Pyatera
   |
Posted - 2008.08.31 19:52:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Kwedaras
Risk vs Reward. I am sure everybody heard these words at least a few times while playing eve. Almost every ccps balancing patch (Read: nerf) is based on that. Stabs, nanos, suicide ganking and other nerfed or will be nerfed things render too much reward or too little risk. Now, i want to point out, that this post is not written by a bitter suicide ganker or nanofaag. I must admit that i have tried suicide ganking few months back, i got some kills but that profession was too boring for me. And for nanos - i have 500kish sp in navigation, so no nanos for me.
Lets see:
Too little risk?
Does having to own and fly a pimped BS with lvl5 resist skills and good engineering skills all round so it tanks like fury but sucks at firepower constitute little risk? NO. Having to share your mission reward with 2 or 3 other corpies or take forever to finish the mission yourself constitute high rewards? NO.
Quote:
Now lets see what we have in empire : You can do lvl4q20 missions freely, even for several agents (there are i think 3 q20 agents in range of 1j in motsu). No need to pay attention all the time (you need in lowsec and 0.0 if you want to stay alive). Also you can try to pimp your ship to a certain level, as suicide ganking is being nerfed and you certainly wont be ganked if you fly a CNR with 500 mil in mods(CN fit). The only left risk is being wardecced, but again, you can leave to npc corp until wardec is dropped. Salvage thieves is not a threat, as they cant shoot you if you are not a moron (Read: you shoot back). Risk ratio : 0-0.01
Let's see what we really have in Highsec: Lvl20 agents are available but EVERYONE and their cat is working for them so there's huge amounts of lag in these systems. Lag=lost ships - as we all know and most mission runners know only too well . That increases the risk factor considerably.
In fact, it's far better to do lvl3 missions and earn more isk and standings since the missions can be done by most lvl4 missioners in a matter of a few minutes. I can do the lvl3 Repair Station in less than 20 minutes and that mission pays quite well. The only reason for me doing lvl4 missions is for the salvage since I build rigs since I can make almost 50% more isk overall doing lvl3 missions.
Quote:
Risk vs. Reward
So what we get (higher the better) : 0.0 - 45-20/4-10 = from 11.25 to 2. risk vs reward ratio. lowsec - 30/4 = 7.5. And finally : 20/0-01 = from OH SHI-(infinity) to 200
Why lvl4s needs a nerf and not lowsec/0.0 ratting/lvl4s needs a boost : boosting lowsec/0.0 ratting/lvl4s will cause massive inflation, as amount of isk earned will be significantly higher.
What we have is more targets for lowsec pirates you mean The significant amount of extra risk from pirates and random gankers in lowsec would still be too much risk even if you doubled the lowsec rewards. Why do you think there so much ore left unmined in lowsec? The reward is not worth losing a hulk for and having someone guarding your operation means splitting the profits so it's still less lucrative than highsec.
Overall, things would be better if there was a significant boost in lowsec instead of a nerf in highsec. If you nerf highsec, people would not bother and soon get bored with the game because lowsec isn't worth the risk and highsec isn't viable to live in. Boost lowsec and people would respond by taking the risk because the significant gain would pay for the losses, which they don't pay for at present. The current system means you can earn as much in highsec as in lowsec, even with the extra value ore and rat bounties etc in lowsec. Taking losses means you earn less and splitting the rewards also means you earn less.
With current values of lvl4 missions, it would take at least 10 missions or so on average to recoup the loss of one BS. Considering player rats would stay around the best agent locations, no-one would ever manage 10 missions unmolested.
|