Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Garr Anders
Minmatar Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 08:01:00 -
[301]
Edited by: Garr Anders on 23/02/2007 07:58:58 What is the big difference between pirate PvP and PvE mission runners setup ?
There is almost none. Both are already heavy streamlined leading to the next question:
Why are PvP pirates in a heavy advantage toward PvE mission runners ?
Because Mission runners have this very streamlined mission setup, they know what to resist, what damage to tank, what damage to do, how much DPS you have to take and how much to deal, .. which in return this leads to a very streamlined PvP pirate setup, you know what resist your possible target is going to tank and what he is going to deal.
The point that PvE is so predictable makes it so easy for PvP pirates to predict their possible mission runner targets in low sec.
What makes PvE so predictable?
The fixed setups for NPCs and the not existing AI. NPCs just target what gets first into their aggro range and that's it.
If you want to have a more PvP (or intelligent) like behaviour you need a better AI which leads to an aggro/threat rating for ships/mods/NPCs/combinations.
You need to go through your database of items and ships and a very large set of common ship/gang/fleet setups and rate their threat to decided which is "primary", just like players do when they encounter each other or NPCs.
Garr Anders - Minmatar
|
Krutis Raa
Caldari Sarlacc Pit Industries
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 08:01:00 -
[302]
I mostly read the the forums and don't write anything. I'm a carebear, yes. I love Eve as i can trade and make missions.
So if you force carebears and people who loving to trade over the borders of the Empire into your "PvP"-Playstyle, they will be unhappy. To move as example a LVL 6 mission completley into 0.4 - 0.0 will be unreachable for people like me, as i DON'T want get into PvP, i love other aspects of the game like the awesome trading and producing. Don t think that everyone wants to PvP! And i don t like the warfare in the empires....i don t want one sitting in Gallente space and don t have the option anymore to move freely in all other empires...
Please don t press high sec pilots in a PvP way because you think its good for everyone, its not!
|
Garr Anders
Minmatar Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 08:01:00 -
[303]
Edited by: Garr Anders on 23/02/2007 07:58:58 What is the big difference between pirate PvP and PvE mission runners setup ?
There is almost none. Both are already heavy streamlined leading to the next question:
Why are PvP pirates in a heavy advantage toward PvE mission runners ?
Because Mission runners have this very streamlined mission setup, they know what to resist, what damage to tank, what damage to do, how much DPS you have to take and how much to deal, .. which in return this leads to a very streamlined PvP pirate setup, you know what resist your possible target is going to tank and what he is going to deal.
The point that PvE is so predictable makes it so easy for PvP pirates to predict their possible mission runner targets in low sec.
What makes PvE so predictable?
The fixed setups for NPCs and the not existing AI. NPCs just target what gets first into their aggro range and that's it.
If you want to have a more PvP (or intelligent) like behaviour you need a better AI which leads to an aggro/threat rating for ships/mods/NPCs/combinations.
You need to go through your database of items and ships and a very large set of common ship/gang/fleet setups and rate their threat to decided which is "primary", just like players do when they encounter each other or NPCs.
Garr Anders - Minmatar
|
Krutis Raa
Caldari Sarlacc Pit Industries
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 08:01:00 -
[304]
I mostly read the the forums and don't write anything. I'm a carebear, yes. I love Eve as i can trade and make missions.
So if you force carebears and people who loving to trade over the borders of the Empire into your "PvP"-Playstyle, they will be unhappy. To move as example a LVL 6 mission completley into 0.4 - 0.0 will be unreachable for people like me, as i DON'T want get into PvP, i love other aspects of the game like the awesome trading and producing. Don t think that everyone wants to PvP! And i don t like the warfare in the empires....i don t want one sitting in Gallente space and don t have the option anymore to move freely in all other empires...
Please don t press high sec pilots in a PvP way because you think its good for everyone, its not!
|
killmc
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 08:02:00 -
[305]
ok i got 3 words for you Oveur your fired
why is that eve hate pve all the delvpers are pies or in bob so they dont like us high space mish runers i have no desire to go to 00 no point i biuld and mine manly so what point of 00 for me or my corp.
ok lets leave lvl 1 to lvl 4 as is make lvl 5 for cap ship and .4 lower fine let not make us carebeers mad and leave game with out us there whould be no game or every one be flying in new player ships only as there whould be no market cant pvp with out a ship that can do it and if eve dont like what i have to say that fine i can take my $$ some where eles alonge with my outer eve i pay for not much you say but in 4 to 6 months eve team might be looking for new jobs as they killed eve and now are wandering what whent wronge as it stand now i tired of this need for need to neff every thang in to pvp mind set and guting pve in your sick twisted minds how you say pve is form of pvp i dont know dont care as i see it make to many mad and it be back to day when eve might have 5k players ad you be cryig in to your beers at the pub
now to fix thangs 1 dont change mish lvl 1 thow lvl 4 2 add lvl 5 and 6 for cap ships low space only lvl 5 be solo cap ship pve lvl 6 be gang or corp capship pve
3 as cap ship cant use deadspace that means that thow mish for cap ship must be open space mish as mwd on fighters dont work in deadspace
4 why price are up in markets that easy you stiped system of belts = less supply more cost that life you know how to fix this
5 all ship auto piolts should auto warp to 0 in .5 higher
6 ban all workers from ccp from eve what they say is of no point in form how eve should be played
7 fix ships base speed it crazzy low for space ships
8 most of all drop this attide about pve and carebeers we are eve and pvp is not with out us there be no pvp or fvf as there be no ships in eve
|
killmc
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 08:02:00 -
[306]
ok i got 3 words for you Oveur your fired
why is that eve hate pve all the delvpers are pies or in bob so they dont like us high space mish runers i have no desire to go to 00 no point i biuld and mine manly so what point of 00 for me or my corp.
ok lets leave lvl 1 to lvl 4 as is make lvl 5 for cap ship and .4 lower fine let not make us carebeers mad and leave game with out us there whould be no game or every one be flying in new player ships only as there whould be no market cant pvp with out a ship that can do it and if eve dont like what i have to say that fine i can take my $$ some where eles alonge with my outer eve i pay for not much you say but in 4 to 6 months eve team might be looking for new jobs as they killed eve and now are wandering what whent wronge as it stand now i tired of this need for need to neff every thang in to pvp mind set and guting pve in your sick twisted minds how you say pve is form of pvp i dont know dont care as i see it make to many mad and it be back to day when eve might have 5k players ad you be cryig in to your beers at the pub
now to fix thangs 1 dont change mish lvl 1 thow lvl 4 2 add lvl 5 and 6 for cap ships low space only lvl 5 be solo cap ship pve lvl 6 be gang or corp capship pve
3 as cap ship cant use deadspace that means that thow mish for cap ship must be open space mish as mwd on fighters dont work in deadspace
4 why price are up in markets that easy you stiped system of belts = less supply more cost that life you know how to fix this
5 all ship auto piolts should auto warp to 0 in .5 higher
6 ban all workers from ccp from eve what they say is of no point in form how eve should be played
7 fix ships base speed it crazzy low for space ships
8 most of all drop this attide about pve and carebeers we are eve and pvp is not with out us there be no pvp or fvf as there be no ships in eve
|
Krunk Burkel
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 08:05:00 -
[307]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Krunk Burkel This plan is DOA as far as I'm concerned.
If this goes through as is then I will be moving... not to low sec or 0.0 though, to another game.
I was hopeing the blog would be about adding LVL V's at all security levels and fixing things like whole room drone aggro but I guess thats asking to much. Some of the ideas are good, but they won't make any difference to me if the best I can get is a dumbed down LVL IV in empire.
CCP just doesn't seem to understand that there is nothing they can do to force people into low sec. They can easily force a large percentage of the player base out of the game though. Well too bad, so sad for me and many others but maybe one or two of the dev's should have a chat with the people over at Sony before they jump into this one.
If you ut it so, it will ahe the results to spead the people in low sec: Now 300.000 accounts: 135.000 0.0 = 40%, 30.000 in low sec = 10% 135.000 in high sec 40% after 200.000 accounts 120.00 in 0.0 = 60%. 25.000 in low sec = 12,5% 55.000 in high sec = 22,5% Cleary the percentage in low sec and 0.0 will increase.
LOL. Yes you are quite right. This is obviously the type of strategic thinking being done down at dev HQ. I'm sure the book keeping department won't see it exactly the same way though.
|
Krunk Burkel
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 08:05:00 -
[308]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Krunk Burkel This plan is DOA as far as I'm concerned.
If this goes through as is then I will be moving... not to low sec or 0.0 though, to another game.
I was hopeing the blog would be about adding LVL V's at all security levels and fixing things like whole room drone aggro but I guess thats asking to much. Some of the ideas are good, but they won't make any difference to me if the best I can get is a dumbed down LVL IV in empire.
CCP just doesn't seem to understand that there is nothing they can do to force people into low sec. They can easily force a large percentage of the player base out of the game though. Well too bad, so sad for me and many others but maybe one or two of the dev's should have a chat with the people over at Sony before they jump into this one.
If you ut it so, it will ahe the results to spead the people in low sec: Now 300.000 accounts: 135.000 0.0 = 40%, 30.000 in low sec = 10% 135.000 in high sec 40% after 200.000 accounts 120.00 in 0.0 = 60%. 25.000 in low sec = 12,5% 55.000 in high sec = 22,5% Cleary the percentage in low sec and 0.0 will increase.
LOL. Yes you are quite right. This is obviously the type of strategic thinking being done down at dev HQ. I'm sure the book keeping department won't see it exactly the same way though.
|
Iriana freaks
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 08:13:00 -
[309]
So the first thing i'm thinking after reading this is: This summer i'm going to quit EVE. Yea it's about time to do something about missions but don't nerf those lvl 4s even further come on. And someone should really get an asswooping for even suggesting to downgrade missionrewards.
The idea of corperate missions is cool but don't touch the lvl 4s as they are now.
|
Iriana freaks
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 08:13:00 -
[310]
So the first thing i'm thinking after reading this is: This summer i'm going to quit EVE. Yea it's about time to do something about missions but don't nerf those lvl 4s even further come on. And someone should really get an asswooping for even suggesting to downgrade missionrewards.
The idea of corperate missions is cool but don't touch the lvl 4s as they are now.
|
|
Frug
Zenithal Harvest
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 08:29:00 -
[311]
They want to introduce higher level missions. You high sec mission runners (of which I am one) probably like that idea.
Realize that there will be a point when you can no longer solo missions. Maybe you can take your uber CNR and plow through the new level 5's once they're in. But not 6's, and certainly not 7's.
You'd have to find a gang of mates to do it with anyway and that cuts about half of you out of the equation. For the rest of the mission runners who have a gang to fight with, you can go into low sec and actually defend yourself.
That's the point I think Oveur is tryin' to make that's lost on people.
- - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - or automatic signatures - - - - - - - - |
Frug
Zenithal Harvest
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 08:29:00 -
[312]
They want to introduce higher level missions. You high sec mission runners (of which I am one) probably like that idea.
Realize that there will be a point when you can no longer solo missions. Maybe you can take your uber CNR and plow through the new level 5's once they're in. But not 6's, and certainly not 7's.
You'd have to find a gang of mates to do it with anyway and that cuts about half of you out of the equation. For the rest of the mission runners who have a gang to fight with, you can go into low sec and actually defend yourself.
That's the point I think Oveur is tryin' to make that's lost on people.
- - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - or automatic signatures - - - - - - - - |
CPL Nobbes
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 09:01:00 -
[313]
Quote: For the rest of the mission runners who have a gang to fight with, you can go into low sec and actually defend yourself.
This is not a point people are missing it's a point they are ignoring because it's rubbish. A smallish gank team WILL prevail over a larger mission dedicated team. Unless you have 1/2 your crew come mission ready and the other half come pvp ready. Even then by the time this madness is institued the gank teams will be like seagulls on a seaside chip, thus ensuring small corps based around say a group of RL friends will be effectively shut out from these agents and missions. But it would appear that CCP is deliberatly trying to excise those types of corps and players from the world of eve so given that the changes will be quite efficacious.
|
CPL Nobbes
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 09:01:00 -
[314]
Quote: For the rest of the mission runners who have a gang to fight with, you can go into low sec and actually defend yourself.
This is not a point people are missing it's a point they are ignoring because it's rubbish. A smallish gank team WILL prevail over a larger mission dedicated team. Unless you have 1/2 your crew come mission ready and the other half come pvp ready. Even then by the time this madness is institued the gank teams will be like seagulls on a seaside chip, thus ensuring small corps based around say a group of RL friends will be effectively shut out from these agents and missions. But it would appear that CCP is deliberatly trying to excise those types of corps and players from the world of eve so given that the changes will be quite efficacious.
|
Amateratsu
Caldari Terra Incognita Confederation of Independent Corporations
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 10:13:00 -
[315]
Most of the proposed changes are great, However i think Lv4 missions should be left alone, they are fine as they are. I have no problem with lv5 and above being restricted to 0.4 and below. but don't take away or nerf the current lv4 missions in empire, they have been nerfed Enough times already. Yes eve is a pvp orientated game, but as oveur said pvp is not just about blowing other players up all the time, not everyone wants to play shoot em ups Let the pvp'ers have their fun with lv5 and above and let the industrialists have their fun with lv4's as they are currently.
|
Amateratsu
Caldari Terra Incognita Confederation of Independent Corporations
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 10:13:00 -
[316]
Most of the proposed changes are great, However i think Lv4 missions should be left alone, they are fine as they are. I have no problem with lv5 and above being restricted to 0.4 and below. but don't take away or nerf the current lv4 missions in empire, they have been nerfed Enough times already. Yes eve is a pvp orientated game, but as oveur said pvp is not just about blowing other players up all the time, not everyone wants to play shoot em ups Let the pvp'ers have their fun with lv5 and above and let the industrialists have their fun with lv4's as they are currently.
|
Garr Anders
Minmatar Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 10:37:00 -
[317]
As a general comment toward the proposed changes, yes most of them sound great and it for sure is a good idea.
One thing maybe as myself being branded by SWGs NGE and to avoid the huge outcry of the current lvl 4 running player base is honestly maybe just to expand to lvl 5 and above but do not touch the current level 4 missions.
Those who are currently not in favour of the changes fear for their playstyle while adding the new levels is generating new content for those interested in an easier transition from PvE to PvP.
Those who dislike the new stuff can keep doing what they like, those who want to move on can do so with the new stuff.
Garr Anders - Minmatar
|
Garr Anders
Minmatar Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 10:37:00 -
[318]
As a general comment toward the proposed changes, yes most of them sound great and it for sure is a good idea.
One thing maybe as myself being branded by SWGs NGE and to avoid the huge outcry of the current lvl 4 running player base is honestly maybe just to expand to lvl 5 and above but do not touch the current level 4 missions.
Those who are currently not in favour of the changes fear for their playstyle while adding the new levels is generating new content for those interested in an easier transition from PvE to PvP.
Those who dislike the new stuff can keep doing what they like, those who want to move on can do so with the new stuff.
Garr Anders - Minmatar
|
Arknen
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 10:47:00 -
[319]
I like some of the ideas suggested but I'm not sure I understand the reasoning behind many parts of the plans.
Introduce new higher level missions - check, people have been waiting for stuff harder than the current lvl4s for a while. I mean I always wanted to take that fleet in the last part of Human Cattle, would be awesome if they were actually there to be shot at rather than avoided. Similarly, taking a group of 3/4+ in BSs to shoot down a rogue carrier plus fighters, that would be incredible for those players who never otherwise have the opportunity to engage in alliance PVP.
Escalating missions, new more challenging types of missions and behaviour - check, too many people afk missions. BUT this needs to be balanced with the risk that you are going to lose your ship because you can't plan exactly for what is going to happen. I like the addition of some uncertainty though, it adds more excitement rather than the only real excitement being 'can I survive the 45 second lag at jump in when everything aggros'? Make missions more than just aggro management and range.
Pooling LPs - woot! Now I don't have to wait for a crappy offer from my lvl2 agent just so I can 0 the LP and move up, same with the lvl3 to 4 move etc.
However...
Oveur states they are wanting to improve the PVE element of the game (agents etc) and then they do it by forcing people into lowsec and PVP - huh? I really don't understand the thinking behind that one. People PVE in EVE because its an awesome game, they like flying spaceships (come on every young persons' dream surely) and they can have fun doing it BUT at their own pace. Getting ganked by pirates is not fun as you can see from the reaction to some of the changes. If you take away that fun element for people they will leave.
Move some of the harder lvl4s into lvl5s and make lvl5s and up capital ship capable - huh? so missions that can now be solo'd by a BS can now be solo'd by capital ships? Where is that introducing any new challenge?
Moving 5s and up into lowsec - I think this ties into being able to bring in cap ships. Many people have complained about this but I like the idea as long as you leave lvl4s the same. My big concern is that agent stations get cornered much like the big complexes do and smaller corps or heaven forbid a soloer has no ability to try out this potentially cool part of the game.
On both these points however you are basically forcing those people to take their very expensive ship (faction/capital) and fly them into areas where they not only have to contend against the NPCs but also against any pirates who decide they want to blow up 2bn of ship and fittings. How many people do you think are going to do this? Group? Sure but you remove the ability for casual players who may be solo or in pairs to have a decent shot at this element of gameplay. Essentially you are restricting what they can experience with their subscription.
Lvl4s and up being tied to facational warfare - huh? Anyone else in a corp with multiple factions in? Any other small corps have members doing missions for different factions to earn ISK? This has the potential to mean people who have played alongside their friends will no longer be able to as they can't enter the same regions of space (obviously this has the effect of forcing them into 0.0 where there is no faction)
Removal of ISK - so how is the new player going to afford the BS now, from looting lvl1/2 missions? As well as making the value of the larger corps/alliances money piles grow overnight, this will have a detrimental effect on new players and new/smaller corps.
I can't help thinking this has all been kind of rushed to be honest and once again seems to cater for the high end player alliances like the top complexes do. If I was in a 0.0 alliance with the chance to run lvl6/7 missions in total security in alliance space I would be cheering right now.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente CRICE Corporation Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 11:13:00 -
[320]
All the high sec carebears are whining because their multi-billion ISK/week industry is coming to an end. They don't want the removal of their solo AFK mission whoring with zero risk and 100% guaranteed payout.
CCP removed instas and introduced warp to 0km. The carebears rejoiced at their new found safety. Now it's switching the other way a bit (heck, they're still getting a HUGE buff to NPC missions, I don't know what they're whining about) and they're crying like babies.
Everyone is having a stupid contest, and you're in first place! |
|
Arknen
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 11:25:00 -
[321]
You see, I'm not sure that the vast majority of carebears in highsec get even a small fraction of that kind of income. What isn't clear is the kind of reward which will be coming out of lvl5/6/7 missions and the fact that they could (just like the complexes) be completely controlled by the big alliances totally removing not just carebears but smaller corps and other casual players from even experiencing this part of gameplay.
Essentially this could have the effect of turning a proportion of the PVP playerbase into carebears themselves only wanting to PVE in safe alliance space. What difference is there then between the 2 groups?
PVPing requires income, where does that income come from if you don't have access to 0.0 space, high bounty belt rats or complexes if they reduce the ISK in missions?
If CCP just want the game to be PVP then they should never have introduced missions in the first place or complexes etc. But the fact remains that they did, as well as other non Combat-PVP activities. Thats what makes the game so appealing to more players. My feeling is that older more established players/alliances just want the good old days back when there were only 3000 people online and scorps were king.
|
Adrianx7
Just Research
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 11:52:00 -
[322]
I like some of the ideas but not all As i run a lot of L4 missions in empire, I would not go to low sec if i can help it. As i have too many obligations near by. Low / 0.0 does not intrest me, been there done that died there lived there etc. L5 and above missions I like BUT cap ships for mission in low sec is good But you will penalizs players that dont want low sec play and dont want to train for capital ships.
Agent store card is the way to go I have been wating for this for a LONG time
Not sure about the rate of eqipment drop increase from the higher missions, as this will affect alot of traders and miners. Yes mining is boring BUT some love it good luck to them i say, some only play eve to kill a roid.
But in saying the above only cap ship players will be able to do the large missions, BUT how many is going to risk a 2 bill ( fully setup ) cap ship on a mission, when possible to lose it too the mission / or nasty pirates
|
DTson Gauur
Glauxian Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 11:54:00 -
[323]
After reading the Blog and all 11 pages of this thread all I can say:
I like some of the things (new levels, LP store) but there is A LOT I don't LIKE.
Yes I like to run missions in high sec in relative safety, why you ask? Because it IS the way I can guarantee that I have the ISK to BUY AND FIT my PvP ships I fly in low sec. The only way I see that CCP can guarantee the current highly specialized factionships moving to low sec space to run missions is to make mission spaces totally protected (no way to scan someone running on a mission), Otherwise low sec will dry up even more than it is now...
|
Dragon Lord
Caldari Helion Production Labs
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 12:03:00 -
[324]
well i like everything the blog says except 1, taking the hard lvl4s up to lvl5s so that u only get easy lvl4s and i have to sell my cnr. Ill do somthing else to make isk instead. Or wait till i can fly a carrier and join an alliance and run lvl6 and 7s. id guess these would have story missions that reward u with +6 and +7 implants.
The thing for me is as people have mentioned mission runners are setup for pve. where as mission gankers (the real carebears imo) fit for pvp.
Why do i think mission gankers are the real carebears? simple there is zero risk to a group of gank bears hunting and killing a mission runner.
people always bang on about risk vs reward where is the risk to the gank bears? they dont even have to worry about the npcs.
Id be quite happy about the changes if the following was implemented.
If your solo in a deadspace area only 1 pvper may enter and engage u. If theres 2 running a mish then 2 pvpers may enter and so on. Also a proportion of the npcs should attack the pvpers when they enter the plex. And since mission runner dont have scrams. If a pvper enters a mission runners deadspace they cant warp unless they kill the mission runner or the mission runner warps.
These above changes would make the risk vs reward much more balanced. As you would no longer be able to gank missoners FTW and make easy risk free isk. It would become a challenge to take out a mission runner, whereas atm its far far to easy.
If somthing like this was to be implemented then people would happily go to low sec and 0.0 for missions imo.
Otherwise with the way the game is atm, say good by to the faction module and ship market. Why bother when the new lvl4s can be run in a t2 fitted bc. And as for lvl5s, carriers ftw, no need for faction gear there either.
Thanks for reading
|
Kopach
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 12:04:00 -
[325]
To nerf the missions in empire and force the mission runers to play in pirate land is the worst idea I have heard in years from any game developer in any game.
|
Ogul
Caldari ZiTek Deepspace Explorations Prime Orbital Systems
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 12:10:00 -
[326]
I can't help the feeling that this patch is turning EVE into a DVP game (developers versus players).
Leave lvl 4 missions alone! No one complains about the extension of a game, but some aspects have been nerfed too much already.
|
Gudrun Hart
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 12:13:00 -
[327]
Originally by: Sinder Ohm
Originally by: Gwendolyne Croft Missions Lvl 5 only in low sec? I dont see that. Why? That the low sec pirates gets more targets? I see the problem with capital ships and Empire, but when i want to do some missions, the last thing i want to is PvP with other players.
- Make Gates in low sec 0.1-0.4 safe - Hide Missions in low sec 0.1-0.4 that they cant be found with exploration .....
I must respectfully disgree there.. so you basicly want a instanced dungeon ? we all know what the answer to that would be.
Yes, a instanced dungeon for PvE Runners. The only solution i see for 0.1-0.4 and a large amount of players. Let me explain why: We all know CCP wants us to move into the alliances and 0.0. But not all of the players wants to do that or do have the time for it. They pay the same amount of $ like the others. I think CCP should take care about them. A working Empire is, in my oppinion, essential for a working low sec. 0.0 looks fine for me at the moment. But low sec 0.1-0.4 and Missions does not work. Sentries are a Joke, when you get found in a Mission you have to deal with the NPC and the Pirats. The missions runner needs a NPC Fitting and the Pirats uses a PvP Fitting. LowSec Pirats are the Carebears of the PvP Faction, they will have full support from CCP with the changes.
Removing challanges (lowering lvl 4 to lvl 3) from Empire is not the way ccp should go.
Alliances are eating up the 0.0, Alliance politics is just boring and the Carebear PvP Players hopes to get a lot of Mission Runner targets.
I miss the days where i could explore 0.0 for weeks and just meet pilots once a week.
|
Scordif
Caldari Mitsukashi Holdings Limited
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 12:15:00 -
[328]
I originally posted this as a reply on the missions forum... But it belongs here...
Originally by: Oveur * Level 4 will become closer to Level 3 in difficulty, the jump up will not be as drastic as it is now. * Level 5 will be the new level, consisting partly of the most difficult Level 4 missions, but mainly new missions.
Ignoring the most recent level 4 mission additions, most people seem to have been coping just fine with the existing level 4's. There is no need to reduce their difficulty. Just fix the most recently added missions. Oveur doesn't state it, but we all know what will happen: Reducing difficulty of level 4's closer to level 3's means reducing rewards as well.
If you want to add level 5's, fine. Add them. If you want level 5's to be low-sec only, fine. Do that. But don't screw around with our level 4's. Reducing level 4 difficulty (AKA nerfing the difficulty and following on with nerfing the rewards) is basically just giving the big middle finger to a large portion of the player base.
Originally by: Oveur * The majority of these new missions will not have ISK bounties on NPCs, they will be Loyalty Point focused or Mini-Profession based. You earn your ISK by selling to other pilots. We're very aware of ISK inflation and this is a step in preventing that.
If you don't want us farming missions for bounties all day, fine. Give us some decent loot to sell to other players instead of the 99% rubbish we currently get. Stop giving us civilian shield boosters ffs.
Originally by: Oveur * You would now earn Loyalty Points on the corporate level, allowing you to move easier to other agents in the same corporation.
Finally.
Originally by: Oveur * New missions will utilize Exploration and Mini-professions to further expand reward abilities.
As long as they're optional and not a requirement.
Originally by: Oveur * Mission rewards can be split among a group.
Finally.
Originally by: Oveur * Encourages colonization of low security, the higher population providing pirates with more, but tougher (capital-ship-driving-group-flying) pilots.
'Encourage' is a nice way of saying 'do it, or get screwed over by level 4 nerfs'.
Originally by: Oveur * Slowly involves the "PvE" player in more "PvP" EVE activity.
OK... Now lets see what was said at the top of the post...
Originally by: Oveur It's important to understand that EVE is a "PvP" focused game, but in a broader sense of the word. We consider almost every activity in EVE to be "PvP" "PvP" isn't only direct person to person combat Selling an item on the market which somebody buys from you is resulting in another guy not getting a sale.
Oveur said it himself. We're already knee deep in 'PvP' as it is, even if we're not pew pewing it. So why are you screwing with level 4 mission runners by nerfing half their missions and moving the other half into low-sec as level 5 missions?
It sounds like some nice changes are in store for missions... But it's horribly tainted by the threat of screwing over the high-sec mission runners (again) and alienting a large portion of the player base that simply DOESN'T WANT TO GO TO LOW-SEC/0.0!
|
shuckstar
Gallente Order of New Blood
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 12:17:00 -
[329]
Originally by: Kaptein Trefot Edited by: Kaptein Trefot on 21/02/2007 23:33:44 Edited by: Kaptein Trefot on 21/02/2007 23:23:04 There is a lot of carebears in this game and the only universal issue that angers carebears is an attempt to force your game-play upon them. There are a lot of high sec mission-runners and those ppl simply donĘt want to play the PvP game you are offering in low sec and 0.0.
If your 'idea' of how you intended this game to be is more important than your business, than this is the way to go. If you want the player-base in eve to grow, you should definitely rethink the consequences of these changes to high sec missions.
Force a playing style on a carebear and it will be the last time you see him.
im currently running missions and have also done PvP, but i heard ti uber easy for a noob to probe down mission runners in no time, there is no way ill take my faction bs, fully faction fitted low sec to run missions, it will be easier for me 2 run lvl3's all day in high sec and not risk my billions . Dont get me wrong i dont mind dieing loosing stuff ect, but why risk it when i dont have 2 . But yeah it sounds good and fun but im not going low sec unless i have a fleet with me.
|
Mr Mozzie
Eve University Ivy League
|
Posted - 2007.02.23 12:23:00 -
[330]
I sat here trying to figure out some wise advice to give, but....
IMO, ccp should employ some economists - experts to monitor the game economy and make recomendations on changes. That is if they haven't already.
After all, the first rule of economics is that our actions always have unforseen economic consiquences.
PS I am not economist.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |