EVE Search - Plan for new L4-Agents?

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Plan for new L4-Agents?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Gol'dar	Posted - 2008.01.29 10:11:00 - [1] hi, I've got a short question. Is there a plan for a installation of new L4 agents in the four main factions? Last weekend there were many lags in Sing Laison, especially in Auvergne / Aunia / Dodixie with 200 - 330 player in each system. For example the entire Gallente-Federation has got only 2 HighSec-L4-Agents in Command, Security, Internal Security or Surveillance with a quality 16 or better. One of them is in an enclave in 00. So Auvergne is nearly the mainbase of the Gallente-battlemissionrunner. Another possibility would be the quality-increase of an existing agent. And no, this is not whining, only a question have a nice day and fly safe
Kuolematon Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2008.01.29 12:10:00 - [2] Originally by: Gol'dar .. Auvergne is nearly the mainbase of the Gallente-battlemissionrunner. Excellent news, thank you sir! It's great being Amarr isn't it.
Tyr Zewa Caldari Tax Collectors	Posted - 2008.01.29 12:23:00 - [3] Adding some more agents would indeed help to lessen the load on system like Umokka. It's an easy thing to do, doesn't seem to have many side effects attached, and it helps to spread the load.
Jaketh Ivanes Amarr Do Or Die And Live Or Try The Kano Organisation	Posted - 2008.01.29 15:04:00 - [4] Why not use a L4 Q10 or below if it is in a unused system? Oh, you lose about 10k isk and 500LP... But you'll have more fun.
Sathenu	Posted - 2008.01.29 16:21:00 - [5] Caldari Navy Lvl4 agents in high sec need moved...they are far too close to one another
Phillipe d'Rothschild	Posted - 2008.01.29 16:51:00 - [6] Try working for a different Corporation. No one is forcing 400 pilots into choosing Caldari Navy and then flying over to Motusu to run missions. it might be a bit harder to grind up standings with some corps, but the payoffs when you have a l4 q16 agent with 16 people in local in highsec are worth it if you don't like the lag.
Gol'dar	Posted - 2008.01.29 22:15:00 - [7] Edited by: Gol''dar on 29/01/2008 22:15:01 Originally by: Phillipe d'Rothschild Try working for a different Corporation. No one is forcing 400 pilots into choosing Caldari Navy and then flying over to Motusu to run missions. it might be a bit harder to grind up standings with some corps, but the payoffs when you have a l4 q16 agent with 16 people in local in highsec are worth it if you don't like the lag. I was searching for another high-quality (16 or 18) L4-agent in Command / Security / Internal Security or Surveillance. Not only in FN or FIO, in all corps of the Federation. Only 2 in the highsec, one (for the most player useless I think) in the enclave (5 Jumps in 00). Caldari Navy has got Umokka, Spacelane Patrol has got Isinokka. Few good agents and more and more player can't work, imho. And "go to a worse agent" should'nt be the best solution of this "problem". So there is the question: what is the plan for the future? have a nice day and fly safe
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Enuma Elish.	Posted - 2008.01.29 22:43:00 - [8] Edited by: James Lyrus on 29/01/2008 22:44:04 There are plenty of level 4 agents. The problem is, quality level is a broken mechanic. There's quite literally no reason _not_ to use the highest QL agent you can. And the difference in mission payout is huge. (Way more than the difference in pay you get in different sec status areas). So, you have an infinite resource (missions) where one is significantly better on time and effort than another. Which are you going to use? This sort of ties in with the 'lowsec' problem. A QL 18 agent, i used as a sample. the difference between a 0.3 and a 0.5 in terms of mission running, is ... well highsec vs lowsec, so huge. But hte acutal pay, is ... negligably different. Same missions, same mission loot, same bounties. 1k lps different (8k-9k ish). Thus I'd like to propose this: Remove agent quality levels. Have every agent be the same QL in highsec. Add _maybe_ a few at QL: -20 for the sake of the standings grinders. And then simply replace all highsec agents with QL zero, and lowsec with QL:20. You'll remove 'clumping' of mission runners, you'll give some incentive to move to lowsec, but without 'pushing' people. Everyone who doesn't do missions, doesn't have the 'zomg lag' effect of going near motsu. Everyone wins. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
Re'Lon	Posted - 2008.01.30 15:26:00 - [9] I am all for the removal of agent quality. It should be replaced with your standings. Faction would make the most sense, esp with faction warfare starting soon.
Tarron Sarek Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2008.01.31 03:13:00 - [10] Originally by: Re'Lon I am all for the removal of agent quality. It should be replaced with your standings. Faction would make the most sense, esp with faction warfare starting soon. This is a good idea. Perhaps together with utilisation factored in, which would be a nice incentive to stay away from the most popular systems. ___________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well - Please stop using the word 'nerf' Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters
Sephra Star	Posted - 2008.01.31 05:45:00 - [11] The best agents should all be in low sec. It would give Mission Runners a reason to band together in Gangs in order to defend the space and stimulate some PvP.
Marcus TheMartin Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2008.01.31 06:17:00 - [12] Moving all -1 quality and up agents into lowsec would solve some missioning lag
Carniflex Caldari Fallout Research Fallout Project	Posted - 2008.01.31 07:16:00 - [13] Originally by: Sephra Star The best agents should all be in low sec. It would give Mission Runners a reason to band together in Gangs in order to defend the space and stimulate some PvP. They already are in low sec. With desert landscape as background and few withered bushes. You see, low sec is not worth the risk, especially after removal of nexsus chip buy orders and resulting LP price crash. As it stands currently you are better off using negative quality agents in hi sec than any low sec agent, as majority of your income comes nowdays from mission bounties and faction pimped CNR is faster enough vs T2 fitted regular Raven to grant you better isk/h even after factoring in those few extra mil and some 50 - 70 % more LP per mission. That is before you take into account time you spent evading local yarr population.
Ezekiel Sulastin Gallente Eve University	Posted - 2008.01.31 16:52:00 - [14] You also need to factor in such nice factors as splitting the mission rewards among your gang and the time it takes to get your battleship out there, noting that if there is a HIC anywhere along the route, at best you're done for the day and at worst you're dead. Even better, due to the agent quality system it will be rather predictable which systems you'd find the newer lowsec missioners in. With the points the above poster mentioned, and the ones I did, why would anyone WANT to mission in lowsec? And why do you pirate types keep crying for it? The second-order effects'll bite you in the behind ...
Ulstan	Posted - 2008.01.31 19:12:00 - [15] Quote: The best agents should all be in low sec. The best agents with the best payouts are in low sec. No one uses them because if you do a pirate gang will scan you down and blow up your faction fitted CNR in about 5 minutes. Unless of course you run away, but if you're going to spend your time running away might as well mission in hi sec instead. Quote: Moving all -1 quality and up agents into lowsec would solve some missioning lag See above. It wouldn't do a thing for missioning lag. Everyone would simply continue to run the most profitable hi sec agent. No matter how low a reward it is, it beats going out into low sec and having your faction fitted mission pimp mobile blown up by a pirate gane. Positive income, no matter how low, beats negative income. If mission runners weren't completely at the mercy of pirates gangs who scan them down, maybe we could do something with this. Regarding the actual subject of the thread, I think retuning agent quality is a good idea. Low sec agents should have higher rewards than hi sec agents, and they do. I don't propose changing that. But it's silly for agents within a region to have different quality levels...what's the point exactly? It just ensures no one will use the bad quality agents. There's no 'upside' to using a poor quality agent.

Pages: [1] :: 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.