EVE Search - So, you want missioners in lowsec?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

So, you want missioners in lowsec?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.09.01 17:55:00 - [1] Lobby to make missions blobbable. And by that I mean scale with the number of people coming to the party, up to about 100 or so. At the moment the more people you bring to a mission the less profitable it becomes (travel time to/from mission and between gates being the biggest killer). Bonus points for giving force recons something useful to do as well. PvP is a blob friendly activity -- the bigger and more varied your blob the better your odds of no losses and lots of killmails. PvE is a solo friendly activity. And we all know which side is likely to win a P&P&P&P&P...&PvP encounter. There you go. Anything else is just hot air.
Jameroz Echoes of Space	Posted - 2008.09.01 17:57:00 - [2] But people doing missions solo are easier target!
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.09.01 18:09:00 - [3] Originally by: Clair Bear Lobby to make missions blobbable. And by that I mean scale with the number of people coming to the party, up to about 100 or so. At the moment the more people you bring to a mission the less profitable it becomes (travel time to/from mission and between gates being the biggest killer). Bonus points for giving force recons something useful to do as well. PvP is a blob friendly activity -- the bigger and more varied your blob the better your odds of no losses and lots of killmails. PvE is a solo friendly activity. And we all know which side is likely to win a P&P&P&P&P...&PvP encounter. There you go. Anything else is just hot air. I would absolutely love to see a system where missions are very unpredictable and the best missions (level 4s) are NOT completable solo with the same ship setup. A given ship setup may blow through one mission with ease but another mission (Or another random spawn in the same mission) may rip it a new one. Not removing solo missions but heavily encouraging help to cover weaknesses.
Dirk Magnum Royal Hiigaran Navy	Posted - 2008.09.01 18:24:00 - [4] People who think missions are the solution to Low Sec are all silly and cute in their naivete
Banana Torres Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.09.01 18:34:00 - [5] Originally by: Dirk Magnum People who think missions are the solution to Low Sec are all silly and cute in their naivete I guess this sums it up better than any wall of text can.
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.09.01 18:46:00 - [6] Originally by: Dirk Magnum People who think missions are the solution to Low Sec are all silly and cute in their naivete Huh? What do you mean? How the hell can something be a solution to a location? The issue is that lowsec missioning simply isn't as good as it should be, it's not in any vague attempt to do anything else other than make it worthwhile.
Zen Guerrilla Minmatar Mindfunk	Posted - 2008.09.01 19:01:00 - [7] Edited by: Zen Guerrilla on 01/09/2008 19:02:55 Originally by: Dirk Magnum People who think missions are the solution to Low Sec are all silly and cute in their naivete This. There already are people running missions in lowsec. And no matter how you'd change missions, even moving L4s to lowsec, those people already there would still be the only ones. You will not get the carebears into lowsec. They don't want pvp. They won't take the risk. No matter whats the reward. /edit OT: But i like the idea of having missions adjust with the number of players entering the deadspace or whatever.
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.09.01 19:06:00 - [8] Let's do a bit of analysis. Removing the station-only professions we have the following possible lowsec targets. 1. ratters 2. missioners 3. miners 4. haulers 5. pirates A huge swath of eve economy in highsec is driven by missioners. If you don't believe me feel free to check out region markets without good L4 agents. They're a freaking ghost town. Missioners inject materials for manufacturers. Manufacturers in turn provide a market for miners. Traders come to get a slice of the pie, bringing haulers with them. In 0.0 this is true on a smaller scale -- good rocks and good rats mean a station hub and a viable economy. Bad rocks and bad rats mean an occasional cloaky raven in local, if that. So yes, if the 'breakage' with lowsec is not having enough targets the quickest and easiest fix is PROFITABLE NPC harvesting, in either ratting or missioning flavors. Fix nothing, my approach is one which WILL get more people in lowsec if done right. FW was just rewards short of doing this. L5s might have done it if they were meant for larger groups of players (read: 50-100 vs 5-10). Current game mechanics are all about the blob. If blobs are impractical all you get is roaming nanogangs. And those may not be around for that much longer.
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.09.01 19:07:00 - [9] Originally by: Clair Bear Let's do a bit of analysis. Removing the station-only professions we have the following possible lowsec targets. For someone in FTZ, you sure forgot that farming is a profession.
Enkidu Uruksen Wakizashi Renaissance	Posted - 2008.09.01 19:09:00 - [10] To these "target" professions I'd add: - Explorers (or do you consider these missioners?) - Salvagers
Banana Torres Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2008.09.01 19:12:00 - [11] Originally by: Clair Bear A huge swath of eve economy in highsec is driven by missioners. If you don't believe me feel free to check out region markets without good L4 agents. They're a freaking ghost town. Missioners inject materials for manufacturers. Manufacturers in turn provide a market for miners. Traders come to get a slice of the pie, bringing haulers with them. Wrong, wrong, wrongity, wrong. Missioners have the ISK to buy stuff, so the the sellers of said stuff move there to sell their stuff to the mission runners.
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.09.01 19:30:00 - [12] Originally by: Banana Torres Missioners have the ISK to buy stuff, so the the sellers of said stuff move there to sell their stuff to the mission runners. Other than ammo missioners don't use up that much compared to PvPers. And the faction toys, implants etc. are cheaper in Jita. Explorers aren't much of a target -- the standard approach is to scan while cloaked in a covops, bookmark, come back in a PvE gang later. You're not going to catch an explorer with even a quarter of a brain until they're plexing -- at which point it's indistinguishable from a mission. Salvagers I'll give you, but even then that's a profession dependent on ratters or missioners. And to my very blue goon friend: unless you're selling GTCs exclusively you're farming something or another. Be it newbies, rats, or people who suck at market manipulation or recognizing scams. It's a matter of degree.
Metangela Usafa	Posted - 2008.09.01 20:16:00 - [13] The same old cry from the PvP crowd is getting old. Nerf high sec so we can kill someone that doesn't want to PvP. Most PvP'rs that live in 0.0 sec fight other people that also live in 0.0 sec. It is a different game for them and both sides come to the knife fight knowing it's a knife fight. The nerf high sec crowd wants targets, not fights. They want to be able to scan out the guy in the Faction fit CNR that is running a lvl 4 solo so they can scram him and wear his shields down without him being able to fight back effectively. If you PvE in a ship that can also PvP then you suck at both and vice versa. They want targets not fairness.
Malcanis RuffRyders Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.09.01 20:26:00 - [14] Originally by: Zen Guerrilla You will not get the carebears into lowsec. They don't want pvp. They won't take the risk. No matter whats the reward. People keep saying this, but when lo-sec was considerably more profitable than hi-sec, there were a lot more people in it. How did the "no PvP under any circumstance whatever" crowd cope before hi-sec missions were so profitable? That's right - they ran them anyway.
Roy Batty68 Caldari Immortal Dead	Posted - 2008.09.01 20:42:00 - [15] It's kind of amazing, really. A forum phenomenon of sorts. People repeat their strawman argument so often they start to really believe it. They even come up with "solution" threads to answer it. Kind of cool from a purely clinical perspective.
Artemis Rose Varion Galactic Accord Corporate Enterprise Syndicate	Posted - 2008.09.01 20:56:00 - [16] I used to be one of those players that goes "Nerf High sec bears, boost low sec, its way too empty, waahh wahhh" Then I became an outlaw, and realized, the population is good, the fights are nice and lag is rare. A good match for me
Nadarius Chrome Celestial Horizon Corp.	Posted - 2008.09.01 21:06:00 - [17] Oh goodie, we haven't had any threads on this subject before, I shall watch with interest , as the resolution is bound to show itself shortly.
Sergeant Spot Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.09.01 21:32:00 - [18] OP has an interesting idea. Very interesting in fact. I'd even go further than the OP, and tailor Low Sec missions so a PvE pilot NEEDS to fit a web and scrambler, or be grouped with folks so fitted. Make it so the the PvE group MUST include tacklers, etc, for the mission to be completed. Give the PvE group meaningful benefit for including EW ships. And be sure to make mission rats reset aggro in such a way that makes in impossible for folks attacking the missioners to avoid drawing a MAJOR portion of the NPC aggro (yes, this could be used as an aggro management tool by missioners. So what?)
Highfaust	Posted - 2008.09.01 21:34:00 - [19] lol best video ever, whole corp on a mission = owned. Linkage
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.09.01 22:31:00 - [20] Originally by: Sergeant Spot I'd even go further than the OP, and tailor Low Sec missions so a PvE pilot NEEDS to fit a web and scrambler, or be grouped with folks so fitted. That's not enough, IMO. Part of the mission objectives should call for other ECM (including long range webbing & scrambling), otherwise a critical part of a PvP gang is left yawning on the sidelines. FoTM also need to be modeled and installed -- at least one stage should have the team facing a nano recon gang or future popular equivalent. The PvE group MUST include tacklers, jammers, warp in point providers (oh me me! covops pilot!) etc, for the mission to be completed. Give the PvE group meaningful benefit for including EW ships. And FFS, stop making it a shield tanking contest while slowboating between 90km gates. Nobody except caps should need to run a sustainable tank for 40 freaking minutes. Here is my proposed 'level 6' mission makeup: 1. 1-N mission waypoints given to the mission puller (FC). Some game mechanic needs to be introduced to share this with wing and squad commanders. 2. Some of the mission objectives should include whacking a specific rat which tries to warp out (permanently) in structure. 3. Other mission objectives require jamming a structure (?) to activate a deadspace gate. 4. Create a few objectives for those of us who can only fly either covops or gank ship -- dynamic scan down a target and/or warp in on a high dps gang to neutralize before they open a can of whupass. In all cases the mission rooms should be close enough for entire gang to warp in. A solo pilot could finish this, of course. But it would take them ages and require many ship swaps. This way if you have a gang of 10, you go with a gang of 10. If you have a gang of 300, you are still good to go with some coordination. Finishing N out of X objectives should be good enough for a partial reward. Alternatively, progress on objectives should be saved -- make it function like an N part storyline, with all N parts doable simultaneously. Highsec L4s are still available to the solo player if they desire an autistic experience instead.
Malcanis RuffRyders Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.09.01 22:31:00 - [21] Originally by: Metangela Usafa The same old cry from the PvP crowd is getting old. Nerf high sec so we can kill someone that doesn't want to PvP. The same old cry from mission farmers is getting old: Make ad hominem remarks rather than address the issues so we can keep making ISK to sell. See how you like being on the receiving end of a complete distortion of your position, you cheating ISK seller.
Ki An Gallente The Really Awesome Players	Posted - 2008.09.01 22:49:00 - [22] Most people talking about nerfing level 4 missions already agree that moving them to low sec wouldn't fix low sec, and that other ways to balance them are better. Such as: 1: A dynamic agent quality system, where agents that are used a lot drops in quality, and agents that aren't used as much goes up. 2: A general nerf of high sec mission payout to bring it in line with other high sec professions such as mining. Trading is not counted into this, as it is a direct form of player competition. 3: A boost of low sec and 0.0 mission payout to compensate for the lack of security. 4: A revised probing system that makes it harder to find mission runners. We're looking to fix an imbalance. We're not looking to move people anywhere. Those who do go to unsafe space should be aptly rewarded for it, though, and those who chose to remain in high sec should not get the big rewards they are currently getting. However tired you are of hearing it, risk/reward applies to mission runners too. Not just to everyone you have been whining about for the last years.
Spoon Thumb Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.09.01 23:02:00 - [23] Tbh, low sec missioning is already viable. You just need to get organised / in a group to take control of the area I think the best bonus would be if missions in low sec you could reject more often (say one every 2 hours without standings hit), just as an extra incentive to sweeten things without throwing the whole system out of balance or nerfing high sec mission runners
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.09.01 23:36:00 - [24] Originally by: Spoon Thumb Tbh, low sec missioning is already viable. You just need to get organised / in a group to take control of the area And why would someone bother to do that for empire space? There's only room enough for one or two RP alliances to do this, and you're it. If someone is organized enough to hold lowsec NPC space they can head out to 0.0 and do better. If you hold NPC space, might as well make it space worth owning. Slight boost to 0.0 NPC space, null effect on lowsec.
MineralOel Steuer Amarr OP EC	Posted - 2008.09.01 23:49:00 - [25] Adapt or die, Carebear!
Sylper Illysten Caldari Ex Coelis The Bantam Menace	Posted - 2008.09.01 23:51:00 - [26] The OP's premise is flawed. PvPers don't want missioners in low-sec, they want easy, risk free kills and the petty joy of ruining another players day.
Malcanis RuffRyders Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.09.01 23:58:00 - [27] Originally by: Sylper Illysten The OP's premise is flawed. PvPers don't want missioners in low-sec, they want easy, risk free kills and the petty joy of ruining another players day. Your premise is flawed. You want to carry on making ISK to sell in peace.
Sharupak Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2008.09.02 00:09:00 - [28] Quote: So, you want missioners in lowsec? No, I did, but then the 20,000 threads on the subject made me start a secret society bent on infiltrating CCP and Nerfing it into unplayable space!
Sylper Illysten Caldari Ex Coelis The Bantam Menace	Posted - 2008.09.02 00:13:00 - [29] Edited by: Sylper Illysten on 02/09/2008 00:13:34 Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Sylper Illysten The OP's premise is flawed. PvPers don't want missioners in low-sec, they want easy, risk free kills and the petty joy of ruining another players day. Your premise is flawed. You want to carry on making ISK to sell in peace. So all mission runners are ISK sellers? Would you produce some evidence that I'm an ISK seller? I'm quite happy for CCP to investogate my in game financial history because I have never bought or sold ISK. On the other hand like many player I don't have the time or the ISK to make myself a target for you in lowsec so you can gratify yourself over killmails of mission ships, nothing like blowing up a target that can't fight back to make you feel good about yourself? Drop you strawman and consider this, some of us play EVE to relax, that relaxation does not include having to live in a constant state of paranoia.
NoOth3rDestiny	Posted - 2008.09.02 00:19:00 - [30] I could only read half way through this thread since it got hijacked and taken off topic by those who are trying to argue about Lv4 missions in high sec. Back on topic please. I think the OP has a great idea. The one thing I've loved about some other MMO's is scaling fights when entering a dungeon. The more people you have, the harder it gets but more rewarding. Now, CCP might have gone about setting up missions in a way they'd think could scale up and get groups of people to do them effectively, but you can solo up to lv4, and well lv5 is insanely harder. The idea could possibly only effect some missions or all depending on how it is done. I am picturing a mission where you have a single room with waves of units, like blockade or some others (new ones even). Now the first guy goes in and as usual would grab the agro from the first wave, when the second guy or third guy comes in the NPC's go "Oh so you brought some backup, we will respond in kind" and they bring another wave in, these would continue as you trigger them from there on. Ships could be worth points, where if you breach a certain amount of points, you trigger an additional wave. Thus you'd likely require more then one tanker and possibly a logistics ship. With the large number of ships, some lesser used weapons may become useful, like smart bombs. The agent would then adjust the reward higher after you return stating that you encountered a larger force and all in your fleet should receive rewards for their participation. There would need to be the standard mission reset after a few hours in and remove additional spawns.
Malcanis RuffRyders Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.09.02 00:33:00 - [31] Originally by: Sylper Illysten Edited by: Sylper Illysten on 02/09/2008 00:13:34 Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Sylper Illysten The OP's premise is flawed. PvPers don't want missioners in low-sec, they want easy, risk free kills and the petty joy of ruining another players day. Your premise is flawed. You want to carry on making ISK to sell in peace. So all mission runners are ISK sellers? Would you produce some evidence that I'm an ISK seller? Of course you're an ISK-seller, you dirty ISK-seller. You want to "relax" in hisec so that you can make ISK to sell. It's obvious and therefore I don't have to produce any proof or even logic to support my assertion. And even if I did, I still wouldn't because you're a filthy stinking ISK-seller.
Malcanis RuffRyders Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.09.02 00:50:00 - [32] Originally by: Sylper Illysten Drop you strawman I bolded the part that went right over your head, btw.
Daan Sai HAZCON Inc	Posted - 2008.09.02 01:12:00 - [33] Doooooon't encourage blobbing!!! Just make it practical to jump into lowsec on a regular basis without being ganked before you start the missions. At the moment it is a complete lottery when you jump into the lowsec choke point, and you are simply stupid to jump in in a PvE fit battleship as sooner or sooner you'll get blown up with no option t do anything about it. Using a scout/metagaming is lame, a way to help, but not solve, a fundamental game design flaw (IMHO). Going in in a cov ops or nano-frigate is OK if you are running a pipe out to an alliance pocket, but not for any sort of missioning. I'll go to lowsec when you prevent gate camping. That is all. Disable all weapon systems on the same grid as the gate, simple. Once away from the gate it is fair game and a real game of hunt the missioneer is on. But jumping into lowsec choke point gates is just plain dumb in anything other than a covert ops, and even then the brainless smartie BS on the other side takes all skill from the play. Mindless gate camping pirates give the other cool pirates a baaaad name. I like outsmarting pirates, and if I get caught, fair play, but massively over camped gateways are completely stupid and no pro missioneer would waste their time going in. Probe me down in mission, find me in belts, planets/moons, cool, but if you don't let people into lowsec they are hardly going to go there often.
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2008.09.02 02:54:00 - [34] Originally by: Clair Bear Lobby to make missions blobbable. PvE is a solo friendly activity. And we all know which side is likely to win a P&P&P&P&P...&PvP encounter. There you go. Anything else is just hot air. Great point. Scale LowSec missions (assuming they can) to in-system gang size.
Gracious NightAngel	Posted - 2008.09.02 05:52:00 - [35] I Think there is Mission in Low-Security already
Anaalys Fluuterby Caldari	Posted - 2008.09.02 05:59:00 - [36] Originally by: Gracious NightAngel I Think there is Mission in Low-Security already Yep. And they even pay much better than High Sec missions do. But they are rarely run because the risk vs reward is off due to players shooting at the PvE fitted ships with PvP ships Hence not too many players run them.
Gracious NightAngel	Posted - 2008.09.02 06:05:00 - [37] Why didn't I think of that GANK
SmokinFighter Gallente	Posted - 2008.09.02 11:47:00 - [38] Originally by: Jameroz But people doing missions solo are easier target! <- that's why people don't low sec mission
Daelin Blackleaf Aliastra	Posted - 2008.09.02 12:01:00 - [39] Quote: So, you want missioners in lowsec? No. I want it to be worth my time running missions in lo-sec compared to hi-sec. I'd like for exploration and mining to be more competitive too both in hi-sec and in lo-sec (after considering potential losses and time loss of course) but that isn't on the general EVE publics radar right now. Since you asked what I'd want.
Jagadai Bator Amarr Veyr	Posted - 2008.09.02 13:14:00 - [40] Edited by: Jagadai Bator on 02/09/2008 13:16:56 Prepare for slight eye bleeding episode....Whilst the blob mission idea is a move in the right direction, the whole problem with moving missions to low sec is surely more to do with individual play style. Assumptions - The vast majority of mission runners must be in player-owned corps. I am going to discount the hard-core solo players who sit in NPC or one man corps - after all this is ment to be an MMO, and its highly unlikely they will ever move out of Empire if they aren't already in Low-Sec/0.0. I therefore assume that most runners (60-70%?)use missions as a means of generating an income, not as a major reason for playing. I know, because I do this and I find it so inconcievably boring, I refuse to believe the majority of runners do nothing else in Eve. Then again this is an MMO..... If missions become a blob/Corp Op, that will force people like me to only run missions when a suitable number/mix of fellow corp members is on-line and available. This will not be during those days I log on for just an hour or so, which is probably the majority of my playing sessions. Therefore I loose perhaps 50% of my income and am more limited in my activities (i.e. fewer spare iskies). Question is will I log on less (I have paid for this and refuse to mine or watch building queues, thank you) or stop saving up for a FC ship and blow my wad on cheap PvP fits until I'm skint - that was a rhetorical question. If I mission in Low-Sec, will the rewards be upped to balance the smaller amount of time I can spend running them or is this a way to deflate part of the economy? Would missions then be changed to favour a fleet with a PvP fit? Frankly a blob of PvE ships must be a Pirate's wet dream. If so, will this lead to escalations (easier to probe out 20 ships than 1) and future whines about lag? Personally I'd prefer to mission in Low-Sec but I'd like to fly with at least some form of PvP fit. I hate being forced to warp to safe spots due to a probe somewhere and end up spending 3 hours doing a 40 minute mission - its feckin' boring! The alternative is to try and rush through the mission and then get reamed when the Pie's turn up - nothing I hate more than seeing a flashy red and knowing there is nothing I can do from that point onwards apart form delaying the inevitable. (Yeah, call for help, but I mission away from hubs and away from fellow Corpies. Im stupid like that....) It would be neat to be able to combine PvE missions with a bit of a chance in a PvP situation. Tl:dr Blobing missions take longer to run, requires bigger rewards, becomes bigger ISK faucet, dictates when individuals can 'play'. PvE vs PvP fits should be scrapped - let missions be possible in PvP fits - more PvP all round! Edit: stupidity
Aaron Mirrorsaver R.E.C.O.N.	Posted - 2008.09.02 13:48:00 - [41] Originally by: Jagadai Bator Edited by: Jagadai Bator on 02/09/2008 13:16:56 Prepare for slight eye bleeding episode....Whilst the blob mission idea is a move in the right direction, the whole problem with moving missions to low sec is surely more to do with individual play style. Assumptions - The vast majority of mission runners must be in player-owned corps. I am going to discount the hard-core solo players who sit in NPC or one man corps - after all this is ment to be an MMO, and its highly unlikely they will ever move out of Empire if they aren't already in Low-Sec/0.0. I therefore assume that most runners (60-70%?)use missions as a means of generating an income, not as a major reason for playing. I know, because I do this and I find it so inconcievably boring, I refuse to believe the majority of runners do nothing else in Eve. Then again this is an MMO..... If missions become a blob/Corp Op, that will force people like me to only run missions when a suitable number/mix of fellow corp members is on-line and available. This will not be during those days I log on for just an hour or so, which is probably the majority of my playing sessions. Therefore I loose perhaps 50% of my income and am more limited in my activities (i.e. fewer spare iskies). Question is will I log on less (I have paid for this and refuse to mine or watch building queues, thank you) or stop saving up for a FC ship and blow my wad on cheap PvP fits until I'm skint - that was a rhetorical question. If I mission in Low-Sec, will the rewards be upped to balance the smaller amount of time I can spend running them or is this a way to deflate part of the economy? Would missions then be changed to favour a fleet with a PvP fit? Frankly a blob of PvE ships must be a Pirate's wet dream. If so, will this lead to escalations (easier to probe out 20 ships than 1) and future whines about lag? Personally I'd prefer to mission in Low-Sec but I'd like to fly with at least some form of PvP fit. I hate being forced to warp to safe spots due to a probe somewhere and end up spending 3 hours doing a 40 minute mission - its feckin' boring! The alternative is to try and rush through the mission and then get reamed when the Pie's turn up - nothing I hate more than seeing a flashy red and knowing there is nothing I can do from that point onwards apart form delaying the inevitable. (Yeah, call for help, but I mission away from hubs and away from fellow Corpies. Im stupid like that....) It would be neat to be able to combine PvE missions with a bit of a chance in a PvP situation. Tl:dr Blobing missions take longer to run, requires bigger rewards, becomes bigger ISK faucet, dictates when individuals can 'play'. PvE vs PvP fits should be scrapped - let missions be possible in PvP fits - more PvP all round! Edit: stupidity after reading the first half of your post, I must ask what is the point to your existence or playing the game? you say you run missions for income and its the primary reason you do them and probably the primary reason anyone else does them because thats the only viable easy way to get isk in high sec, but what the hell do you do with your isk? you dont pvp, you dont have any losses, you dont need isk to buy capital ships cause your in hi sec, so what do you need piles and piles of isk earned from months on end of mission running? ------ RECON is recruiting.
Eltanin Draconis	Posted - 2008.09.02 13:55:00 - [42] IÆm sorry but ôboost low-secö argument is wrong because low-sec is broken. In high-sec if you shoot someone the police show up instantly and kill you. (This is like some upscale neighborhood.) In 0.0 your alliance can do the job of the police and shoot intruders at will. (This is like some lawless area run by warlords.) In low-sec you canÆt preemptively defend yourself without killing your security status but you have no protection. (This is like some crime ridden neighborhood that the police largely ignore. The police wonÆt protect you. And if you protect yourself then you are the one that goes to jail.) Remove the security status hit and gate guns from low-sec, treat it like unconquerable 0.0 space, and people will go thereà Player corps will move in to control the area so they can mine and mission run. Orà Put CONCORD in low-sec and treat it just like high sec. Either one works. But until this is fixed, few people will want to go to low-sec.
Malcanis RuffRyders Axiom Empire	Posted - 2008.09.02 14:01:00 - [43] Originally by: Aaron Mirrorsaver Originally by: Jagadai Bator Edited by: Jagadai Bator on 02/09/2008 13:16:56 Prepare for slight eye bleeding episode....Whilst the blob mission idea is a move in the right direction, the whole problem with moving missions to low sec is surely more to do with individual play style. Assumptions - The vast majority of mission runners must be in player-owned corps. I am going to discount the hard-core solo players who sit in NPC or one man corps - after all this is ment to be an MMO, and its highly unlikely they will ever move out of Empire if they aren't already in Low-Sec/0.0. I therefore assume that most runners (60-70%?)use missions as a means of generating an income, not as a major reason for playing. I know, because I do this and I find it so inconcievably boring, I refuse to believe the majority of runners do nothing else in Eve. Then again this is an MMO..... If missions become a blob/Corp Op, that will force people like me to only run missions when a suitable number/mix of fellow corp members is on-line and available. This will not be during those days I log on for just an hour or so, which is probably the majority of my playing sessions. Therefore I loose perhaps 50% of my income and am more limited in my activities (i.e. fewer spare iskies). Question is will I log on less (I have paid for this and refuse to mine or watch building queues, thank you) or stop saving up for a FC ship and blow my wad on cheap PvP fits until I'm skint - that was a rhetorical question. If I mission in Low-Sec, will the rewards be upped to balance the smaller amount of time I can spend running them or is this a way to deflate part of the economy? Would missions then be changed to favour a fleet with a PvP fit? Frankly a blob of PvE ships must be a Pirate's wet dream. If so, will this lead to escalations (easier to probe out 20 ships than 1) and future whines about lag? Personally I'd prefer to mission in Low-Sec but I'd like to fly with at least some form of PvP fit. I hate being forced to warp to safe spots due to a probe somewhere and end up spending 3 hours doing a 40 minute mission - its feckin' boring! The alternative is to try and rush through the mission and then get reamed when the Pie's turn up - nothing I hate more than seeing a flashy red and knowing there is nothing I can do from that point onwards apart form delaying the inevitable. (Yeah, call for help, but I mission away from hubs and away from fellow Corpies. Im stupid like that....) It would be neat to be able to combine PvE missions with a bit of a chance in a PvP situation. Tl:dr Blobing missions take longer to run, requires bigger rewards, becomes bigger ISK faucet, dictates when individuals can 'play'. PvE vs PvP fits should be scrapped - let missions be possible in PvP fits - more PvP all round! Edit: stupidity after reading the first half of your post, I must ask what is the point to your existence or playing the game? you say you run missions for income and its the primary reason you do them and probably the primary reason anyone else does them because thats the only viable easy way to get isk in high sec, but what the hell do you do with your isk? you dont pvp, you dont have any losses, you dont need isk to buy capital ships cause your in hi sec, so what do you need piles and piles of isk earned from months on end of mission running? Those officer power diags aren't cheap you know. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.09.02 14:04:00 - [44] Edited by: Esmenet on 02/09/2008 14:05:57 Originally by: Clair Bear Lobby to make missions blobbable. And by that I mean scale with the number of people coming to the party, up to about 100 or so. At the moment the more people you bring to a mission the less profitable it becomes (travel time to/from mission and between gates being the biggest killer). Bonus points for giving force recons something useful to do as well. PvP is a blob friendly activity -- the bigger and more varied your blob the better your odds of no losses and lots of killmails. PvE is a solo friendly activity. And we all know which side is likely to win a P&P&P&P&P...&PvP encounter. There you go. Anything else is just hot air. Personally i dont really care if you come to low sec or not. I just want to fix the broken risk/reward system. But i hope you do realise that establishing a mission running corp would have an actual value in low sec if its done properly. Vote against the nano nerf!
Jagadai Bator Amarr Veyr	Posted - 2008.09.02 14:40:00 - [45] Originally by: Aaron Mirrorsaver after reading the first half of your post, I must ask what is the point to your existence or playing the game? you say you run missions for income and its the primary reason you do them and probably the primary reason anyone else does them because thats the only viable easy way to get isk in high sec, but what the hell do you do with your isk? you dont pvp, you dont have any losses, you dont need isk to buy capital ships cause your in hi sec, so what do you need piles and piles of isk earned from months on end of mission running? Where did I say I dont PvP or have losses? PvE is my income source as I dont like the market/mine/manufacture options. I dont have piles and piles of isk or faction anything - if you do, feel free to send some my way. Following up the OP I said I would go to low-sec if I could PvP fit for missions as I only play intermittently. Which is why Im not obscenely rich or faction obsessed. Currently, its a one sided gaurenteed gank; if runners felt they had a chance against pirates, more of them would be happy to go to low-sec. This would then increase the opportunities for PvP. See, not that difficult to understand.
Drykor Minmatar Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.09.02 14:46:00 - [46] If you make missions blob-friendly, it will just encourage use of alt accounts even more than now.
Metangela Usafa	Posted - 2008.09.02 18:16:00 - [47] Originally by: Esmenet Edited by: Esmenet on 02/09/2008 14:05:57 Originally by: Clair Bear Lobby to make missions blobbable. And by that I mean scale with the number of people coming to the party, up to about 100 or so. At the moment the more people you bring to a mission the less profitable it becomes (travel time to/from mission and between gates being the biggest killer). Bonus points for giving force recons something useful to do as well. PvP is a blob friendly activity -- the bigger and more varied your blob the better your odds of no losses and lots of killmails. PvE is a solo friendly activity. And we all know which side is likely to win a P&P&P&P&P...&PvP encounter. There you go. Anything else is just hot air. Personally i dont really care if you come to low sec or not. I just want to fix the broken risk/reward system. But i hope you do realise that establishing a mission running corp would have an actual value in low sec if its done properly. When this was brought up about freighters being ganked in high sec the cries of the gankers were deafening. You want to use this as a reason to nerf Lvl4 missions. Why not just say "The way they play the game is better than the way I play it". It's not impacting another player the way that ganking was but it's just not fair....Metangela stomps her foot in frustration.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.