EVE Search - Since you are changing PVP, Lets change missions.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Since you are changing PVP, Lets change missions.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Dura'Lorth	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:37:00 - [1] Move lv 3 missions to 0.5-0.3 sec space, and lv 4 missions to 0.3-0.0 sec space. No one should be able to make that much isk off these mission in high sec systems, it causes lag. And makes sense RPwise since how hard it would be for pirate faction battle ships to use jump gates into 0.9-0.7 mission hubs.
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:39:00 - [2] /signed - DesuSigs
Atlas Oracle Minmatar Native Freshfood	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:39:00 - [3] i have considered your suggestion. it is stupid, ignorant, and summarily rejected. /thread
Dura'Lorth	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:41:00 - [4] Quiet you silly missioner, you know pirate battle ships would never make it into highsec, they would be instapoped by CONCORD or the Faction Navies. SOMEONE THINK OF THE RP! Too much reward, not enough risk. You cant spell risk with out isk.
Atlas Oracle Minmatar Native Freshfood	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:43:00 - [5] Originally by: Dura'Lorth You cant spell risk with out isk. i lol'd
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:43:00 - [6] Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 07/08/2008 17:44:07 Of course you realize that this change would strip the earning power of non-industrialists in High Sec down to practically nil. Nullsec and Low Sec corps who dominate mission hubs or good ratting systems would ensure that unless you were a member of their organization you'd never be able to run a Level 3 or 4 without getting scanned down and destroyed. This is severely tipping the balance in favor of full-time PvPers. You have to keep a semblance of real balance. Nerf payouts from High Sec missions, but don't take them away. Also the bit about pirate faction battleships as an RP factor in High Sec is nonsense. You own a ship built from a pirate blueprint. The ship itself is not a criminal object unless it's being used to commit crimes. You aren't flying your Mac on behalf of the Archangels, are you?
SurrenderMonkey	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:44:00 - [7] Originally by: Dura'Lorth Move lv 3 missions to 0.5-0.3 sec space, and lv 4 missions to 0.3-0.0 sec space. No one should be able to make that much isk off these mission in high sec systems, it causes lag. And makes sense RPwise since how hard it would be for pirate faction battle ships to use jump gates into 0.9-0.7 mission hubs. /signed Everyone always carries on about risk/reward, but they're so selective about how it's applied. At present, I can make more money in high sec missions than I can in 0.0 sec, with a risk level that approaches 0% of what I'd have in null sec. I'm all for risk being proportional to rewards - I just wish CCP would stop messing around and get consistent about it.
Joey Meow MURAKAMI INDUSTRIES	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:46:00 - [8] Edited by: Joey Meow on 07/08/2008 17:53:24 What changes to PVP? You mean the "Suicide Ganking Nerf?" - well, I agree with Insurance removal, and I do not agree with changes to Sec Status hits; again, I think, CCP went little bit overboard. They present a proper change, and then add additions that make it sour. Now, as far as your proposal to remove L4 agents from High Security - this will never happen, CCP is here to make money, and forcing those who do not wish to PVP into certain PVP is not a way to keep up subscription numbers. Also, there are L5 agents in low security, they do need to be fixed, or rather the missions need to be fixed somewhat. Again, no amount of moaning will make CCP disregard 88% of EVE's population, by last count, who stay in Empire. Originally by: SurrenderMonkey At present, I can make more money in high sec missions than I can in 0.0 sec, with a risk level that approaches 0% of what I'd have in null sec. Really? Wow, damn, I do not believe you. If you are part of a well organized Alliance or a Corporation with access to 0.0, and you are making less than mission runners, you are obviously doing it wrong - or you are ninja ratting in systems frequented by the neutrals who operate on NBSI, so you have to pause, and run, and cloack. In a well defended, well organized 0.0, you should not have an issue ratting none-stop and making crap load of ISK, way more than even the best mission runner in Empire. You also have access to the expensive ores and minerals which can be jumped back to Empire and sold. So, forgive me if I call bullshit on your whine.
Sinker1345	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:47:00 - [9] Coming from a misson runner, I believe that they should nerf high sec lvl 3 and lvl 4 misson payouts while at the same time addning better paying lvl 3 and 4 agents to low sec.
Amateratsu Caldari Terra Incognita Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:48:00 - [10] Never going to happen, keep dreaming.... Nerfing missions to low-sec so you piewats can have your wicked way would cause a s**t storm on a scale never before seen in eve and would prove seriously damaging to ccp's subscriptions revenue. You will just have to go find targets to pew pew elsewhere. á

Exlegion New Light Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:48:00 - [11] Quote: Since you are changing PVP, Lets change missions. "CCP, you hurt me :(. Now please hurt them. I hate them :(" I swear, this place sometimes feels like grade school . One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr
SurrenderMonkey	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:48:00 - [12] Edited by: SurrenderMonkey on 07/08/2008 17:49:39 Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 07/08/2008 17:44:07 Nullsec and Low Sec corps who dominate mission hubs or good ratting systems would ensure that unless you were a member of their organization you'd never be able to run a Level 3 or 4 without getting scanned down and destroyed. This could be easily enough solved by spreading resources out so that working out of such a "hub" is not the only option. Quote: This is severely tipping the balance in favor of full-time PvPers. You have to keep a semblance of real balance. Nerf payouts from High Sec missions, but don't take them away. This would be acceptable as well, but it'd have to be an across the board nerf to every aspect of them, I think. Loyalty points, bounties (when I pull 30m in bounties from one mission in which I'm never even remotely in danger, something is seriously amiss), and cash payouts. Quote: Also the bit about pirate faction battleships as an RP factor in High Sec is nonsense. They weren't talking about the ships themselves, but the PIRATES. Ever seen what happens when a player pirate tries to enter high sec? Yet the NPC ones (who, presumably, don't have great sec rating) simply slip on through and concord ignores them entirely.
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:51:00 - [13] Originally by: Dirk Magnum Of course you realize that this change would strip the earning power of non-industrialists in High Sec down to practically nil. Nullsec and Low Sec corps who dominate mission hubs or good ratting systems would ensure that unless you were a member of their organization you'd never be able to run a Level 3 or 4 without getting scanned down and destroyed. Something should be done about mission hubs anyway, as they cause lag. Change over to a system which doesn't tie particular agent's missions down to a small area in space. Originally by: Joey Meow Now, as far as your proposal to remove L4 agents from High Security - this will never happen, CCP is here to make money, and forcing those who do not wish to PVP into certain PVP is not a way to keep up subscription numbers. Also, there are L5 agents in low security, they do need to be fixed, or rather the missions need to be fixed somewhat. Again, no amount of moaning will make CCP disregard 88% of EVE's population, by last count, who stay in Empire. Those same people also want perfect safety, but CCP won't give it to them... - DesuSigs
Drunk Driver Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:54:00 - [14] Pirate whine thread detected.....
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:55:00 - [15] Edited by: Crumplecorn on 07/08/2008 17:55:06 The assumption than only pirates want the risk/reward ratio on missions fixed is a fallacious one. - DesuSigs
Unfunny Alt Anonymous Forumposters	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:55:00 - [16] great idea... bet the ham drake will be pretty cool in lvl 2 missions... the whole idea has been posted quite a few times to sum it up: will not work simply because moving agents from high sec to low sec is not an incentitive to move there. player who want to stay in high sec will either switch to lvl 3 or in your case to lvl 2 missions or simply quit eve all together. while i remember the times of less than 14k players online quite fondly i am not certain the current complex mechanisms could survive such a playerloss. Fighter in the Trollwars
Dirk Magnum Spearhead Endeavors	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:55:00 - [17] Ah yes you're right about the pirate ships meaning NPC pirates. However, they don't use the CONCORD jump gates, they use the pirate gates. You see this out in nullsec in some places, and you can jump through them yourself. You see them in some missions too, although of course they are just for decoration there.
Joey Meow MURAKAMI INDUSTRIES	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:56:00 - [18] Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Joey Meow Now, as far as your proposal to remove L4 agents from High Security - this will never happen, CCP is here to make money, and forcing those who do not wish to PVP into certain PVP is not a way to keep up subscription numbers. Also, there are L5 agents in low security, they do need to be fixed, or rather the missions need to be fixed somewhat. Again, no amount of moaning will make CCP disregard 88% of EVE's population, by last count, who stay in Empire. Those same people also want perfect safety, but CCP won't give it to them... You are correct, they do not have "perfect safety" either. There are still options to war declare those in the PC corporations or alliances, there are still options to suicide gank those who present really juicy targets. As I said, the only issue I see with the Ganking nerf is the Sec Status hits, a very heavy handed approach, and should not be implemented, and insurance cancelation is enough imo.
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:56:00 - [19] Originally by: Dura'Lorth Move lv 3 missions to 0.5-0.3 sec space, and lv 4 missions to 0.3-0.0 sec space. No one should be able to make that much isk off these mission in high sec systems, it causes lag. And makes sense RPwise since how hard it would be for pirate faction battle ships to use jump gates into 0.9-0.7 mission hubs. Missions need a massive change at least. Vote against the nano nerf!
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:57:00 - [20] Originally by: Crumplecorn Originally by: Joey Meow Now, as far as your proposal to remove L4 agents from High Security - this will never happen, CCP is here to make money, and forcing those who do not wish to PVP into certain PVP is not a way to keep up subscription numbers. Also, there are L5 agents in low security, they do need to be fixed, or rather the missions need to be fixed somewhat. Again, no amount of moaning will make CCP disregard 88% of EVE's population, by last count, who stay in Empire. Those same people also want perfect safety, but CCP won't give it to them... Yet... Vote against the nano nerf!

SurrenderMonkey	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:58:00 - [21] Originally by: Dirk Magnum Edited by: Dirk Magnum on 07/08/2008 17:56:24 Ah yes you're right about the pirate ships meaning NPC pirates. However, they don't use the CONCORD jump gates, they use the pirate gates. You see these out in nullsec in some places (tarnished metallic gates with orange and red flame-like energy streams), and you can jump through them yourself. You see them in some missions too, although of course they are just for decoration there. Doesn't really jive with Concord's omniscience/omnipotence with regard to anything player-related, tbh. I don't really see it mattering how the pirates enter a system, Concord is all powerful.
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:59:00 - [22] Originally by: Dura'Lorth Move lv 3 missions to 0.5-0.3 sec space, and lv 4 missions to 0.3-0.0 sec space. No one should be able to make that much isk off these mission in high sec systems, it causes lag. Waaa waaa, CCP took away my toy. Now they must take away other peoples toys also. Please cry more! These griefer tears are so delicious.
Unfunny Alt Anonymous Forumposters	Posted - 2008.08.07 17:59:00 - [23] Originally by: SurrenderMonkey At present, I can make more money in high sec missions than I can in 0.0 sec, with a risk level that approaches 0% of what I'd have in null sec. a wise man (okay it was a bob member) once said, the true wealth of 0.0 isn t in the belts or ice fields. it s in the moons. just because you as a single member can t make as much money doing your solo thing doesn t mean your corp can t make more money with there nice dyspo moon. Fighter in the Trollwars
Pithecanthropus	Posted - 2008.08.07 18:00:00 - [24] How much isk are these missioners making? More than carebears ratting in 0.0? I doubt it. These missioners put in time... in return they make isk. Seems like you pvpers need to realize their time is just as valuable as your time. Perhaps you should use YOUR time more wisely. --------------------------------- Pithecanthropus erectus, a name derived from Greek and Latin roots meaning upright ape-man.
Faife Minmatar Kinda'Shujaa	Posted - 2008.08.07 18:02:00 - [25] Originally by: Dura'Lorth Move lv 3 missions to 0.5-0.3 sec space, and lv 4 missions to 0.3-0.0 sec space. No one should be able to make that much isk off these mission in high sec systems, it causes lag. And makes sense RPwise since how hard it would be for pirate faction battle ships to use jump gates into 0.9-0.7 mission hubs. CCP is already doing this, except they're adding CONCORD protection to mission runners in low sec feel free to start whining --here-- - -
SurrenderMonkey	Posted - 2008.08.07 18:04:00 - [26] Originally by: Unfunny Alt Originally by: SurrenderMonkey At present, I can make more money in high sec missions than I can in 0.0 sec, with a risk level that approaches 0% of what I'd have in null sec. a wise man (okay it was a bob member) once said, the true wealth of 0.0 isn t in the belts or ice fields. it s in the moons. just because you as a single member can t make as much money doing your solo thing doesn t mean your corp can t make more money with there nice dyspo moon. And just how much can such a moon yield in a month? I have a feeling I won't be all that impressed.
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.07 18:04:00 - [27] Originally by: Unfunny Alt a wise man (okay it was a bob member) once said, the true wealth of 0.0 isn t in the belts or ice fields. it s in the moons. just because you as a single member can t make as much money doing your solo thing doesn t mean your corp can t make more money with there nice dyspo moon. Ok, so how about in Lv3 and Lv4 missions the money and loot goes to your corp, not you? - DesuSigs
Deej Montana Caldari Outbound Flight	Posted - 2008.08.07 18:05:00 - [28] I don't get why you "nerf missions" guys care so much about how much people can potentially make in high sec. So there are people who have more stuff than you? Too bad, deal with it. You don't hear the high sec crowd complaining about not having moons to mine or million isk rats to kill or rare ore to mine do you? No. We go about our business and play the game the way we like, as is our right as a paying CCP customer. We understand that there are (in theory) lots of isk to be made in low and null sec, but for our own reasons, we choose to remain in Empire. Why the hell do you care? Don't tell me it's because you want to maintain the "integrity of the developers vision" or any of that crap. At least be honest; you either want a bunch of what you see as soft targets to gank risk free, or, you're petulant children who can't stand that someone else has gotten more than you and had fun while doing it. How about we make a deal? You play Eve the way you like and so will I.
Somealt Ofmine	Posted - 2008.08.07 18:12:00 - [29] First of all, they aren't changing "PvP". They're addressing suicide ganking, which, IMO, barely qualifies as PvP at all. In it's present form it's practically a no-lose. As long as you can figure out how to use a cargo scanner and do some arithmatic, YOU WIN!!. Where's the "risk/reward" in that? Sad to say, but the people whining here don't want "PvP", they want helpless victims, which isn't the same thing. I'd be all for moving level 4s to low-sec with the following changes to them: 1) Re-configure them so that optimal mission running setups are very similar to optimal PvP setups (i.e. you need to be able to deal/take burst damage, web, scram, etc). 2) Make them not soloable, and requiring a good mixed fleet of damage dealers, tacklers, etc. This is the norm in other MMOs, where you cant run most worthwhile dungeons solo, or with a group consisting only of damage dealers or tanks. If they made these two changes I'd LOVE to see level 4s moved to low sec. Of course, the pirate whines would be far louder than they are on this thread.
Crumplecorn Gallente Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2008.08.07 18:12:00 - [30] Edited by: Crumplecorn on 07/08/2008 18:12:58 Originally by: Deej Montana I don't get why you "nerf missions" guys care so much about how much people can potentially make in high sec. So there are people who have more stuff than you? Too bad, deal with it. You don't hear the high sec crowd complaining about not having moons to mine or million isk rats to kill or rare ore to mine do you? No. We go about our business and play the game the way we like, as is our right as a paying CCP customer. We understand that there are (in theory) lots of isk to be made in low and null sec, but for our own reasons, we choose to remain in Empire. Why the hell do you care? Don't tell me it's because you want to maintain the "integrity of the developers vision" or any of that crap. At least be honest; you either want a bunch of what you see as soft targets to gank risk free, or, you're petulant children who can't stand that someone else has gotten more than you and had fun while doing it. How about we make a deal? You play Eve the way you like and so will I. Perhaps we recognise that this is MMORPG and as such everyone everywhere needs to be playing by the same basic rules - like Risk/Reward. I know that since mission running is basically a single player game that it is easy to forget this, but you are part of the game, and do have an effect, and thus need to be regulated like everyone else. - DesuSigs



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: 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.