EVE Search - CSM Minutes on Faction Warfare

All Channels

Warfare & Tactics

CSM Minutes on Faction Warfare

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Frozen Fallout Mecha Enterprises Fleet 8	Posted - 2012.01.25 19:26:00 - [301] - Quote Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: chatgris wrote: Missions should be removed completely from FW. This is because there is no way to fail your opponents mission (except for one). Therefore, carebears can just come in, pick up 14 missions, and if they get interrupted in one place go away do others and come back later, or just fail the mission. I know, because I've both hunted mission runners and run missions like that for 36 hours straight solo in a gila. Expecting pvp to come from this primarily pve activity is just not going to happen. What should occur instead is that plexes should give LP for completion. Unlike a mission, if someone comes into your plex they can actually undo the work you've done. This forces the mission runner to pvp to chase them away, or abandon your progress (not resume it later). This also gives the mission hunter some reward for staying and ruining your day. How plexes should be changed is a completely different story: e.g. notifications if someone is running a plex: this could lead to interesting last stand situations where you try and delay the enemy getting to your plex (distractions along the way etc?). NPC balance etc all are independent of this idea. Yes, carebears will still come. Nothing will force carebears into your guns, but you can hunt them more effectively, eventually giving them the option of learning to pvp, or moving elsewhere for other rewards leaving the FW specific rewards to those who wish to pvp. This is a completely legitimate solution to the problem as well. I agree. Agreed I also like this idea. Simple and easy solution. I like!
Garr Earthbender Quantum Cats Syndicate 33	Posted - 2012.01.25 19:43:00 - [302] - Quote +1 Chat. Possibly some sort of scale of LP for plexing in a heavily contested system? Or not. If I'm thinking as a carebear, then It just seems that if I get LP for running a plex in a contested system, I wanna do it as far away from fighting as possible. This isn't a fully formed idea though. Just putting it out there.
chatgris Quantum Cats Syndicate 25	Posted - 2012.01.25 20:06:00 - [303] - Quote BolsterBomb wrote: I like this but I would like to see it in addation to the pelxes you mentioned not removing the missions. Each sec system needs mission types. And all sec systems have soloable mission types (even L4) Doing this will result in more pvp in plexes, however it does not solve the problem of people completely disinterested in pvp still siphoning off the unique rewards intended for those in fw.
chatgris Quantum Cats Syndicate 25	Posted - 2012.01.25 20:09:00 - [304] - Quote Garr Earthbender wrote: +1 Chat. Possibly some sort of scale of LP for plexing in a heavily contested system? Or not. If I'm thinking as a carebear, then It just seems that if I get LP for running a plex in a contested system, I wanna do it as far away from fighting as possible. This isn't a fully formed idea though. Just putting it out there. This could work , but I am very wary that small gangs should have the ability to lurk off somewhere and not face just one big blob. Then, if you want to hunt said small gangs, a small gang could go out and live in a region of space. I love that plexing requires you to respond quickly to thwart the enemy, and one way to respond faster is to spread out, slimming the blob. If increasing the scale of LP for a heavily contested system is implemented, rewards should probably be scaled down somewhat for having more people doing a single plex.
Bad Messenger draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 105	Posted - 2012.01.25 20:19:00 - [305] - Quote So conclusion is that now no one is not able to pvp because horrible farmers lowered their income and now they have to farm 3 times more missions to get rich, did i get it right? I wonder how people managed to pvp before fw missions got 1st boost. You are just used to fly too expensive ships if you can not afford to pvp with 100m/ hour or more earnings.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 112	Posted - 2012.01.25 20:24:00 - [306] - Quote chatgris wrote: Missions should be removed completely from FW. This is because there is no way to fail your opponents mission (except for one). Then add a way to fail your opponent in all missions. Edit: There's nothing wrong with having both FW missions and FW plexes in game with complementary goals.
BolsterBomb Royal Black Watch Highlanders Flatline. 10	Posted - 2012.01.25 20:25:00 - [307] - Quote chatgris wrote: BolsterBomb wrote: I like this but I would like to see it in addation to the pelxes you mentioned not removing the missions. Each sec system needs mission types. And all sec systems have soloable mission types (even L4) Doing this will result in more pvp in plexes, however it does not solve the problem of people completely disinterested in pvp still siphoning off the unique rewards intended for those in fw. Then the problem lies in FW nto the missions. When looking to change missions you need to examine how other missions work as well. Sanctums / 0.0 stuff - yes alliances generate more lucrative santums,etc however anyone can run these in NPC space anyone can run them Missions (in high and null sec) can be done solo. True solo, not dual box. The risk are the same and I would argue the pirate missions are OP as far as the reward. Almost all missions in high and null are less then 3 jumps from the starting point. By removing missions all together from Lowsec you remove one of the most important aspects of the game isk. By limiting rewards to plexes only makes it a team effort to generate isk as well as you make it difficult to earn isk. THis is a problem because two things occur: 1) People that are pirate and FW must have an alt to be able to generate isk if missioning in high sec / incursions/whatever 2) You send more people into 0.0 to simply farm sanctums and thus remove more people from FW. I would much rather have people in lowsec for the possible pvp rather then tell them to leave and go earn isk somewhere else. I think your idea of adding LP rewards to plexes/conquering gives a REASON to plex and fight for control which IS the problem in FW. However removing FW missions would severly chop the head off of FW. And for the record I am not a billionare isk plowing FW running person. I am not in FW (I do plan to come back) I simply do not want to see a key componet of each sec system drastically changed for what you say would be the better and then find out it severly hurts lowsec in general. That is why I say make the conquering systems influence how missions can be done, this makes everyone work to keep there isk faucet open. By simply removing the faucet does not mean you fixed the problem. (lack of pvp)
Hans Jagerblitzen Autocannons Anonymous 848	Posted - 2012.01.25 20:34:00 - [308] - Quote BolsterBomb wrote: That is why I say make the conquering systems influence how missions can be done, this makes everyone work to keep there isk faucet open. By simply removing the faucet does not mean you fixed the problem. (lack of pvp) For the record FW missions do not constitute a major "isk faucet" , because the majority of the isk to be made involves the LP benefit, as the actual cash payout is a very small portion of the reward. LP stores are considered "isk sinks" because you pay partially with isk, which than disappears, unlike conventional market transactions where the isk is merely traded but not removed from the game the way it is when you cash in your LP. I hate to be "that guy", I just know from experience that when you start flipping terms like "isk faucet" the real economists (of which I am not) go apeshit. Just a warning.
Hans Jagerblitzen Autocannons Anonymous 848	Posted - 2012.01.25 20:42:00 - [309] - Quote Bad Messenger wrote: So conclusion is that now no one is not able to pvp because horrible farmers lowered their income and now they have to farm 3 times more missions to get rich, did i get it right? Nope, you got it wrong again. No one said that it prevents us from PvPing, we're saying it slows down PvP. It nerfs one of the incomes that was designed to sustain Faction Warfare. The point of missions is to provide high rewards (at increased risk) to FW pilots so they can support constant PvP. The more time people come and farm the missions and take the isk elsewhere, the longer we have to grind to be able to support PvP. That does NOTHING to help the FW scene, it just slows everything down. Seriously, stop throwing down straw man arguments. You take everything someone in here says and take it to the extreme so you can refute it. Actually listen to what people are posting if you're going to keep replying.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 113	Posted - 2012.01.25 20:45:00 - [310] - Quote Garr Earthbender wrote: +1 Chat. Possibly some sort of scale of LP for plexing in a heavily contested system? Or not. If I'm thinking as a carebear, then It just seems that if I get LP for running a plex in a contested system, I wanna do it as far away from fighting as possible. This isn't a fully formed idea though. Just putting it out there. Don't fall into the hype of that whacko chatgris. CCP should do at minimum two things: 1. Figure out rewards for System Occupancy - whatever it is. LP for plexes, Percentage of PI taxes go to those who run plexes, whatver, etc... 2. Modify FW missions so that mission hunter can fail the mission. If #2 were implemented, there would be a boom of pvp type activity for all of those who wish to make isk off of FW missions. You'll start off by running your missions solo. Then when somebody starts stalking you, you'll call for backup. Then he'll call for backup. You could have a running battlefield all across Black Rise. What I would also suggest: 1. Completion/Denial of FW mission counts towards system occupancy. 2. Minor reward for capping individual plexes. Major rewards for occupying systems. Two ways to get the same job done. In case 1 (Plexes), you sit still and get bored to tears if there's no fight, and in case 2 (missions), you get to keep roaming low sec if there's no fight. Anyways, enough theory crafting. 1. We 've all agreed mechanics of plexing are almost there. Rewards for system occupancy need to be implemented. 2. I realize I'm in the minority opinion, but hopefully everybody will see the light and agree the way forward for FW missions is not to remove them but to give mission hunters a means to fail missions.
chatgris Quantum Cats Syndicate 25	Posted - 2012.01.25 20:57:00 - [311] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: Garr Earthbender wrote: +1 Chat. Possibly some sort of scale of LP for plexing in a heavily contested system? Or not. If I'm thinking as a carebear, then It just seems that if I get LP for running a plex in a contested system, I wanna do it as far away from fighting as possible. This isn't a fully formed idea though. Just putting it out there. Don't fall into the hype of that whacko chatgris. CCP should do at minimum two things: 1. Figure out rewards for System Occupancy - whatever it is. LP for plexes, Percentage of PI taxes go to those who run plexes, whatver, etc... 2. Modify FW missions so that mission hunter can fail the mission. If #2 were implemented, there would be a boom of pvp type activity for all of those who wish to make isk off of FW missions. You'll start off by running your missions solo. Then when somebody starts stalking you, you'll call for backup. Then he'll call for backup. You could have a running battlefield all across Black Rise. What I would also suggest: 1. Completion/Denial of FW mission counts towards system occupancy. 2. Minor reward for capping individual plexes. Major rewards for occupying systems. Two ways to get the same job done. In case 1 (Plexes), you sit still and get bored to tears if there's no fight, and in case 2 (missions), you get to keep roaming low sec if there's no fight. Anyways, enough theory crafting. 1. We 've all agreed mechanics of plexing are almost there. Rewards for system occupancy need to be implemented. 2. I realize I'm in the minority opinion, but hopefully everybody will see the light and agree the way forward for FW missions is not to remove them but to give mission hunters a means to fail missions. As long as the hunter get some kind of reward for failing missions, I'm fine with it. But then, missions just start looking like plexes with choke points (agents who give missions) that enemy blobs can camp. If you want to keep missions in the game, have them count towards system occupancy, in what way do they differ from plexes?
BolsterBomb Royal Black Watch Highlanders Flatline. 10	Posted - 2012.01.25 20:59:00 - [312] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: Garr Earthbender wrote: +1 Chat. Possibly some sort of scale of LP for plexing in a heavily contested system? Or not. If I'm thinking as a carebear, then It just seems that if I get LP for running a plex in a contested system, I wanna do it as far away from fighting as possible. This isn't a fully formed idea though. Just putting it out there. Don't fall into the hype of that whacko chatgris. CCP should do at minimum two things: 1. Figure out rewards for System Occupancy - whatever it is. LP for plexes, Percentage of PI taxes go to those who run plexes, whatver, etc... 2. Modify FW missions so that mission hunter can fail the mission. If #2 were implemented, there would be a boom of pvp type activity for all of those who wish to make isk off of FW missions. You'll start off by running your missions solo. Then when somebody starts stalking you, you'll call for backup. Then he'll call for backup. You could have a running battlefield all across Black Rise. What I would also suggest: 1. Completion/Denial of FW mission counts towards system occupancy. 2. Minor reward for capping individual plexes. Major rewards for occupying systems. Two ways to get the same job done. In case 1 (Plexes), you sit still and get bored to tears if there's no fight, and in case 2 (missions), you get to keep roaming low sec if there's no fight. Anyways, enough theory crafting. 1. We 've all agreed mechanics of plexing are almost there. Rewards for system occupancy need to be implemented. 2. I realize I'm in the minority opinion, but hopefully everybody will see the light and agree the way forward for FW missions is not to remove them but to give mission hunters a means to fail missions. QFT - and big QFT Chatgris is a whacko
Julius Foederatus Hyper-Nova 58	Posted - 2012.01.25 21:13:00 - [313] - Quote Chatgris has it right. If missions are to be made functionally equivalent to plexes, why even have a distinction? I'm assuming it would be far easier to code them out and assign some sort of benefit system to plexes instead of trying to invent some sort of way for people to cause you to fail your mission.
Frozen Fallout Mecha Enterprises Fleet 8	Posted - 2012.01.25 21:17:00 - [314] - Quote chatgris wrote: As long as the hunter get some kind of reward for failing missions, I'm fine with it. But then, missions just start looking like plexes with choke points (agents who give missions) that enemy blobs can camp. If you want to keep missions in the game, have them count towards system occupancy, in what way do they differ from plexes? I think there would still be a difference even if both gave LP and occupancy. FW missions would be blitzable and would be for money. Go in kill something and leave. Should give lots of LP an some occupancy. Plexs should be about holding a spot like they are for an amount of time. Lots of VP but some LP The hunter in each case would have to do a timer just like Plexing. I like the idea of capping missions.
Bad Messenger draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 105	Posted - 2012.01.25 21:41:00 - [315] - Quote Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: Bad Messenger wrote: So conclusion is that now no one is not able to pvp because horrible farmers lowered their income and now they have to farm 3 times more missions to get rich, did i get it right? Nope, you got it wrong again. No one said that it prevents us from PvPing, we're saying it slows down PvP. It nerfs one of the incomes that was designed to sustain Faction Warfare. The point of missions is to provide high rewards (at increased risk) to FW pilots so they can support constant PvP. The more time people come and farm the missions and take the isk elsewhere, the longer we have to grind to be able to support PvP. That does NOTHING to help the FW scene, it just slows everything down. Seriously, stop throwing down straw man arguments. You take everything someone in here says and take it to the extreme so you can refute it. Actually listen to what people are posting if you're going to keep replying. So reason why you cry is that you have to grind more missions to get isk for stupidly lost carriers? Come on, you greedy whiner.
Hans Jagerblitzen Autocannons Anonymous 848	Posted - 2012.01.25 21:55:00 - [316] - Quote Bad Messenger wrote: So reason why you cry is that you have to grind more missions to get isk for stupidly lost carriers? Come on, you greedy whiner. And again, you're throwing down straw man arguments. Carriers have an extremely high rate of return on insurance, the few that I've lost before (like 2?) I went out and replaced the same day without missioning at all, cause insurance paid for most of it. Say what you please, in threads like these its ridiculously easy to spot who is here to talk about FW improvements, and who is here to fiercely defend mission income. Actual FW pilots understand and respect my motivations for being here, and its their opinions I care about in the end.
Kade Jeekin Kinda'Shujaa 9	Posted - 2012.01.25 22:02:00 - [317] - Quote In order to cap missions CCP would also have to sort out the navy aggression of friendlies. I've previously suggested that missions be replaced by plexes, in a similar way to chatgris, but with the added suggestion that agents assign plex capture missions. Quote: GÇóGet rid of FW missions. Agents send people to plexes instead. No standing penalty for failure, but penalty for refusal GÇóPlexes can still be scanned for too GÇóGive LP for plex capture/defend GÇóRequire all NPC's to be eliminated to allow capture GÇóMore LP for kills http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1219869&page=3#65 or, more verbosely Quote: My opinion has always that the regular missions should be replaced with missions to capture plex spawns. eg "Our operative has detected an Amarr complex in Oyanata system, go and capture it and return to me" or "Our operative has detected an Amarr complex under attack in Oyanata system, go and save it and return to me" The same mission could be given to multiple players. LP and ISK reward would be the same as for a regular mission of the same level. That way the militias would actually get pod pilots actually working towards faction warfare's supposed goals, promote PVP and gang activity. This would also either replace or supplement the poor plex spawn mechanic. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1520969&page=1#3
Shaalira D'arc Quantum Cats Syndicate 385	Posted - 2012.01.25 22:02:00 - [318] - Quote I like the proposal to remove missions and swap LP rewards to plexing, because of the utter simplicity of it all. Far, far less can go wrong than whatever complex sov-prototype system that's being hashed out. You fly out to contested systems. You either 1) Get pew-pew and LP because you win, 2) Get pew-pew and die gloriously, or 3) Go unopposed and get LP. Sounds like a win-win-win to me. Want a big gang fight? Form up a fleet and plex one of the central hub systems. Going for solo or smaller fights? Plex at the fringes of the warzone, or use small ships to dodge blobs and hit plexes with only a handful of enemies inside. I heavily suspect, however, that whatever CCP has planned involves a tie-in to the Dust release. That would discount simple fixes to the existing system.
Bad Messenger draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 105	Posted - 2012.01.25 22:27:00 - [319] - Quote Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: Bad Messenger wrote: So reason why you cry is that you have to grind more missions to get isk for stupidly lost carriers? Come on, you greedy whiner. And again, you're throwing down straw man arguments. Carriers have an extremely high rate of return on insurance, the few that I've lost before (like 2?) I went out and replaced the same day without missioning at all, cause insurance paid for most of it. Say what you please, in threads like these its ridiculously easy to spot who is here to talk about FW improvements, and who is here to fiercely defend mission income. Actual FW pilots understand and respect my motivations for being here, and its their opinion I care about in the end. Yes we all see you are here for defending your own income. I say missions are fine as they are now when balancing mechanics affects income. It is not only FW missions that affects income you get from lp, most higsec missions give mostly same items, so nerfing only fw missions does not bring lp price up enough on level where it was at the beginning. Main reason why isk/lp was high when fw got boost was that ccp banned 6000+ rmt guys.
Garr Earthbender Quantum Cats Syndicate 33	Posted - 2012.01.25 23:18:00 - [320] - Quote Lotsa good stuff in here. There seems to be good arguments on keeping or removing FW missions. Both sides of the arguments have merits for sure. The other question to ask (thanks Shaalira) is 'What about Dust 514?' I mean, all this theorycrafting is just CRAP without knowing how Dust will be implemented within the EVE universe, and specifically FW. le sigh Oh well.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 113	Posted - 2012.01.25 23:39:00 - [321] - Quote As already stated w.r.t differences between missions and plexes: FW Missions require multiple jumps through low sec to complete. Shoot and scoot (if you and your buds pick up 20 of them). Running battles in plexes, at gates, etc..., if enemy fleet is hounding you. FW Plexes are about attacking/defending a specific location. Sit and orbit. Wait for opponent to ship up or down to get a fight. Anyways, farmers will farm. That's what they do. My Caldari alt and I will be moving to Saranemi to farm FW plexes when FW missions are removed. I will run a minor in my afk AB fit repper comet. My alt will run the medium in his Kestrel. We'll keep doing this, contesting and then decontesting, until I'm fat, rich, and very satisfied.
Frozen Fallout Mecha Enterprises Fleet 8	Posted - 2012.01.25 23:39:00 - [322] - Quote Garr Earthbender wrote: Lotsa good stuff in here. There seems to be good arguments on keeping or removing FW missions. Both sides of the arguments have merits for sure. The other question to ask (thanks Shaalira) is 'What about Dust 514?' I mean, all this theorycrafting is just CRAP without knowing how Dust will be implemented within the EVE universe, and specifically FW. le sigh Oh well. I guess the question I would ask is do we want Dust 514 to be a big effect on FW or if it will just be about planets (not directly related to our sov) Do we want to be the test bed or whatever for the Dust Eve Connection. I personally don't want that. I would rather see small fixes and a rewards system for plexs and capturing systems but not to be a test bed for the New Sov System. I personally think that CCP currently things this is a good idea. And since we don't really have anyone on the CSM that is there to protect and enhance our aspect of the game. No one is really being able to stand up to CCP and say No and present them with something better for FW.
Hans Jagerblitzen Autocannons Anonymous 850	Posted - 2012.01.25 23:43:00 - [323] - Quote Bad Messenger wrote: I say missions are fine as they are now when balancing mechanics affects income. It is not only FW missions that affects income you get from lp, most higsec missions give mostly same items, so nerfing only fw missions does not bring lp price up enough on level where it was at the beginning. Main reason why isk/lp was high when fw got boost was that ccp banned 6000+ rmt guys. Edit: also now when people have lot of unused lp example some federation navy tags has gone up approx 3,5m/tag , so if you do certain fw plexes and loot those tags you can do quite much isk/day. Are you daft?? No one here is talking about nerfing mission income. Some people have mentioned getting rid of them, since they're a form of PvE and FW is mainly about PvP. You consistently protest every step of the way .... saying "income is fine, income is fine". You keep calling me a greedy bastard while you wear the monocle and explain to everyone here how make the most isk from FW. You're as transparent as glass, my friend.
Bad Messenger draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 105	Posted - 2012.01.25 23:53:00 - [324] - Quote Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: Bad Messenger wrote: I say missions are fine as they are now when balancing mechanics affects income. It is not only FW missions that affects income you get from lp, most higsec missions give mostly same items, so nerfing only fw missions does not bring lp price up enough on level where it was at the beginning. Main reason why isk/lp was high when fw got boost was that ccp banned 6000+ rmt guys. Edit: also now when people have lot of unused lp example some federation navy tags has gone up approx 3,5m/tag , so if you do certain fw plexes and loot those tags you can do quite much isk/day. Are you daft?? No one here is talking about nerfing mission income. Some people have mentioned getting rid of them, since they're a form of PvE and FW is mainly about PvP. You consistently protest every step of the way .... saying "income is fine, income is fine". You keep calling me a greedy bastard while you wear the monocle and explain to everyone here how make the most isk from FW. You're as transparent as glass, my friend. So you want to remove FW missions totally? Now tell me how FW players are supposed to make isk then?
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 113	Posted - 2012.01.25 23:59:00 - [325] - Quote Bad Messenger wrote: So you want to remove FW missions totally? Now tell me how FW players are supposed to make isk then? Orbit buttons of course.
Bad Messenger draketrain Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 105	Posted - 2012.01.26 00:02:00 - [326] - Quote X Gallentius wrote: Bad Messenger wrote: So you want to remove FW missions totally? Now tell me how FW players are supposed to make isk then? Orbit buttons of course. oh, then i would be even richer than now. Hans will be mad about it.
X Gallentius Quantum Cats Syndicate 113	Posted - 2012.01.26 00:41:00 - [327] - Quote Bad Messenger wrote: oh, then i would be even richer than now. Hans will be mad about it. You can set up plex farming shop in Ladistier, and I'll set one up in Vifr.
Hans Jagerblitzen Autocannons Anonymous 850	Posted - 2012.01.26 00:48:00 - [328] - Quote Bad Messenger wrote: oh, then i would be even richer than now. Hans will be mad about it. Hahahaahah. See, I'm not really mad about your isk, I don't really care how wealthy anyone is in the game, in the end. If you had read any of my posts, you'd know that. If I'm frustrated with anything, its the fact that you keep posting about the isk. This isn't a thread about how to farm FW missions. I start to lose patience with anyone who sticks to the same subject, and only posts about one thing. You have consistently only surfaced in FW threads to defend isk incomes, than you pretend you're not there for the isk, and call others greedy, and than you say stuff like this ^^ that just proves my point anyways. I've been critical of others who bring all FW discussions back to the same topic within the feature. And yes, I'm taking about Cearain, just so no one thinks I'm being passive aggressive. I like Cearain, and I appreciate his tenacity in sticking up for FW and he's offered some good ideas on how to improve it as well. I just don't have any problem pointing out that whether he realizes it or not, he has a tendency to bring all discussions back down to NPC's in plexing, even if they start elsewhere. You, on the other hand, are NOT bringing anything constructive to the conversation, nor do you stick to the topic of the threads you post in. You also either don't read people's posts carefully, or you do and deliberately choose to use straw man arguments to try to derail ideas. Like the last one, asking if I wanted to remove FW missions - despite the fact that I've never proposed that idea, not once, not anywhere in the entire forum. I will give you the benefit of the doubt for now because I'm hoping its just a language barrier issue that causes you to completely misunderstand every post someone makes. I'm all for free speech, but you abuse the privilege by wasting time and space in FW threads by repeating yourself over and over again unnecessarily. We all know you by now, and why you are here.
Dirk Smacker Black Talon Aerospace Black Watch. 16	Posted - 2012.01.26 01:37:00 - [329] - Quote I'm working on a concept for that contest someone said they'd run. While brainstorming, I realized the obvious solution to limit farming if the current plexes started giving out LP rewards: Have once per day missions, one for each plex type (and maybe one for defensive capping). Scale the rewards for 10-20 mil isk/day if you do all of them (personal opinion on that amount, whatever is best for the game). This, along with having to clear the field of enemy npc's before a cap, should sufficiently limit farming LP's (or isk) from plexes. I guess once you have a signature, you cannot have a blank one.
BolsterBomb Royal Black Watch Highlanders Flatline. 10	Posted - 2012.01.26 01:42:00 - [330] - Quote What is wrong with people farming missions? it happens in every other sec, you say farming like its a bad thing.............

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.