker probes. Make the pirate have to probe several times in order to find you. This unit migh have the added bonus of indentifying who is probing in your area? 2. Ghost probes - if they can launch probes to find you, you should be able to launch probes to imitate your signatue and send them out around your system as decoys. 3. Glitter bombs - A simple device that sends out metallic sand to diffuse and confuse the resolution/accuracy of probes. Makes it easier to find you but impossible to warp to 0 on you but make them warp in at 0-300 km from you. OK so they could get you on their overview and then warp in but at least you have the chance to run. 4. Make a starship out of wood so it has 0 signature to probes....lololol (remember the Mosquito the brits made in the 1940's) Think back over the old WW2 radar and sonar warfare tactics. Mik AUSSIE AND KIWI EVE Fansite
Contralto Binary Fringe inc	Posted - 2006.12.08 04:53:00 - [7] Originally by: Zacha Nioto Originally by: Contralto If the "Greifers" were fast they could still be camping the gate by the time I got there but thats up to me to be faster. I'm pretty sure it's not possible to probe out anything in the deadspace itself, including the gate leading into it. So no, they can't come to your mission gate before you do. They can probe the assembled mission rats. Old probes could do that. OP asked what would make me return to low sec mission running and I gave my answer, your comment was superfluous! I want safety from other players interfering in my mission yes, but Im happy to have 50 or 60 angry mission rats aggro me, after all thats why im there.
Takanohana Deep Space Explorers	Posted - 2006.12.08 05:46:00 - [8] Originally by: Mik Nostrebor 4. Make a starship out of wood so it has 0 signature to probes....lololol (remember the Mosquito the brits made in the 1940's) Minnie ships are made of rust colored duct tape you know....
exarienne	Posted - 2006.12.08 07:42:00 - [9] I would like to change the odds only. Now i feel like a pirate has over 99% chance of killing mission runner in mission. Missions are difficult enough without pirates at all so i think it should be under 5% or less, no matter how it will be accomplished. Additional modules are hard to balance solution imho as they are taking some other equipment out. Locking gates is too much. It might be partial solution, even locking allies out of some missions for ballance. Lower chance /higher skill reqs/ longer time of deadspace probing is probably best option as it lowers other problems like stealing mission critical loot or mass aggro. Originally by: Leandro Salazar Now I really don't mind being ganked when I am careless, but I DO mind being forced to play the gank or be ganked game every waking moment
Willo Vasquez Gallente Raptus Regaliter	Posted - 2006.12.08 07:58:00 - [10] Having lost 3 domi's in the space of a week to mission 'invaders' while running level 4's, I've experienced the downside of the new probing system, and it's currently little more than a license to grief. I don't expect total security in lowsec, but when I'm in a mission, I don't want uninvited guests, the only players I want showing up are people I invite. Mission DS area's should be cloaked completely from probes, Deadspace should be that - DEAD space, an area that isn't detectable. Other option is to make an deployable cloak generator and launcher, that cloaks the DS gate from probes for a time, maybe half an hour or an hour. To the people that will scream 'carebear' and 'whiner' to this post, I have one thing to say - bite me. I'm not here for your entertainment, I'm here for my own reasons, and if you've got a well setup bubbled gate camp, or you find me out belt ratting of mining in lowsec, then you go ahead and fire if you want to, and take your chances that I'm ready (or not) for you. Probing down my mission and jumping in when I'm tanking numerous other ships, and then taking me out is just cowardice, it's a cheap shot, nothing more. The current probing system has made lowsec mission running like grenading fish in a barrel, with mission runners being the fish.
Horst Schlemmer	Posted - 2006.12.08 09:08:00 - [11] I found my solution Accounts = cancelled I dont want to play on something where i have to live with the thought that even after years of gameplay from one day to another the whole game is broken for the way i like to play, makes it senseless. The missing foresight in developing and releasing patches like this makes me just mad. have fun bye eve
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2006.12.08 11:19:00 - [12] Originally by: Mik Nostrebor How about looking at the problem from a different angle. If there are improved probes should there not be improved probe defences? Some ideas: 1. Signature scrambling - fit a mid slot mod that has a scramble strength to defeat the weaker probes. Make the pirate have to probe several times in order to find you. This unit migh have the added bonus of indentifying who is probing in your area? 2. Ghost probes - if they can launch probes to find you, you should be able to launch probes to imitate your signatue and send them out around your system as decoys. 3. Glitter bombs - A simple device that sends out metallic sand to diffuse and confuse the resolution/accuracy of probes. Makes it easier to find you but impossible to warp to 0 on you but make them warp in at 0-300 km from you. OK so they could get you on their overview and then warp in but at least you have the chance to run. 4. Make a starship out of wood so it has 0 signature to probes....lololol (remember the Mosquito the brits made in the 1940's) Think back over the old WW2 radar and sonar warfare tactics. Mik That won't work, on the harder missions (which are also the ones subjecting you to the gankbears the longest) you need every slot for your PvE fitting. What I want to see is reverting to almost pre-Kali probing, which means min scan deviations so people have to use a succession of probes instead of just one to get a pinpoint result, and a moderate nerf to recon launcher scan times. This would mean just like before Kali you could reliably scan for probes again and get ample warning if you do it dilligently enough, but the probers would not have to deal with the stupid disc issue anymore and could scan with just one probe. --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
Lord WarATron Amarr Vanguard Frontiers Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.12.08 11:31:00 - [13] Edited by: Lord WarATron on 08/12/2006 11:32:05 Originally by: Zacha Nioto Woohoo, completele safety for mission runners in low-sec 4tw! \o/ ... or not. Since there is already complete safety of running complex's in 0.0 due to the keys, I can see mission runners migrating there or wanting a simaler change. --- Slot 10 Akemons Modified 'Noble'Zet 5000 implant +8% Armour FREE
Peter Stuyvesant Amarr	Posted - 2006.12.08 11:37:00 - [14] Originally by: Horst Schlemmer I found my solution Accounts = cancelled lol, knee-jerk reaction ftw, even after that news item was posted...sigh... Not even gonna give CCP a chance to tweak things? Then you don't deserve to play this great game. Cya.
Saltire System-Lords E N I G M A	Posted - 2006.12.08 11:46:00 - [15] bloody carebears, this is a multiplayer game so integrate or quit, yes probing is far far to easy, only nerfs needed are a move of l4's to lowsec and raise the time it takes to probe someone. or heres an idea! get some friends into the mission with you, secure a profitable lowsec l4 system and just kill -10s before they can harm you, jeez going to highsec is not the answer.
Katarine Whip	Posted - 2006.12.08 12:07:00 - [16] Originally by: Horst Schlemmer I found my solution Accounts = cancelled I dont want to play on something where i have to live with the thought that even after years of gameplay from one day to another the whole game is broken for the way i like to play, makes it senseless. The missing foresight in developing and releasing patches like this makes me just mad. have fun bye eve I did the same with my two accounts.
Nardon Gallente	Posted - 2006.12.08 12:40:00 - [17] Originally by: Saltire bloody carebears, this is a multiplayer game so integrate or quit, yes probing is far far to easy, only nerfs needed are a move of l4's to lowsec and raise the time it takes to probe someone. or heres an idea! get some friends into the mission with you, secure a profitable lowsec l4 system and just kill -10s before they can harm you, jeez going to highsec is not the answer. Of course it is. It just might not be the answer you'd like to hear. Cry me a river.
andronymous	Posted - 2006.12.08 12:57:00 - [18] I run missions and I'm all for easy scanning, particularly with exploration, I believe it can add a lot of interesting gameplay. Just seems like CCP need to make it harder (not impossible) to hunt down mission runners. I run missions in low sec because the rewards are better but also because it is a more involved experience having to think about factors external to the mission. After a while mission running without risk gets dull - the risk for mission runners just needs balancing. 1. Less accurate scanning of deadspace and mission areas (if it interferes with MWD it can screw up scanners!) 2. A 'Your Being Scanned' warning - means you have to be alert at all times because 60 secs later your going to get ganked. 3. Don't change it just make the rewards match the risk - T2 BPO or faction drops anyone! ....Some of my ideas Until they fix it I'm staying in high sec doing Cosmos.
d026 Herrscher der Zeit Jagdgeschwader The Pentagram	Posted - 2006.12.08 13:30:00 - [19] i think starting running missions in 0.0 (for guristas) chances are realy smal to get ganked there (new local ftw!).. revards are insane:)
exarienne	Posted - 2006.12.08 13:38:00 - [20] I cancelled my subscription few hours before they announced they are thinkin how to fix it. I did it mostly becouse there was no reaction from ccp for some two weeks after they made this mistake. I had 6 month subscription so i hope it will be fixed before my account will be really suspended, as i do not want to leave eve (in such case my account suspension will have no effect except sending them direct message). Originally by: Leandro Salazar Now I really don't mind being ganked when I am careless, but I DO mind being forced to play the gank or be ganked game every waking moment
Slevin Kalebra	Posted - 2006.12.08 13:47:00 - [21] Originally by: Mik Nostrebor How about looking at the problem from a different angle. If there are improved probes should there not be improved probe defences? Some ideas: 1. Signature scrambling - fit a mid slot mod that has a scramble strength to defeat the weaker probes. Make the pirate have to probe several times in order to find you. This unit migh have the added bonus of indentifying who is probing in your area? 2. Ghost probes - if they can launch probes to find you, you should be able to launch probes to imitate your signatue and send them out around your system as decoys. 3. Glitter bombs - A simple device that sends out metallic sand to diffuse and confuse the resolution/accuracy of probes. Makes it easier to find you but impossible to warp to 0 on you but make them warp in at 0-300 km from you. OK so they could get you on their overview and then warp in but at least you have the chance to run. 4. Make a starship out of wood so it has 0 signature to probes....lololol (remember the Mosquito the brits made in the 1940's) I'm not sure about #4 (there's the whole business of space being a vacuum) but the others are reasonable suggestions. I already posted something along the lines of the Sig Scrambler (although my idea was to have a low-slot module which could replace the now useless (for mission running at least) WCS. Deploying decoy probes that cause several false probe readings for a period of time (e.g a 30 minute duration) would be interesting... if you have several mission runners in the same system all deploying 5 or 6 'crybabies' (name 'borrowed' from Firefly) it might get a bit frustrating for the pirates though. They'd have to be quite expensive and have a fairly low deployment rate.
Sendraks TOHA Heavy Industries	Posted - 2006.12.08 14:02:00 - [22] Originally by: Zed Nash My question to you is: What will CCP have to implement to get you to return to lowsec for all your mission-running needs? Two things. 1) Make it harder to find mission runners with probes, but not as hard as it was pre-Kali. 2) Treble the ISK and LP rewards for Low Sec missions. I'd be quite happy to spend an entire evening, ****ing about a system trying to avoid pirates while trying to do a mission if I knew I was going to get a decent payout. Not only that, but knowing I'd get more ISK would mean I'd be more inclined to put better fittings on my ship, so if I am nailed by a gate camp or group of pirates, there is more in it for them.
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2006.12.08 14:21:00 - [23] They really can't up the rewards to levels that match the risk under the new probing. That would make people who can do missions with little pirate traffic (be it due to odd times or a system out in the boonies) just filthy rich. So they have to reign the risk back in. --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
Tachy	Posted - 2006.12.08 15:44:00 - [24] You ain't saying that the 'invite only' complexes have to be changed to 'free for all'? --==*-- The cause for this is not yet known, but we do have a possible fix in testing. by Sharkbait \| 2006.09.20
Jaded	Posted - 2006.12.08 17:34:00 - [25] Edited by: Jaded on 08/12/2006 17:35:17 Originally by: Zed Nash A question to those lowsec runners who moved to highsec to avoid the bloodbath.......... CCP has announced a "fix" for probing out deadspace missions in the scheduled 12/13 patch. My question to you is: What will CCP have to implement to get you to return to lowsec for all your mission-running needs? Don't think I'm ever going back to low sec. Getting assaulted by PKs while you're already knee-deep in pve just isn't an option, no matter how 'long' it takes them to find you.. IMO there's enough risk from just moving to and from missions in a pve fitted ship. Risk vs. reward is better for the PKs and they're not even in it for profit. I'll just stay in empire for now, or move to 0.0 if I can free up more time for EvE.
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.12.08 17:48:00 - [26] I think the cats out of the bag - if you can kill people in deadspace its going to happen and it will happen a lot now. Theres no way to fix it. A timer wont work - lvl 4s just take to long. You will always die if they go that route. The problem is with the faction loss you cant afford to fail missions often and there no way to stop that. Wherever you went - here you are.
Ghoest	Posted - 2006.12.08 17:51:00 - [27] There is one way I would go back. Increase the rewards(including faction) by about 10 times but only have the bonus apply if you do it in groups. You would still have to lengthen the scan times. Wherever you went - here you are.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.08 18:08:00 - [28] Originally by: Sendraks Originally by: Zed Nash My question to you is: What will CCP have to implement to get you to return to lowsec for all your mission-running needs? Two things. 1) Make it harder to find mission runners with probes, but not as hard as it was pre-Kali. 2) Treble the ISK and LP rewards for Low Sec missions. I'd be quite happy to spend an entire evening, ****ing about a system trying to avoid pirates while trying to do a mission if I knew I was going to get a decent payout. Not only that, but knowing I'd get more ISK would mean I'd be more inclined to put better fittings on my ship, so if I am nailed by a gate camp or group of pirates, there is more in it for them. I don't see that working...pirates will just treble the bounty they ask for. I do have ONE suggestion...make it so player warp scramblers don't work in deadspace. I'll take my chances at the stargates. --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment until you've looked at them.
Lincoln Armm	Posted - 2006.12.08 18:10:00 - [29] Now trhat its been made abundantly clear to pirates how lucrative kiling mission runners can be no system could be too hard, unless it was virtually prohibitive. THe only thing that will get me back to mission running in low sec is locked gates or undetectable deadspace. I will not run mission where I can get jumped. Any attemt to force me to do so will just force me to stop running missions instead.
Ryan Scouse'UK	Posted - 2006.12.08 18:50:00 - [30] Originally by: Takanohana Originally by: Mik Nostrebor 4. Make a starship out of wood so it has 0 signature to probes....lololol (remember the Mosquito the brits made in the 1940's) Minnie ships are made of rust colored duct tape you know.... Saying that I dont Want to chance my Mach in low sec =P
Black Scorpio	Posted - 2006.12.08 19:30:00 - [31] The solution is simple. Require advanced hacking, i.e. lvl 5 to hack a gate, and when it starts to hack the gate, show a message to the mission runner inside the complex that someone is tampering with the gate, and it will take approx (x amount of time.. see decreasing counter) to complete hacking. When the attacker warps in the complex have all (or at least half rats) automatically change to target and scramble him as well. This will give misison runner enough time to do as he pleases. Also allow only 1 person per hacked attempt. If you want to make it harder on the attacker, make hacking attempts chance based after a certain amount of time required to hack the gate!
Razean Minmatar Agony Unleashed	Posted - 2006.12.08 22:00:00 - [32] Originally by: Saltire this is a multiplayer game Therein lies the crux of the problem, missions are entirely single player oriented. There's no multiplayer aspect to them at all, and that should never have happened. Originally by: Ghoest There is one way I would go back. Increase the rewards(including faction) by about 10 times but only have the bonus apply if you do it in groups. You would still have to lengthen the scan times. I was thinking more along the lines of making the bonus 10 times larger and reduce the deadline for the bonus enough that it's impossible for 1 or 2 players to complete in time, would require 3-4 highly skilled players to get the bonus, and 5+ players would be able to reasonably complete the mission in time to get the bonus. Safety in numbers isn't a large enough incentive cause you can solo high sec more productively than teaming low sec missions, and low sec pirates will still be able to harrass a team enough that they're productivity is even lower. It's the one aspect of the game where it is just more productive to solo, and that's a huge flaw in the whole mission system. Bottom line, for an MMO, the mission system is WAY too single player oriented, especially considering it's ENTIRELY single player oriented.
Squrl Gallente	Posted - 2006.12.08 22:28:00 - [33] Have the faction your working for protect you from pirates while your in deadspace let em spawn in like concord if you get attacked.Or just lock the gates no reason for anyone one but you an your gang to be allowed in anyway, after all it is your mission not theirs!
lollerskates Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2006.12.09 03:19:00 - [34] /plays the world's smallest violin
Spike 68 Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2006.12.09 03:21:00 - [35] wait, people can die in low sec to other players? zomg im quitting
natashii Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2006.12.09 03:22:00 - [36] Edited by: natashii on 09/12/2006 03:23:46 Okay...lol First of all. If you are so worried about your precious missions. Do them in empire. When you step into low sec, you are taking a risk. All they did was balance the odds and make low sec the THREAT it is supposed to be. Low sec, is not supposed to guarantee anyone safe passage...that's why IT'S LOW SEC. There is the illusion of security but you are at risk. I don't understand, why you expect to be invincible in a low sec system. As soon as you jump in, you should be on guard for pirates. Pirates aren't a game exploit, they are a part of this game, SAME AS mission runners. You have to be on the lookout at all times when you enter low sec or 0.0. It's just part of the game. So when you are in system, running your mission, keep an eye on local and on your scan. Align if you have to and do what you can to protect yourself. But *****ing about how its ccp's fault is ridiculous. If you are so concerned and/or broke and can't afford to risk losing a ship, go to empire. Stay in empire and mission run. Don't even bother jumping into a low sec system if you aren't prepared to deal with the potential consequences. If you can't deal with the risk, get the hell out of low sec. And if you do venture into low sec, welcome and prepare to die. ;) ============================== lolol old sig had to go...this will have to do
Esaka Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.09 03:34:00 - [37] Yawn, so how long do you guys plan to run your corp op here on the mission forums? We know what can be done and we know what the limits are and i'm not going to buy your crap that the current situation would be in any way or sort balanced. It is not balanced in the time it takes to scan somebody out, it is not balanced in the respect of what equipment is needed to run lvl4 missions and it is not balanced reward wise to make gangs to run lvl4 missions. But ofc the whole situation is worth it for pirates, well at least until nobody is left in low sec. -------------------------------------- Agent & Mission-Info: http://www.eveinfo.com Evewide Market-Info: http://eve-central.com/
natashii Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated	Posted - 2006.12.09 03:34:00 - [38] Originally by: Willo Vasquez Having lost 3 domi's in the space of a week to mission 'invaders' while running level 4's p.s.:Try to be more careful Willo Vasquez a.k.a. Try not to be mentally handicapped when mission running. Then perhaps you wouldn't lose three domi's... ============================== lolol old sig had to go...this will have to do
ScreamingLord Sutch Hand in Mouth	Posted - 2006.12.09 04:02:00 - [39] Originally by: Black Scorpio The solution is simple. Require advanced hacking, i.e. lvl 5 to hack a gate, and when it starts to hack the gate, show a message to the mission runner inside the complex that someone is tampering with the gate, and it will take approx (x amount of time.. see decreasing counter) to complete hacking. When the attacker warps in the complex have all (or at least half rats) automatically change to target and scramble him as well. This will give misison runner enough time to do as he pleases. Also allow only 1 person per hacked attempt. If you want to make it harder on the attacker, make hacking attempts chance based after a certain amount of time required to hack the gate! If you want people to take you seriously then your ideas should be balanced. I think we can all quietly agree that things are in favour of the pirates at the moment. Your idea however, is just ridiculous and no unbiased reader with a modicum of intelligence will take it seriously.
FourQue	Posted - 2006.12.09 08:51:00 - [40] I fail to see what all the fuss is about. Your running missions in low sec! People who play in low security systems understand the risks but enjoy the rewards. Your gaining more loyalty points than the guys running missions in Motsu or Oisio why shouldn't you be exposed to the same risk everyone else in low sec deals with. If you dont like it move to empire and accept less lp's per mission. All the mission runners I know have uber expensive and factioned out ships coupled with heads full of expensive implants. They try and make their lvl 4 missions as simple as possible paying for what they call a constant tank. They sit there hour after hour, locking a target, shooting at it then moving on to the next, never having to worry about their tank. In short mission runners have become fat, rich and lazy. Wake up guys its really not difficult to stop yourself being ganked in a mission, you just need to be playing the game rather than watchin **** and jacking yourself off whilst playing. Move more than 20k away from the entry point and stay alligned how difficult is that ??? Warp off when anyone enters your mission !! I mean come on, I know mission runners are carebares but actually getting ganked in a mission is sad, miners learn and adapt, why cant mission runners ? Pretty sad to think the guys with the training in tanks and guns are actually less adept at dealing with gankers than the guys with skills in refining and manufacturing.
Daimoness	Posted - 2006.12.09 11:46:00 - [41] If you accuse mission-runners in their fat faction-fitted ships lazy, then I wonder what you think of yourself? You seem to get off by shooting people that are already busy battling others. The closest resemblance to that is kicking someone that's already lying on the ground. That said, the new missions that came in with Kali are quite a bit harder, so even the multi-billion faction ships are no guarantee. And as for being aligned and always ready to warp out - you didn't ever do missions, did you? There are quite a few missions with scrambler/webber frigs around. The danger of low-sec has been sufficently increased for me by interdictor bubbles. I don't need the added fun with people warping into my missions and trying to kill me. I will return to low-sec missions once they fix probing of missions so that you can only find them with faction probes (Gravimetric, Ladar etc.) and give them a very small signature radius so chances even with Sift probes are at about 10% per scan. If you think that's way too low, then you have not tried exploration yet. On second thought - no, I don't think I will return to low-sec-missions. I have worked far too hard for my ships and faction fittings to become another entry in some low-sec-ganker's kill list.
Thaddeus Brutor Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2006.12.09 15:49:00 - [42] When probes do not reveal deadspace contents, only the entry gate (which is not in deadspace), and probing speed is drastically reduced. Deadspaces can be locked down in 5 minutes at the moment. It is retarded, currently.
Lrrp Minmatar Gallente Mercantile Exchange	Posted - 2006.12.09 16:12:00 - [43] Rich fat cat mission runner? I've been flying a old stinky trash can called a Typhoon for the last 6 months in low sec missions with mostly all T1 fittings. Never got ganked in a mission either....until after I lost it after Revelations (Thanks Turby...gave me incentive to go buy a Maelstrom). So with my new ship I've relocated to High Sec where there is a lvl 4 agent and ran my first Worlds Collide solo. With the bounties and loot drops I got 20% of my new ships paid back. So I am wondering, why do I want to go back to low sec in a 200 mil ship even if CCP fixes "The Problem". Better LP's? Better isk? Balance out how things are right now and ship loss ver reward, I just don't see the return on investment.
Altanna Ati	Posted - 2006.12.10 03:21:00 - [44] Originally by: Zed Nash A question to those lowsec runners who moved to highsec to avoid the bloodbath.......... CCP has announced a "fix" for probing out deadspace missions in the scheduled 12/13 patch. My question to you is: What will CCP have to implement to get you to return to lowsec for all your mission-running needs? This isn't a "PvP vs non-PvP" debate, if you don't run missions you have no reason to post here. I posted this on another thread, but this is what I think what would be fair: when someone enters a deadspace room who is unganged with anyone already in that room, every NPC in range has a 50% of targeting/retargeting the new guy.
Neuromandis	Posted - 2006.12.10 07:58:00 - [45] Edited by: Neuromandis on 10/12/2006 08:06:48 Edited by: Neuromandis on 10/12/2006 08:05:11 I have been following the stuff all these days. The OP's question is one of the most intelligent I have heard on the matter. Short answer: Nothing. Why? It has nothing to do with risk. Neither with enforced pvp - I chose that when I left the little green dots and went to little orange and red ones. Main reason is because it is TEDIOUS. I haven't lost a single isk to pirates in my home system - apart from a few cruise missiles they were on the receiving end of. They cannot say the same. But getting the hell out and refitting each time someone enters the system is tiresome. VERY tiresome. And, it has reached the simple point that ratting in Providence is a lot (I mean A LOT) more profitable. So, there is simply no reason to return to low-sec. I will either leave or not leave, neither will be permanent. But at the same time, I know that the sigh of relief that people will feel going back into high-sec and realise that there is no more an "I-WIN" button against them will prevent them from returning. EVER. Unless there is twice the whine from the pirates that they can no longer, ever, noway, hunt them, mission runners will not return. Why? Because there is no reason to - unless they are spoiling for a fight. I stayed for the fight, and even brought some friends. But I was no longer missioning, sorry. You make more money running 7-8 missions in a day with half the reward, than running 2 with double the reward. That was just about my drop rate. I'll go rating, because instead of running missions, I'm going back-and-forth to refit for combat. I am tired. I have sore feet. Sorry. In a gatecamp, there is always the possibility of a bigger group coming and tearing you a new one. In a mission, one has an "I win" button that may or may not work, the other has nothing. You cannot defend yourself. So you leave, unless you feel like playing the lamb for someone else's dinner. Low-sec is dead. Pvpers go to 0.0, missioners will go to 0.5. The few that remain won't be able to support a market. pity Only the most drastic of changes is gonna replace that. I dunno what was the intention, but today that I was in a mood to run a few missions I understood that it will take a lot of skill and drastic changes to undo the damage of the new probing system. If it is even possible. Bad, baaaad backfire, I wouldn't have seen it coming either. Good luck with this one, ccp... I am afraid only the most drastic of changes
ToyGirl	Posted - 2006.12.10 09:35:00 - [46] I read a lot in this thread along the lines of: if you don't like the risk go somewhere else, or: finally, mission running was to easy. The major issue is, it's become too easy to spot and intercept missionrunning. PreKali it was very difficult to locate a complex and enter it, now it is way too easy. I've heard of pie-rats occasionally jumping a missionrunner, but that did not happen a lot. Now it seems almost a given situation. I think the simplifying of using probes was a bad move, but it seems unlikely that it will be turned back. Suggestions on aggro-ing newcomers seems to me a good thing, but will it be enough? On outfitting your ship: config it for PvP. May make missions more difficult, but that should be not a reason to complain. On griefing by taking the mission-loot or such, I think that will pass. Something similar happened in a previous upgrade with ore-thieving, but you rarely read about it nowadays.
Molech Amarr	Posted - 2006.12.10 12:27:00 - [47] ------------------------ Bring me your first born
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.10 13:35:00 - [48] Aggroing incomers won't work...once the incomer leaves, those rats will remained in an aggro'd state...and targetting will revert back to the mission runner. What you're basically suggesting is an ability of an incomer to insta-aggro all rats. Not good. --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment until you've looked at them.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.10 13:36:00 - [49] Aggroing incomers won't work...once the incomer leaves, those rats will remained in an aggro'd state...and targetting will revert back to the mission runner. What you're basically suggesting is an ability of an incomer to insta-aggro all rats. Not good. --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment until you've looked at them.
Willo Vasquez Gallente Raptus Regaliter	Posted - 2006.12.10 17:51:00 - [50] Originally by: natashii Edited by: natashii on 09/12/2006 04:16:17 Originally by: Willo Vasquez Having lost 3 domi's in the space of a week to mission 'invaders' while running level 4's p.s.:Try to be more careful Willo Vasquez Then perhaps you wouldn't lose three domi's... Your post serves no purpose except to reinforce my point, for which I thank you.
Grey Area Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.10 19:38:00 - [51] Edited by: Grey Area on 10/12/2006 19:41:52 Originally by: Neuromandis Bad, baaaad backfire, I wouldn't have seen it coming either. But lots of us DID see it coming...easy scanning, plus WCS nerf = lots of dead mission runners. Lots of dead mission runners = lots of going back to high sec. This is what I and LOTS of others said would happen. And of course lots of priates flamed us and said we were "whining". Lots of pirates are of course, STILL saying it. But all it really would have taken was for CCP to add two and two and get four, and it could have been prevented. Now, unfortunately, I agree with you...it's going to take one HELL of a big change to get people back...something that used to happen maybe one mission in 20, and then only if you weren't paying attention, now happens on one mission in TWO, and no matter how much care you take. Going back to the 1 in 20 situation is unlikely to help because the mission runners now have that bad experience of being ganked. Equally, I have a bad feeling that CCP's "fix" will more likely take us back to 1 in 10, which will scare off even MOR mission runners. Hence my suggestion...stop warp scramblers working in deadspace. A prepared pirate team could STILL hunt them, but would have to flush them out of deadspace first. Adn they'd still get to jump them at gatecamps of course. --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment until you've looked at them.
LICENCE2KILL Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.12.10 19:40:00 - [52] ze
Mik Nostrebor Minmatar ORKS	Posted - 2006.12.11 01:44:00 - [53] Originally by: Takanohana Originally by: Mik Nostrebor 4. Make a starship out of wood so it has 0 signature to probes....lololol (remember the Mosquito the brits made in the 1940's) Minnie ships are made of rust colored duct tape you know.... LOL. Yes and that is why minnie ships have smaller sig radiuses :) The sad thing is that the rust colouring is made of real rust... oh yeah, and you forgot that there is spit in the mix as well. Spit and duck tape... and chewing gum in the tech II ships.
Sorela Gallente	Posted - 2006.12.11 03:04:00 - [54] My view on this is very simple. In no way shape or form is it acceptable that I might be jumped for PvP while I'm currently fitted for and engaging in very risky PvE. That doesn't mean I want missions to be safe. It simply means some mechanism must exist for me to disengage from PvE and somehow refit my ship before the engagement occurs. Now if they change mission mechanics somehow such that belt ratting setups were acceptable in a mission then I'd certainly wave the "refit my ship" portion of things. I'm not interested in discussing how that can be achieved honestly. Anyone who thinks that it's carebear though because people want a way to to enter a PvP fight as fresh as their opponent though is just off his/her rocker.
Arain	Posted - 2006.12.11 05:35:00 - [55] Started to reply to this but it ended up as a PvP verses PvE arguement, so suffice to say CCP screwed up and had better figure out how to return the threat level back to its previous level or lose a large portion of thier low sec population.
Tiodus Gallente City of Certitude	Posted - 2006.12.11 05:49:00 - [56] Yay lvl4 agents in hi-sec, guess who isn't even gonna spit in the direction of low-sec. I really didn't know this before I read this thread.
Lorn Zolog Beasts of Burden Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.12.11 06:57:00 - [57] Edited by: Lorn Zolog on 11/12/2006 06:59:47 The thing you have to realize is that CCP created Security Ratings for a reason. If you don't want to have to deal with pirates then stay in high sec that's what its there for. If you want to run missions in low sec you're gonna have to be smart about it. Pirates are supposed to be able to find you in low sec that's why CCP has made these changes, they knew what they were doing and whining at them won't get them to change it. There's actually a very simple solution to low-sec pirates, join a corp with other people that want to run low sec missions that can help you fight off the pirates. It's really not tough at all for a corp to secure a system as long as it doesn't have too much traffic. Hell I'll admit I'm a pirate but a number of the people in my corp are major mission runners. They are able to run low sec missions all day long without worrying about pirates because the pvpers in our corp kill anyone else, pirates included, that wander into our area. The solution is not to make it harder for pirates to find mission runners, but rather for mission runners to make friends.
FreeHansje Gallente	Posted - 2006.12.11 07:41:00 - [58] Quote: There's actually a very simple solution to low-sec pirates, join a corp with other people that want to run low sec missions that can help you fight off the pirates You do realize, that most missionrunners are loners, solo-players? What can you do solo against pie-rats jumping you as easy as it is now? And please, let's not get into another 'EVE is PVP only' thread, with PvP translated as spacecombat. ----- FreeHansje Yes, I'm a Newby. So sue me!
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries Confederation of Independent Corporations	Posted - 2006.12.11 10:51:00 - [59] Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 11/12/2006 10:54:29 Originally by: Lorn Zolog Pirates are supposed to be able to find you in low sec that's why CCP has made these changes, they knew what they were doing and whining at them won't get them to change it.. Lol, you really don't know much about CCPs modus operandi, do you? I will bet you my wallet that they did not think even a single second about the impact the easy-mode probing would have on mission runners. They saw how it makes REAL PvP more interesting (and with that I wholeheartedly agree) and implemented it. Mission runners don't really play into CCP considerations much since pretty much all of them are hardcore PvPers who just ignore mission runners. However, runners DO provide quite a chunk of CCPs income, so after the whinestorm it is being adressed. Without details forthcoming though, there is no telling whether their fix will make a difference or not though Besides pirates always were able to find runners in lowsec (with the exception of offplane missions which really were not THAT common, it just required some RL skill and time, i.e. it was an effort, so the gankbears wouldn't do it which now they do), but if you were smart you could protect yourself. Now every idiot can do it and the protection doesn't work anymore. Quote: If you don't want to have to deal with pirates then stay in high sec that's what its there for. Thing is, I DO want to deal with pirates, and I want to run missions. Thats why I live in lowsec. But I don't want to do both at the same time. I am sure many a real pirate enjoys the occasional triple 1.8 mil spawn as well as their PvP, but how would they enjoy a dozen of those 1.8 mil NPCs suddenly attacking them while their tank is already 90% occupied by a PvP engagement? And don't get me wrong, I want missions to be accessible to pirates too, but it should be an effort and there should be a warning for the smart runner (other than a hostile presence in local). Probing mission runners should be an art that seperates the chaff from the wheat among the pirates. --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
Tanya Raskov	Posted - 2006.12.11 14:06:00 - [60] Probing deadspace areas should be impossible. 1. Mission description usually says there is some sort of covert operation in there and that it was discovered by some great effort or by chance !!!!!! Therefore its utterly stupid that simple probing by every idiot can find such COVERT operation in mere seconds. 2. Missions are tied to agents - THEREFORE you should be able to find such spots only by contacting agent. Idea follows. You are in low sec, some mission runner annoys you. You go to agent ( same as his or enemy agent) and ask to betray/scout so you can ambush him at next mission. Cost could be something like 10k loyalty points/standing point of person you are trying to find. CCP should really get it together and scrap up a good idea from time to time.
Black Scorpio	Posted - 2006.12.11 15:40:00 - [61] Originally by: ScreamingLord Sutch Originally by: Black Scorpio The solution is simple. Require advanced hacking, i.e. lvl 5 to hack a gate, and when it starts to hack the gate, show a message to the mission runner inside the complex that someone is tampering with the gate, and it will take approx (x amount of time.. see decreasing counter) to complete hacking. When the attacker warps in the complex have all (or at least half rats) automatically change to target and scramble him as well. This will give misison runner enough time to do as he pleases. Also allow only 1 person per hacked attempt. If you want to make it harder on the attacker, make hacking attempts chance based after a certain amount of time required to hack the gate! If you want people to take you seriously then your ideas should be balanced. I think we can all quietly agree that things are in favour of the pirates at the moment. Your idea however, is just ridiculous and no unbiased reader with a modicum of intelligence will take it seriously. Oh really? and how is that imbalanced? Please provide explanation to your statements, otherwise it's pure trolling!
Lrrp Minmatar Gallente Mercantile Exchange	Posted - 2006.12.11 19:53:00 - [62] Here's how quick this all happens and how it is totally in favor of gankers. A alt comes in system and scans for a mission. Meanwhile the gank squad is sitting outside the system and when word is given they jump in system and promptly jump to the mission. Now if you are just going into the mission you have all of 15-30 sec to notice bad guys in system and react. If you are heading towards a mission gate and a warp out is behind you, A BS takes 10 - 15 secs to turn, align and get into warp. By that time gankers have jumped into mission, scrambled you and have taken you down with a combination of command ships, HAC's and recon cruisers. So unless you have a anti ganker squad set up and waiting for this to happen, you either sit in station or go to Hi sec as getting people organised to sit around and wait for gankers is more difficult than people who gank regularly getting their squad out and looking for easy pickings. I say give the lone mission runners real tools to counter this, else the lo sec agents are going to be sitting idle. Until then I can live without the greater bounus and LP's hi sec agents give as I can still make good bounty money and loot by doing hi sec lvl 4's. In short I don't play the game to give someone else a cheap thrill to kill my ship while in a mission. No whine, just facts
Akira2501	Posted - 2006.12.11 20:38:00 - [63] Edited by: Akira2501 on 11/12/2006 20:42:26 The solution to pirates jumping in on missions is simple. Change the NPC AI a bit so that they agro and warp scramble the pirates, not just the mission runner. This creates risk for the pirates looking for easy targets. Then itÆs fair. Secondly, the rewards for low-sec mission running should increase as the threat increases.
Lord Artemis Filthy Wyrm	Posted - 2006.12.11 21:11:00 - [64] Scanning Pre-Kali too hard (from the majority) Scanning Post-Kali too easy (from the majority) Middle ground is what is needed to fit between what pirates want and what mission runners want. You clearly can't have it sway to either side. Rational and thought out responses/complaints will get listened to a hella lot faster than "Oh crap this sucks change it before I am teh dead!!111!1!!" To those that type "OMG cancelling accounts!!" you people make me sick, take yourself and the rest of your impatient instant gratification slobs and move along. This has been and seemingly will always be a game of thinking/strategy and patience. If you can't do both your pretty much as*sed out and don't let the door hit you on the way out. _____________________________ ... this space for rent ...
madaluap Gallente Mercenary Forces Exquisite Malevolance	Posted - 2006.12.11 22:50:00 - [65] Edited by: madaluap on 11/12/2006 22:49:58 I dont mind anymore. the UBERPVP can whine all they want, but he! i know a hell lot better that both parties are needed and that risk vs reward is royaly ******. So what am i gonna do, im gonna head into 0.0 to do some save npcing. far saver than running lvl 4 in lowsec _________________________________________________ Breetime
ScreamingLord Sutch Hand in Mouth	Posted - 2006.12.12 02:45:00 - [66] Originally by: Black Scorpio Oh really? and how is that imbalanced? Please provide explanation to your statements, otherwise it's pure trolling! Your idea... Would require each person in the attacking gang to have hacking V This would be pointless since the person running the mission would get a popup saying "ohnoes, pirates coming!!!" and warp off. It's pointless.
Concero	Posted - 2006.12.13 14:41:00 - [67] A suggestion on how to modify probing post Revelations For the mission runner: Using modern warfare as an example, if you are being scanned using active radar or sonar you know about it. If you have been locked by said active radar or sonar you know about it. I donÆt see any argument for why this shouldnÆt apply to the current probes in EVE. I think that all ships should have a two stage alarm. First alarm lets you know that someone is probing you. Second lets you know that they have pinpointed you. Tie this in with a skill or two that allows you to use the equipment and increase your warning time. Maybe have a dedicated module or have it built into the ship not sure. Modern warfare has anti-radar/sonar weaponry. Why shouldnÆt EVE? I think some sort of anti-probe missile or single use anti-probe drone should be able to be used to shoot down launched probes. One shot kills. The missiles would be similar to defenders as in they could be loaded into any launcher, say heavy, cruise or torp. Expensive maybe, at least probe price. For the Pirate: To avoid the problems that active scanning brings, passive scanning is often now used. I suggest another branch of passive scan probes. These are more difficult to use, take longer to pin down the location of a target, but have the advantage that the target gets no warning. Another skill or two to speed up probing and improve accuracy of results. Conclusion: Two types of probes. Active probes allow fast location and target triangulation to the disadvantage of alerting the target and possibly having your probes shot down before you can get a result. Passive probes are slower, less accurate and make it less likely to a triangulation accurate enough to warp close to the target without significant effort but with the advantage that the target is unaware that he is being probed.
Stylom Gallente Phoibe Enterprises Eden's Fire	Posted - 2006.12.13 15:24:00 - [68] The easy solution would have been, to move every Level 4 Agent out of high sec. That would have given the risk & reward balance back that most of the post seem to be suggesting.
Iain Curtis	Posted - 2006.12.13 15:39:00 - [69] Originally by: Spike 68 wait, people can die in low sec to other players? zomg im quitting Spike, Yes, this is true. And if you weren't aware of that, then maybe you should have quit some time ago.
Iain Curtis	Posted - 2006.12.13 15:52:00 - [70] Originally by: FourQue I fail to see what all the fuss is about. Your running missions in low sec! People who play in low security systems understand the risks but enjoy the rewards. Your gaining more loyalty points than the guys running missions in Motsu or Oisio why shouldn't you be exposed to the same risk everyone else in low sec deals with... FourQue, Chap, the OP was asking what it would take to get players who were originally in lo-sec to return. Therefore it would be acceptable to acknowledge that they were already there in the first place and are more than aware of the pitfalls. Not wishing to derail the thread and type out instructions to you vis-a-vis what it's actually like running missions, may I politely suggest bthat you stick to replying to the OP? And if you're not an ex-lo-sec mission runner here to answer the OP's question, what exactly are you here for? Quote: If you dont like it move to empire and accept less lp's per mission. Lol, go back to the OP's post and re-read. Quote: All the mission runners I know have uber expensive and factioned out ships coupled with heads full of expensive implants. They try and make their lvl 4 missions as simple as possible paying for what they call a constant tank. They sit there hour after hour, locking a target, shooting at it then moving on to the next, never having to worry about their tank. In short mission runners have become fat, rich and lazy... And what exactly has that got to do with you? Not that I agree, but I fail utterly to understand where your objection is coming from? Please, in all seriousness, reply as to how this affects you so much. Quote: Wake up guys its really not difficult to stop yourself being ganked in a mission... Well, sir, how about you school all of us? All of us that is who have been running missions since before you got off your mother's t1t, i.e last week. Quote: ...you just need to be playing the game rather than watchin ** and jacking yourself off whilst playing... Dear oh dear oh dear. That just says it all really. My dear boy, if you are going to insult people, then take a bit longer and make it a good one. Quote:** ...Move more than 20k away from the entry point and stay alligned how difficult is that ??? Warp off when anyone enters your mission !! I mean come on, I know mission runners are carebares but actually getting ganked in a mission is sad, miners learn and adapt, why cant mission runners ? Pretty sad to think the guys with the training in tanks and guns are actually less adept at dealing with gankers than the guys with skills in refining and manufacturing. You have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about really, do you? Just another inexperienced plank wandering around the forums posting inane drivel based on assumption, inexperience, a lack of moral fibre and basically a very narrow-minded person. I have no idea what drives you to breathe, but if your lungs ever had a clue about the tripe that spews from your mouth they'd be filling out their own donor cards and shutting themselves down. Now go away and get back to humping your neighbours dog little boy. No offence, of course.
Nautius Maximus	Posted - 2006.12.13 17:16:00 - [71] Quote: Hence my suggestion...stop warp scramblers working in deadspace. A prepared pirate team could STILL hunt them, but would have to flush them out of deadspace first. Adn they'd still get to jump them at gatecamps of course. I think that might be the best and easiest fix: no scrambling in Deadspace (including NPCs). You can't use MWDs there, so there's a precedent. And when has a mission runner ever had to scramble an NPC? The ONLY reason for scrambling in Deadspace is to snare mission runners. Pirates can still jump in, but the runner should be able to escape if he's playing heads-up. Quote: "In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move." --Douglas Adams
Yasuki Orie Gallente	Posted - 2006.12.13 20:00:00 - [72] Edited by: Yasuki Orie on 13/12/2006 20:00:36 Another bigger and more dramatic fix is to have CONCORD respond to mission invasions in low sec but let it be a variable time thing like a % cumulative chance per 30 sec equal to 10x the security level of the system. For example, 0.4 is a 4% chance after 0 seconds, 8% after 30 seconds, 12% after 60 seconds and so on. This would introduce an appropriate amount of risk to mission invaders.
Tsanse Kinske WeMeanYouKnowHarm	Posted - 2006.12.13 20:26:00 - [73] Originally by: Yasuki Orie Edited by: Yasuki Orie on 13/12/2006 20:00:36 Another bigger and more dramatic fix is to have CONCORD respond to mission invasions in low sec but let it be a variable time thing like a % cumulative chance per 30 sec equal to 10x the security level of the system. For example, 0.4 is a 4% chance after 0 seconds, 8% after 30 seconds, 12% after 60 seconds and so on. This would introduce an appropriate amount of risk to mission invaders. That would be a funny way to address it. Concord destroys interlopers in a mission, but won't do anything about the rats? Sorry, no thanks. Right now it's looking like the issue is nearly moot anyway, as probing seems to have gotten way more difficult. * * * In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -Douglas Adams, writing about EVE
Magnus Card Caldari	Posted - 2006.12.13 22:03:00 - [74] Originally by: FourQue I mean come on, I know mission runners are carebares but actually getting ganked in a mission is sad, miners learn and adapt, why cant mission runners ? Pretty sad to think the guys with the training in tanks and guns are actually less adept at dealing with gankers than the guys with skills in refining and manufacturing. The problem I see is that there is very little risk vs huge rewards for the Gankers. Until you balance that your point is completely moot.
Sonorra Baki	Posted - 2006.12.13 22:31:00 - [75] Originally by: Magnus Card The problem I see is that there is very little risk vs huge rewards for the Gankers. Until you balance that your point is completely moot. Right now, its like watching 10 guys beating at a guy in a bar who's holding his own, but you pick up a bat and smack him down from behind.

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [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.