EVE Search - Level 4 missions; bad zulupark

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Level 4 missions; bad zulupark

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jason Edwards	Posted - 2008.10.27 16:09:00 - [1] Quote: More lvl4 agents: I've said somewhere above that we want to normalize the risk-reward ratio of level 4's, so this would fall under that hat. This is why you shouldn't touch level 4s. Think of the newbs! Rokh Level 4 runner. Maelstrom Level 4 Runner. Raven Level 4 Runner. All scanned within very short period. My other good reason is outlined here. ------------------------ "There was this bright flash of light - and now this egg shaped thing is on my screen - did I level up?"
Takon Orlani Caldari Chaos Monkeys	Posted - 2008.10.27 16:13:00 - [2] Troll troll is troll PS troll.
Kynes Harkonnen HAZCON Inc YTMND.	Posted - 2008.10.27 16:15:00 - [3] Thats not a noob fit rokh... Its the well known "SHOOP DA WHOOP!" Fit. :P You do gotta love hull tanking mission runners tho lol
5pinDizzy Amarr Umpteenth Podding	Posted - 2008.10.27 16:21:00 - [4] Pft, stupid noob OP has never seen a SHOOP DA WOOP fit before.
DrAtomic Atomic Heroes Arcane Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.27 16:29:00 - [5] Lol @OP not knowing SHOOP DA WHOOP fit... - - - Originally by: CCP Wrangler If you can understand our goal, disagree with our solution and offer a solution that is equal or better your opinion has a better chance of being heard...
Julius Rigel House Rigel	Posted - 2008.10.27 16:41:00 - [6] Quote: Think of the newbs! Where I come from this is referred to as "the mission content for probers". They are put there on purpose so ninja garbage men have some entertainment while picking up the trash.
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2008.10.27 16:48:00 - [7] If you move all the level 4s to low sec, then they'll move to level 3s. There is nothing you can do that will get many of the mission runners to move to unsafe space. They want the ability to log into the game, play a couple hours a day without to much harassment, make enough isk to get new ships and skills, and log out. If you change the game enough to where they can no longer do that, they'll just move on to the next game. Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts. Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal
Jack Gilligan Caldari THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.27 16:51:00 - [8] Check out the speed of Battleships on the test server. L4 missions have already been nerfed. With the speed changes (you can't speed fit a solo mission tank) running missions will take a LOT more time than they do now, lowering even more any perceived advantage over mission running vs 0.0 ratting. Note: there isn't. You make far more isk in less time ratting in 0.0 than with mission running. My opinions are my own and do not necessarily represent those of my corp or alliance.
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.27 16:51:00 - [9] Originally by: Mecinia Lua If you move all the level 4s to low sec, then they'll move to level 3s. There is nothing you can do that will get many of the mission runners to move to unsafe space. They want the ability to log into the game, play a couple hours a day without to much harassment, make enough isk to get new ships and skills, and log out. If you change the game enough to where they can no longer do that, they'll just move on to the next game. So they do level 3s. Cool. What's the problem?
Ralara Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.10.27 16:55:00 - [10] Originally by: Jack Gilligan Check out the speed of Battleships on the test server. L4 missions have already been nerfed. With the speed changes (you can't speed fit a solo mission tank) running missions will take a LOT more time than they do now, lowering even more any perceived advantage over mission running vs 0.0 ratting. Note: there isn't. You make far more isk in less time ratting in 0.0 than with mission running. Um... who in their right mind has ever tried to speed tank a level 4 mission in a battleship? --

Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2008.10.27 17:01:00 - [11] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Mecinia Lua If you move all the level 4s to low sec, then they'll move to level 3s. There is nothing you can do that will get many of the mission runners to move to unsafe space. They want the ability to log into the game, play a couple hours a day without to much harassment, make enough isk to get new ships and skills, and log out. If you change the game enough to where they can no longer do that, they'll just move on to the next game. So they do level 3s. Cool. What's the problem? The problem is in time they could not support themselves in game with level 3s. In essence such a move would move to eliminate casual gamers that have stayed with the game. They'd continue til they hit the plateau then once they hit it and it became no longer conducive to do level 3s and advance they'd leave the game. To them its not worth the risk under any circumstance to go into low sec, some have tried it and lost their ship. Others just figure if they did and lost the ship it would take them months to get it back. While there are people who do missions 8 hours a day, just like some rat that long or pvp that long, that is not what the average player does. Moves that hurt the average player is what ultimately hurts the bottom line of the game, and ultimately affects how EVE will continue. Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts. Your signature is too large. Please resize it to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] - Mitnal
Jack Gilligan Caldari THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.27 17:01:00 - [12] Originally by: Ralara Originally by: Jack Gilligan Check out the speed of Battleships on the test server. L4 missions have already been nerfed. With the speed changes (you can't speed fit a solo mission tank) running missions will take a LOT more time than they do now, lowering even more any perceived advantage over mission running vs 0.0 ratting. Note: there isn't. You make far more isk in less time ratting in 0.0 than with mission running. Um... who in their right mind has ever tried to speed tank a level 4 mission in a battleship? No one. What I meant to say was that tank Raven fits are so tight with respect to cap stability for soloing that you can't really spare a slot for an afterburner, especially for the typical lower SP mission runner who doesn't have all the cap skills maxed. Most mission runners don't fit any speed mods at all. My opinions are my own and do not necessarily represent those of my corp or alliance.
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.10.27 17:05:00 - [13] Originally by: Jack Gilligan Check out the speed of Battleships on the test server. L4 missions have already been nerfed. With the speed changes (you can't speed fit a solo mission tank) running missions will take a LOT more time than they do now, lowering even more any perceived advantage over mission running vs 0.0 ratting. Note: there isn't. You make far more isk in less time ratting in 0.0 than with mission running. But would you fly a multi-billion ISK pimped out pwnmobile for ratting like you can for highsec missions? The answer there for most sane people is 'no.' So the end result of L4 nerfs is removal of a long term goal for some players. That in itself seems bad.
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.10.27 17:08:00 - [14] Edited by: Le Skunk on 27/10/2008 17:10:37 Originally by: Mecinia Lua If you move all the level 4s to low sec, then they'll move to level 3s. And the risk/reward balance with other professions in EVE will be balanced. Which is kind of what people have been crying out for. Quote: The problem is in time they could not support themselves in game with level 3s. What the hell do they need to buy. Certainly not a new raven. Or new fittings. As they never blow up. Some missiles? SKUNK
Cobra Ball Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.10.27 17:30:00 - [15] I can't speak for all mission runners but for people like me, this really puts a dent into what i really want to do - PVP You see, as much as i dislike running level 4, I find its a pretty good way (not the best, but not the worst either) to make enough money to replace my PVP losses. I tried the other professions and i just don't enjoy them. After a day at work, its easier for me to run some mission than sit at a computer trading in jita, or mining for hours on end. So for the average person like me, the less isk that i make, the less i can PVP. And trust me, i am not a very good PVPer, so i do lose a lot of ships. I think in the long run, this can be a problem for them game. After all, this game ultimately revolves around PVP. The less people want to do that, the less likely they are to log in. If that happens, then industrialist won't have anyone to sell their ships to, and miners will have no one to sell their minerals to. And no, you can't have my stuff. I am not going to freak out like some people seem to from every tidbit a dev post on EVE-O. Just my two cents.
Jowen Datloran Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.10.27 17:49:00 - [16] Edited by: Jowen Datloran on 27/10/2008 17:49:50 Originally by: Le Skunk And the risk/reward balance with other professions in EVE will be balanced. Could I get a specification on what professions are balanced in regard to risk/reward in EVE? Low sec mining? Booster production? Moon mining of materials that are in low demand? Ninja salvaging? Exploration of high profitable sites that you can complete faster than it takes to track you down?
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.10.27 18:02:00 - [17] Originally by: Cobra Ball If that happens, then industrialist won't have anyone to sell their ships to, and miners will have no one to sell their minerals to. Technically incorrect. Minerals can be converted directly into ISK through ship hulls & the insurance mechanic. So miners (with access to a blueprint) are a closed loop ecosystem for generating ISK. It just so happens that selling to players is slightly more profitable. You always have the option of selling GTCs instead of grinding you know.
Akyr	Posted - 2008.10.27 18:33:00 - [18] WTB : Mission-Raven with 6 low- and 9 high-slots LOL
Jake Stevens Heretic Militia	Posted - 2008.10.27 18:40:00 - [19] Edited by: Jake Stevens on 27/10/2008 18:40:25 Originally by: Akyr WTB : Mission-Raven with 6 low- and 9 high-slots LOL I see you've never used a ship scanner before.
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.10.27 20:39:00 - [20] L4s should be made dynamic quality level. Let 'market forces' decide where the least desirable places to mission are, and therefore the places that should be paying the most. And actually, L3s make about the same isks/hour as L4s, because you can do them much faster in e.g. a HAC.

Seishomaru	Posted - 2008.10.27 20:46:00 - [21] Originally by: James Lyrus L4s should be made dynamic quality level. Let 'market forces' decide where the least desirable places to mission are, and therefore the places that should be paying the most. And actually, L3s make about the same isks/hour as L4s, because you can do them much faster in e.g. a HAC. Goos call that woudl be. That woudl eventually make low sec elvel 4 reach the reward high enough to be desirable (because to be frank they do not). Low sec missiosn runnign is FAR FAR more dangerous than rattign in 0.0. If L4 are removed from high sec to balance risk reward then rattign must be removed as well. My main lives in 0.0 for 2 years and 3 months.. NEver EVER lost any ship rattign in 0.0, and accumulated around 11 bil isk doing only that. So the argument that high sec mission runnign is not dangerous and you loose nothign is not valid.
Tippia Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.10.27 20:46:00 - [22] Originally by: James Lyrus And actually, L3s make about the same isks/hour as L4s, because you can do them much faster in e.g. a HAC. …yes, but doing L4s in sub-BS class ships is so much more fun! Heck, it's even kind of close to being almost dangerous at times!
Ryan Scouse'UK omen. IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.10.27 20:50:00 - [23] I hope all these changes come , I would love to see EVE fall on its ass just so I can say ur own fault CCP for breaking ur game! It all started back in 2006! No this is not a whine I am happy on my level 70 tier 5 Mage!! woot. But yer Eve was so much more fun when GTCS were cheaper , static plexs were around & Dreads could do level 4 missions you get the idea. no EVE related content in signature. ~Weatherman
Complete Tart Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2008.10.27 21:11:00 - [24] Originally by: Jack Gilligan Check out the speed of Battleships on the test server. L4 missions have already been nerfed. With the speed changes (you can't speed fit a solo mission tank) running missions will take a LOT more time than they do now, lowering even more any perceived advantage over mission running vs 0.0 ratting. Note: there isn't. You make far more isk in less time ratting in 0.0 than with mission running. Bet they won't change the distance to the acceleration gates either.... sometimes you have to travel 50km+ to get to the next stage. Levels 4 are a ****in grind as it is... congrats CCP on having the most laborious PVE content in any MMO
HENODE PRAVIA Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.10.27 21:28:00 - [25] Edited by: HENODE PRAVIA on 27/10/2008 21:28:49 Well... The end of casual, mature, with RL, short time of gameplay player is near... Congratzzz!!!!! Edit: Damm sig!! Xenos, Malleus,....Hereticus!!!
Cambarus The Baros Syndicate Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2008.10.27 23:58:00 - [26] Originally by: Complete Tart Originally by: Jack Gilligan Check out the speed of Battleships on the test server. L4 missions have already been nerfed. With the speed changes (you can't speed fit a solo mission tank) running missions will take a LOT more time than they do now, lowering even more any perceived advantage over mission running vs 0.0 ratting. Note: there isn't. You make far more isk in less time ratting in 0.0 than with mission running. Bet they won't change the distance to the acceleration gates either.... sometimes you have to travel 50km+ to get to the next stage. Levels 4 are a **in grind as it is... congrats CCP on having the most laborious PVE content in any MMO Immagine that, the PVE in a PVP game being somewhat lacking... IMO something needs to be done to nerf level 4s in highsec while making 0.0/lowsec more attractive. double/triple LP in lowsec? Maybe make it so that meta 3 and 4 stuff is only dropped in lowsec or nullsec? It wouldn't be too much of a nerf on lvl 4s in highsec while giving a fairly good reason to run them in low/nullsec. The problem is that there's just too much isk being made by highsec dwellers right now. Sure, you COULD go and simply boost low/nullsec rewards, but then it would become ** easy to make money, and nothing short of capital ship losses would even phase people. There has to be some sort of nerf to lvl 4s in highsec first. Removing them altogether seems a bit harsh IMO, shouldn't completely kill off someone's gameplay like that. However it'd be stupid to think that things don't need to change. Why on earth should it be as easy in highsec to make money as it is in most 0.0 regions, which have to be fought extensively over?
Hoinus Gallente Demon Theory UNLeashed Legion	Posted - 2008.10.28 00:25:00 - [27] Despite the profitability of level 4s, you cannot stop whenever you want (need to finish it) and it is a grind. Ratting is a grind too but least you can go afk in a POS and go do something else. Blah...
Chaos Incarnate Faceless Logistics	Posted - 2008.10.28 00:34:00 - [28] Originally by: Hoinus Despite the profitability of level 4s, you cannot stop whenever you want (need to finish it) and it is a grind. Ratting is a grind too but least you can go afk in a POS and go do something else. Uhm, a missionrunner can warp out or finish the current pocket, and go afk...or come back and give it another try anytime within the next week from start date _____________________ The unofficial faceless Achura alt of EVE Online
Cobra Ball Caldari State Protectorate	Posted - 2008.10.28 00:51:00 - [29] Here is the part i don't quite understand. Unless you are a real sadist who does 10 hours of missions a day, i think a majority of people find it a boring grind that is a necessary evil. I assume other people also find that missions are boring as all hell but do them because it is a means to an end. Has CCP found that mission runners are causing inflation to the economy? If not, why stop people from making isk to do the things they really want to do in EVE?
Christari Zuborov Amarr Ore Mongers Black Hand.	Posted - 2008.10.28 01:12:00 - [30] Originally by: Cobra Ball Here is the part i don't quite understand. Unless you are a real sadist who does 10 hours of missions a day, i think a majority of people find it a boring grind that is a necessary evil. I assume other people also find that missions are boring as all hell but do them because it is a means to an end. Has CCP found that mission runners are causing inflation to the economy? If not, why stop people from making isk to do the things they really want to do in EVE? I don't think it's the casual gamer that has caused deflation to the economy by completing lvl 4's, but the simplicity in which macro'ers can complete them afk that is causing a root core issue in both 0.0 and hi-sec. There's more and more isk entering the game, and not enough leaving. The economic report shows that more ships produced than are taken away. It's easy to see that there's an ever growing increase in supply of everything, causing prices to fall further and further making ratting/missioning the only way possible for ISK generation - rather than organized building. Everyone is suffering...

Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.10.28 01:12:00 - [31] Risk vs reward is what CCP wants for the game. They want low and null sec space to be full of treasure, danger and excitement (pvp). By on TQ, level 4 missions are a way for people to have lol-invincible supply lines of isk to pvp with in low and null sec space, making. However, the really big problem with level 4s is not the massive reward for little isk. The problem is that there is no player interaction (its a mmorpg ffs) and no competition and unlimited resources. List any other main form of isk making in high sec: trading involves competition over a limited number of player sold items, mining involves competition of the biggest rocks nearest the easiest place to sell minerals, building anything means you have to sell it and compete with others, complexes can be scanned faster by another prober, etc etc etc. But a SINGLE level 4 kill agent can supply the ENTIRE EVE population with isk. Competition, player interaction and limited resources to fight over, that is what EVE is all about: unlimited level 4 missions have no place in such EVE. /end report
Bloody Rabbit Jita Miners	Posted - 2008.10.28 01:40:00 - [32] Originally by: Clair Bear But would you fly a multi-billion ISK pimped out pwnmobile for ratting like you can for highsec missions? So I shouldn't rat Sansha in my Golem? Why not, have you seen how fast I can kill those things. Plus it has a big cargo bay so I don't need to refill ammo and I can hold all my faction loot longer.
Strom Kryos Gallente	Posted - 2008.10.28 01:50:00 - [33] 0.0 you plex - hi sec you run lvl 4 missions those are the comparisms for pve.. at least if one was in 0.0 wanted to shoot rats and make isk vs doing it in hi sec. Already seen a well detailed post at how far a comparism plexing is above running lvl 4 missions. Eve's billionaires didnt get that way from doing missions and it wasnt ratting in 0.0 either (maybe both were viable a long time ago). I run missions mostly when I have downtime from 0.0 (about once a year) and while I'm waiting out 24 hrs for jump clone (because of tending my main source of income, or getting stuff prepared to move to 0.0). Plenty of times I've ran missions during a war dec (a bit more risk than ratting in 0.0 imo). If it's too many idiots that think there is too much iskies to be made doing them.. just take the isk away to shut them up as they dont know how to really make isk. Risk vs Reward indeed, I make more isk with a few hours of complete boredom and planning (all in empire) than I can with 10x the ammount of time doing lvl 4 missions (and yeah thats why those guys are idiots). Honestly I could care less what happens with lvl 4 missions I just want something to do while I'm holed up in empire, preferably something that I can use my free time from 0.0 to improve my faction standings, getting close to one of the last goals I made a few years back :) I can deal with war decs ect while moving inventory around, but going to jita while trying to do fw I'm sure isnt viable. Lvl 3 missions.. like the bartender finally get to you only to turn around and help 10 others that stepped up to the bar after you. I had fun exploring for abit .. but after enough people caught on I get on later in the day and the sites are either already gone or empty (at least I can't find them like I used to). So my delima, hi-sec fun while sitting in empire a couple days here and there. For those that say blah blah pvp blah blah everything is crap. Well you can blah blah when your ships, mods and rigs can't be built cause nobody is mining, plexing, running missions and salvaging wrecks, ect. So yeah pvp is great but other aspects are important to eve. Everything has it's place and lvl4 missions are not on the top of the chain for making isk in hi sec. Anyway that's my view and there are so many flawed and inacurate arguments for it both ways and just as many good arguments both ways. However the dust settles I hope something is left thats fun, and I have no doubt that the actual reasons for any changes are well thought out ones.
Jason Edwards	Posted - 2008.10.28 02:07:00 - [34] Quote: If you move all the level 4s to low sec, then they'll move to level 3s. There is nothing you can do that will get many of the mission runners to move to unsafe space. Look at level 5s. Nobody does them because of the risk involved. Quote: They want the ability to log into the game, play a couple hours a day without to much harassment, make enough isk to get new ships and skills, and log out. If you change the game enough to where they can no longer do that, they'll just move on to the next game. Yep. Original post linked to the very point of how it would hurt 0.0 signficantly if they changed level 4s. Quote: So they do level 3s. Cool. What's the problem? I run level 4s all the time. If level 4s are no longer available... I quit eve. I'm not really in the mood to go to 0.0 and low sec is completely a non-option because of hictors. Nobody will do level 3s. Quote: But would you fly a multi-billion ISK pimped out pwnmobile for ratting like you can for highsec missions? But if not these level 4 runners... who do these 0.0 people sell their Gist xl shield boosters to? Nobody can practically use them. Thusly 0.0 cant sell these top of the line mods to anyone. Thusly nobody buys them. Prices crash. 0.0 becomes even more worthless for non-moon mining. Quote: IMO something needs to be done to nerf level 4s in highsec while making 0.0/lowsec more attractive. double/triple LP in lowsec? Um that's how it is already. Level 5s give you 60,000lp per mission even. Where the best lvl4 gives 6000-7000 at most. You cant make 0.0/lowsec more attractive. It's already pretty damn good. People dont go there to do missions; not because lvl4s are more valuable but because they refuse to leave high sec. Meaning by removing lvl 4s will mean only 1 thing. These people who are quiting take their 15-30 billion in their wallet, buy up core materials and such and quit. Destroying the market in doing so. If 15billion is enough to manipulate... billions and billions sitting dormant right now leaving the game can do serious damage. Quote: Maybe make it so that meta 3 and 4 stuff is only dropped in lowsec or nullsec? It wouldn't be too much of a nerf on lvl 4s in highsec while giving a fairly good reason to run them in low/nullsec. This is what I said in my other thread. But make it so mission rats cant drop them at all. You have to rat or do exploration to get them. ------------------------ "There was this bright flash of light - and now this egg shaped thing is on my screen - did I level up?"
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.10.28 02:32:00 - [35] Originally by: Jason Edwards But if not these level 4 runners... who do these 0.0 people sell their Gist xl shield boosters to? Nobody can practically use them. Thusly 0.0 cant sell these top of the line mods to anyone. Thusly nobody buys them. Prices crash. 0.0 becomes even more worthless for non-moon mining. Affordable faction mods... Hmm... Ok, that's an excellent argument. A winning argument, in fact. I was pretty 'meh' either way, but you've convinced me to bandwagon on the 'nerf level 4s' cause.
EliteSlave Minmatar M. Corp Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2008.10.28 02:38:00 - [36] no lvl 4 mission should be in high sec.
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.10.28 03:09:00 - [37] Originally by: Jason Edwards Quote: So they do level 3s. Cool. What's the problem? I run level 4s all the time. If level 4s are no longer available... I quit eve. I'm not really in the mood to go to 0.0 and low sec is completely a non-option because of hictors. Nobody will do level 3s. Are you doing L4s for the sake of running missions (fun, heh)... well, you might as well run L3s instead. The fun factor is the same (zero). Doing L4s for the sake of funding PVP? That should be definitely nerfed. Heavily. Fact, making someone capable of recouping a BS loss in a few hours, in 100% safety of high-sec, is utterly idiotic. There are two reasons to run L4s. One of them (fun) would be satisfied regardless of the ISK you make. Second one is horribly imbalanced. Which one is it?
Bloody Rabbit Jita Miners	Posted - 2008.10.28 03:15:00 - [38] Originally by: Cpt Branko There are two reasons to run L4s. One of them (fun) would be satisfied regardless of the ISK you make. Second one is horribly imbalanced. Which one is it? Imbalanced, which is why I'm now making more from ratting in 0.0 and looting faction rats. But on the flip side, I have to play nice with others so I can rat where I rat so it requires teamwork.
Sylper Illysten Caldari Ex Coelis The Bantam Menace	Posted - 2008.10.28 03:39:00 - [39] Well looks like the ganktards get their wish. This will be then end of the casual player.
Mara Rinn Minmatar	Posted - 2008.10.28 03:46:00 - [40] Originally by: Christari Zuborov The economic report shows that more ships produced than are taken away. It's easy to see that there's an ever growing increase in supply of everything, causing prices to fall further and further making ratting/missioning the only way possible for ISK generation - rather than organized building. Everyone is suffering... The solution to that problem does not involve level 4 missions. The problem is not ISK generation - if there was too much ISK in the economy, prices would be going up. The problem is too many people trying to supply stuff that has a limited demand. One lesson that has been learned many times throughout human history is that the best way to boost a flagging economy is to start a war. So get out there and blow things up. Only by blowing things up are you going to increase demand for the stuff that you're building. Hunt down L4 mission runners, trick them into giving you shooting rights, and blow them up! At the same time, get into the business of manufacturing marauders and T2 fittings for mission runners! Now to convince CCP that people in starter or NPC corps should not be allowed to undock with T2 ships or fittings...

Souvera Corvus Gallente SPORADIC MOVEMENT FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.10.28 04:16:00 - [41] Edited by: Souvera Corvus on 28/10/2008 04:18:50 Edited by: Souvera Corvus on 28/10/2008 04:17:29 We've been through this again and again and it comes down to some people getting ****ty about the fact that people who've chosen not to PvP don't run the same risks and should therefore be beaten with wet spaghetti and have their L$'s taken off them. I fail to see quite why this is an issue and its yet to be explained by EvE's fabled economist whether it is an issue or not. If you move all L4's to low-sec people won't do them and they'll switch to L3's. After a year, the whine will start about moving L3's to low-sec as people are getting far too rich off of chaining them in their Ishtars. If we'd like a true reflection of risk/reward then plexes should be nerfed into oblivion, moon minerals made finite, ratting spawns made much more rare and asteroid belts made virtually impossible to find. What fun that'll be............... Sovereign alliance space is just about as safe as it gets for some players and I think its a little laughable that they're preaching about some of the most inoffensive players in the game from the comfort of their over-upholstered armchair that's been paid for by 24/7 ratting and dyspro moon mining and we all know how hugely dangerous they are.
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.10.28 04:18:00 - [42] Originally by: Sylper Illysten Well looks like the ganktards get their wish. This will be then end of the casual player. Have you tried life in a 0.0 pet corp? Zero political BS. Zero lag. Zero spammy scammers. Zero ninja salvagers. Empire war decs cause nothing but laughter. Log on for however long you feel like, hit some belts, log off. PvE on your own time and not commit for however long a mission takes. It doesn't get any more casual than this.
sfsdf	Posted - 2008.10.28 04:28:00 - [43] Originally by: Takon Orlani Troll troll is troll PS troll. stop the troll thing, first time its fun, second its meh, third its GTFO of here
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.10.28 04:37:00 - [44] Originally by: Jason Edwards Quote: If you move all the level 4s to low sec, then they'll move to level 3s. There is nothing you can do that will get many of the mission runners to move to unsafe space. Look at level 5s. Nobody does them because of the risk involved. Quote: They want the ability to log into the game, play a couple hours a day without to much harassment, make enough isk to get new ships and skills, and log out. If you change the game enough to where they can no longer do that, they'll just move on to the next game. Yep. Original post linked to the very point of how it would hurt 0.0 signficantly if they changed level 4s. Quote: So they do level 3s. Cool. What's the problem? I run level 4s all the time. If level 4s are no longer available... I quit eve. I'm not really in the mood to go to 0.0 and low sec is completely a non-option because of hictors. Nobody will do level 3s. Quote: But would you fly a multi-billion ISK pimped out pwnmobile for ratting like you can for highsec missions? But if not these level 4 runners... who do these 0.0 people sell their Gist xl shield boosters to? Nobody can practically use them. Thusly 0.0 cant sell these top of the line mods to anyone. Thusly nobody buys them. Prices crash. 0.0 becomes even more worthless for non-moon mining. Quote: IMO something needs to be done to nerf level 4s in highsec while making 0.0/lowsec more attractive. double/triple LP in lowsec? Um that's how it is already. Level 5s give you 60,000lp per mission even. Where the best lvl4 gives 6000-7000 at most. You cant make 0.0/lowsec more attractive. It's already pretty damn good. People dont go there to do missions; not because lvl4s are more valuable but because they refuse to leave high sec. Meaning by removing lvl 4s will mean only 1 thing. These people who are quiting take their 15-30 billion in their wallet, buy up core materials and such and quit. Destroying the market in doing so. If 15billion is enough to manipulate... billions and billions sitting dormant right now leaving the game can do serious damage. Quote: Maybe make it so that meta 3 and 4 stuff is only dropped in lowsec or nullsec? It wouldn't be too much of a nerf on lvl 4s in highsec while giving a fairly good reason to run them in low/nullsec. This is what I said in my other thread. But make it so mission rats cant drop them at all. You have to rat or do exploration to get them. I would do level 5s if there happend to be a level 5 agent in my pocket, sadly there is not (or did I just never look ) if they move level 4s out of highsec and nerf local well then game over dude. that would probably get more outcry than the nano nerf, and likely a bigger response. hictors are a non issue, just make sure it is blue. oh that's right lv4s are a single player game.... hics are scary yay for stupid mission runners massively overpaying for their shield boosters when t2 gear will do it fine. and level 4s are easily soloable, level 5s are usually a small gang operation, splitting that reward. as for the loot/bounty/mission isk reward I don't know how it balances. if meta 3/4 only drops in low/nullsec well lets just say I want to start buying up arby/prototype/scout stuff now
Jason Edwards	Posted - 2008.10.28 05:24:00 - [45] Quote: I would do level 5s if there happend to be a level 5 agent in my pocket, sadly there is not Sad (or did I just never look Shocked) afaik there's only 1 region per faction who has lvl5. Quote: if they move level 4s out of highsec and nerf local well then Laughing game over dude. they only plan to nerf 0.0 local not low sec. But ya lvl 4s only in low sec means... nobody does lvl 4s. nobody makes isk in high sec and people cant buy anything from 0.0 and low sec. Meaning the value of 0.0 crashes immensely. To be fair zulupark said... Quote: High-sec nerfed: Personally I'd like to see more lvl4 agents move more to low-sec, but that's just my personal opinion. This is a very delicate system and any kind of interference with it needs careful consideration. So far we haven't looked at it in any seriousness. Technically he didnt say all. So really the plan would be to cause even more concentration mission hubs. Quote: that would probably get more outcry than the nano nerf, and likely a bigger response. you need to realize that most people are in high sec... most people are never going to lowsec again. Quote: hictors are a non issue, just make sure it is blue. oh that's right lv4s are a single player game.... hics are scary I lived in Oto-Tama area for a long time. With the advent of hictors... Im never going back to low sec. Quote: yay for stupid mission runners massively overpaying for their shield boosters when t2 gear will do it fine. you kidding? gist xl boosters are epic over t2. They easily are permarun with far better defense then t2. That's huge difference. Quote: and level 4s are easily soloable, Those 3 fits I show there... are successful fits @ lvl4s. they came back with mission loot. Quote: level 5s are usually a small gang operation, not really. Usually 1 person with an alt. Nighthawk or similar passive tank.who is accompanied by a dps dealer who has 1-2 remote reps. Though there are a couple lvl 5s where you can use a carrier and smartbomb the entire field no problem. Toooo much risk usually to do that. The dps dealer also cant be a dominix or something because drones cant be used generally. Now CCP could change this; CCP could design a ship... somewhere inbetween a capital and battleship. Who is stealthy who could also be apart of the Blackops group. Who deals big damage. But cant be scanned down. So the ship in a safespot literally can be considered cloaked. this ship then can run missions or lay siege to pos modules... perhaps such as the cyno jammer. This ship is a capital ship who has to jump around using regular cynos... or use the covert bridge. Only then would level 4-5s be done in low sec. It's obvious that such a ship would never be made. Quote: splitting that reward. as for the loot/bounty/mission isk reward I don't know how it balances. When you use alts... you still split the money to yourself. Quote: if meta 3/4 only drops in low/nullsec well lets just say I want to start buying up arby/prototype/scout stuff now I dunno about low sec. Lowsec shouldnt be that good. Perhaps they can get 250mm prototype gauss guns and such. 0.0 indeed. ------------------------ "There was this bright flash of light - and now this egg shaped thing is on my screen - did I level up?"
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2008.10.28 06:33:00 - [46] all i can see is change after change in what appears to be a move to shift the entire paradigm of the game. not that it's necessarily a bad thing, but i would get more comfortable vibes if the changes were coming from someone that had a good track record (that would include the actual presence of a track record!) I'm not saying "OHNOES everyone will quit", but with each major change you roll the dice on people that will find that complete change of game style acceptable and continue playing. be it changing someones immediate play style or changing their goals and long term plans every one is a dice roll. roll the dice enough times and you will get a SWG event where suddenly people don't want to play your game anymore, because its fundamentally not the same game. i'm considering making this my default response to threads discussing zulupark :P
Mika Meroko Minmatar Crayon Posting Inc	Posted - 2008.10.28 06:38:00 - [47] Edited by: Mika Meroko on 28/10/2008 06:38:48 whine whine whine nerf nerf nerf vasaline! seriously, the nerf lvl 4 talk is getting old.... (it will be nerf lvl 3 next.. then 2.. then 1....waaah!) level 5 is there... add more level 5 XD... (to low and 0.0) but yeah, I am shocked at the OP... I mean, I would be more concerned about the missiles changes (if I do missions) than the speed changes.... edit: also, theres also a thing called time vs reward...<--- this keeps people paying CCP money... while risk vs reward doesnt.... not as long...
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2008.10.28 07:05:00 - [48] Originally by: Christari Zuborov Originally by: Cobra Ball Here is the part i don't quite understand. Unless you are a real sadist who does 10 hours of missions a day, i think a majority of people find it a boring grind that is a necessary evil. I assume other people also find that missions are boring as all hell but do them because it is a means to an end. Has CCP found that mission runners are causing inflation to the economy? If not, why stop people from making isk to do the things they really want to do in EVE? I don't think it's the casual gamer that has caused deflation to the economy by completing lvl 4's, but the simplicity in which macro'ers can complete them afk that is causing a root core issue in both 0.0 and hi-sec. There's more and more isk entering the game, and not enough leaving. The economic report shows that more ships produced than are taken away. It's easy to see that there's an ever growing increase in supply of everything, causing prices to fall further and further making ratting/missioning the only way possible for ISK generation - rather than organized building. Everyone is suffering... Naturally the point that creating a macro for ratting in 0.0 is several order of magnitude easier is of no consequence, right? And the report of people finding macro ratting raven in 0.0 have no significance too. Nerf missions, that is the culprit.
Planktal Gallente Kenshao Industries The Star League	Posted - 2008.10.28 07:39:00 - [49] you want to balance risk vs reward in high sec with lvl4 missions, simple, remove CONCORD, problem solved. Of course EVE would die, but hey, the gankers would get their jollies for a bit before that happens. Do any of you who wants to move lvl4 missions to low sec even think that some people don't want to do PvP all the time? No you don't, you just think about you little pleasures killing defenseless ships. Why don't you go out and club a baby seal, it's the same thing.
Cece Cline	Posted - 2008.10.28 08:12:00 - [50] Move lvl5's to high sec instead, I'd love to do them.

Esmenet	Posted - 2008.10.28 08:17:00 - [51] Originally by: Jason Edwards you kidding? gist xl boosters are epic over t2. They easily are permarun with far better defense then t2. That's huge difference. Since a t2 xl booster is more than enough tank for any lvl 4 mission, you are basically paying 1 bill to be lazy and not manage cap.
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2008.10.28 08:26:00 - [52] Originally by: Souvera Corvus Edited by: Souvera Corvus on 28/10/2008 04:18:50 Edited by: Souvera Corvus on 28/10/2008 04:17:29 Sovereign alliance space is just about as safe as it gets for some players and I think its a little laughable that they're preaching about some of the most inoffensive players in the game from the comfort of their over-upholstered armchair that's been paid for by 24/7 ratting and dyspro moon mining and we all know how hugely dangerous they are. You obviously have no idea how much organization and risk comes with conquering and holding good 0.0 space. If they have it so good, go take some space for yourself. I mean it's not dangerous at all right? Choose a spot and put down a POS and set it to claim SOV and tell me how easy you have it. The people that make this claim are usually those that get invited into a large 0.0 alliance and leech easy ISK off the efforts of those who created and held together the organization that took and continues to hold the space that's making those guys rich. ALL the ISK I rat in 0.0 goes into ships that I blow up in PVP defense or offense to assist my corp/alliance (and have fun of course). As a side note - anything to make it harder for ninja cloaking Raven ratters in hostile space to rat in relative security I'd probably be all for. The view that 0.0 space is safe in general is a fallacy and fails to account for variables not obvious to the possible perspective of an individual. "You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus
Taradis Amarr The Imperial Assassins	Posted - 2008.10.28 08:48:00 - [53] Edited by: Taradis on 28/10/2008 08:50:49 Originally by: Ralara Originally by: Jack Gilligan Check out the speed of Battleships on the test server. L4 missions have already been nerfed. With the speed changes (you can't speed fit a solo mission tank) running missions will take a LOT more time than they do now, lowering even more any perceived advantage over mission running vs 0.0 ratting. Note: there isn't. You make far more isk in less time ratting in 0.0 than with mission running. Um... who in their right mind has ever tried to speed tank a level 4 mission in a battleship? Speed and Battleship on a lvl 4 does not compute just those 2 werds being in the same sentance makes no sense. and sides that that's just dumb considering you get webbed in some LVL 4's and hence getting webbed means ya lose speed thus if your speed tanked in a BS you go pop. Sides above is spot on who in their right mind would speed tank a BS on TQ, Sisi i can understand but TQ someone smokin the crak
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2008.10.28 08:57:00 - [54] Originally by: Jason Edwards you kidding? gist xl boosters are epic over t2. They easily are permarun with far better defense then t2. That's huge difference. Not sure if you understood what he meant. Yes gist xl boosters are far better than t2. However there is a max difficulty you will generally find in a lvl 4 mission. After a certain point of effectiveness you will be able to complete lvl 4 missions. Anything on top of that is unnecessary, useful, but not needed to complete the missions. Lvl 4s can be easily run with a t2 xl booster, all of them. The Gist xl booster will make lvl 4 missions easier. You won't have to pay as much attention to spawn triggers and other "dangers" found in the missions. Basically it makes something not dangerous at all, less dangerous even with lower attention payed to it. The confusion for many is why would a gist xl booster be a goal for an EVE player in itself. After it's attained the player can now do what he did before. Is it that now they have the module itself? Would looking at the gist xl booster in their item hangar give the same satisfaction as using on their ship to accomplish what they already could before without it? Frankly if lvl 4s were removed and people didn't use gist xl booster in high sec as much (or at all) their price would drop, BUT they would still be used, most likely in PVP and I see nothing wrong with that at all. I don't have any problem with people running missions only in EVE if that's honestly what they find fun. However I also don't see why they feel they the need to make a certain amount of ISK when they very rarely need to replace anything bought. You can fit a ship capable of running the hardest highest lvl mission in high sec for about 150m or less. Even if the lvl 4 mission rewards were cut in half this amount of ISK could be saved in a matter of weeks or months and now they are capable of accomplishing the hardest thing this type of player will do in their whole EVE career. I've used lvl 4 missions as a form of PVP funding and probably will again in the future so my point of view isn't formed due to personal gain or convenience. Honestly I'd gain nothing directly by lvl 4s being nerfed, but I think it would force people to make ISK to PVP in a PVP/contested oriented environment (low sec, 0.0, trading, mining, production etc.) and that seems right to me for a game like EVE. "You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus
ThorBank	Posted - 2008.10.28 09:32:00 - [55] Originally by: Gorefacer The confusion for many is why would a gist xl booster be a goal for an EVE player in itself. Well thats pretty simple. For some people, me included, its just plain fun to perfect something :) I only do missions to finance my pvp but i like pimpin my missionrunner, too. Its just fun to see how much better the ship perfoms after you put in more isk. Its not about solving missions but the speed you do em with. Its fun to see you¦re beloved ship take the whole stage and blow everything to little wrecks within no time. (At least, thats what i like about missions and missionrunner ships.) So for some people its a long goal term to get more and more of these pimped ships, just for the sake of it. No I wouldnt fly such a ship into lowsec or 0.0. Theres no point in it since as you said, a 150m ship can basicly do the same in a longer time. But: if the lvls 4 moved to low sec, for many people the reason to get such pimped ships will simply vanish. With no long-term goal, theres no point in playin. PvP is fun, but without the perfectonistic approach you can take on missionrunners, eve would loose a lot of its attractivness for many people. (note: this is not supposed to be a whine, i only wanted to explain what is interesting for one part of the player base. if missions get nerfed and its no use to pimp such ships anymore, there will be another way to gain money....yepp even if its lvl 3. in a command ship. ;) )
Jason Edwards	Posted - 2008.10.28 09:34:00 - [56] Quote: all i can see is change after change in what appears to be a move to shift the entire paradigm of the game. not that it's necessarily a bad thing, but i would get more comfortable vibes if the changes were coming from someone that had a good track record (that would include the actual presence of a track record!) This is true. Essentially by moving level 4s to low sec. It would mean that many people quit the game. While others stick around... but now cant generate any real isk. Meaning they never buy officer mods. Officer mods drop in price like mad. Eventually equalizing where 0.0 is indeed the best isk/hour potential... you have a grand stalemate of loss. Essentially reaching the point where 0.0 isnt tenable and high sec level 3s become the next big isk flood. Which after the big drop in isk influx... everything deflates like mad. Seriously along the lines of 60-80% deflation. Gist c-type xl shield booster is 1.6billion now. It will be much closer to less than 500mil. As 1.6billion is to level 4s as about 500mil is to level 3s. Then you have the problem of people who have already amassed billions for themselves. Basically Trophy collections will become epic. On the otherhand with such huge deflation. 100bil-30bil for supercaps is far less tenable. Meaning that only those with insane amounts of isk already can manage such things. Titans themselves will be nuts. Having such a lower capable foe means that titans arent destroyed. Eventually... Bob and Goons will be the ones who control vast empires. who cant be challenged because you need big isk to fight big isk. Quote: but yeah, I am shocked at the OP... I mean, I would be more concerned about the missiles changes (if I do missions) than the speed changes.... Op here :) For the most part I fly dominix and soon Ishtar. My CNR is for the most part unchanged in the missile changes. Torp golems infact appear to have more dps and thusly run missions even faster. Assuming t2 ammo. Quote: No you don't, you just think about you little pleasures killing defenseless ships. Why don't you go out and club a baby seal, it's the same thing. Carebears are like baby seals? Alright it's true. Quote: Move lvl5's to high sec instead, I'd love to do them. Never going to happen. Quote: Since a t2 xl booster is more than enough tank for any lvl 4 mission, you are basically paying 1 bill to be lazy and not manage cap. You are quite correct. Personally I just use CN xl booster on my cnr. Quote: You obviously have no idea how much organization and risk comes with conquering and holding good 0.0 space. If they have it so good, go take some space for yourself. I mean it's not dangerous at all right? Choose a spot and put down a POS and set it to claim SOV and tell me how easy you have it. Technically speaking a great deal of 0.0 is pretty much unclaimed. Rarely have people in it... and if it wasnt for absolutely nuts nano gangs... 0.0 would be significantly safer. Even in the current setup... you can pretty much find yourself a hole in 0.0 plop up a pos and start doing your thing. Quote: The people that make this claim are usually those that get invited into a large 0.0 alliance and leech easy ISK off the efforts of those who created and held together the organization that took and continues to hold the space that's making those guys rich. Actually either it's that alliance's fault for being stupid or you are. Big alliances get paid by other groups billions per month to grab a hold of some safe unused space in their space. The fee covers any claim of "leeching"
Joshua Calvert Caldari Safespot Industries	Posted - 2008.10.28 09:40:00 - [57] Originally by: Cobra Ball I can't speak for all mission runners but for people like me, this really puts a dent into what i really want to do - PVP You see, as much as i dislike running level 4, I find its a pretty good way (not the best, but not the worst either) to make enough money to replace my PVP losses. I tried the other professions and i just don't enjoy them. After a day at work, its easier for me to run some mission than sit at a computer trading in jita, or mining for hours on end. So for the average person like me, the less isk that i make, the less i can PVP. And trust me, i am not a very good PVPer, so i do lose a lot of ships. I think in the long run, this can be a problem for them game. After all, this game ultimately revolves around PVP. The less people want to do that, the less likely they are to log in. If that happens, then industrialist won't have anyone to sell their ships to, and miners will have no one to sell their minerals to. And no, you can't have my stuff. I am not going to freak out like some people seem to from every tidbit a dev post on EVE-O. Just my two cents. +1 Peace and love, Josh
Jason Edwards	Posted - 2008.10.28 09:52:00 - [58] Quote: ALL the ISK I rat in 0.0 goes into ships that I blow up in PVP defense or offense to assist my corp/alliance (and have fun of course). In my experience good alliances cover 100% of subcapital combat pvp and 33% of capital pvp. So any isk you earn in 0.0 literally stays with you. The alliance itself earns isk from the moons and such it holds. The corps earn isk through bounties/tax or through purchasing and refining the drone alloys. 0.0 is profitable for everyone unless you're in a terrible situation. Quote: As a side note - anything to make it harder for ninja cloaking Raven ratters in hostile space to rat in relative security I'd probably be all for. Because you arent the cloaking raven and you want the ability to destroy them. Get a clue. Quote: The view that 0.0 space is safe in general is a fallacy and fails to account for variables not obvious to the possible perspective of an individual. If I were to crank open eve right now and check how many active pilots in system or docked and count the systems in 0.0 with NOBODY. How many do you think there are? How about low sec? Betcha it'll be much harder. Infact when I was in low sec you pretty much 3-5 people in all systems. Though that was caldari space. Amarr space I suspect to be more dead. Quote: Not sure if you understood what he meant. Yes gist xl boosters are far better than t2. However there is a max difficulty you will generally find in a lvl 4 mission. After a certain point of effectiveness you will be able to complete lvl 4 missions. As I said... those pics I posted were lvl 4 mission runners... who were successful. My point is that changing level 4s would eliminate these people if risk is increased. OR if reward is drastically dropped the the succesful lvl 4 runners cant fit their ships and also have to do the "shoop da whoop" fit. Nobody buys anything coming from 0.0 Suddenly the value of 0.0 decreases signficantly and then as you said... you barely break even... you will afterwards be very very poor. Quote: The Gist xl booster will make lvl 4 missions easier. You won't have to pay as much attention to spawn triggers and other "dangers" found in the missions. Basically it makes something not dangerous at all, less dangerous even with lower attention payed to it. The real point though is that if you change lvl 4s... nobody buys those gist xl boosters... and then you are royally screwed in 0.0 Quote: The confusion for many is why would a gist xl booster be a goal for an EVE player in itself. After it's attained the player can now do what he did before. Is it that now they have the module itself? The confusion for many is why would a tech2 xl booster be a goal for an EVE player in itself. After it's attained the player can now do what he did before. Is it that now they have the module itself? Why doesnt he just use a named xl booster... it works... hell that raven doesnt even have a tank at all. Perhaps all lvl 4 mission runners have to fit their ships like that. Quote: Frankly if lvl 4s were removed and people didn't use gist xl booster in high sec as much (or at all) their price would drop, BUT they would still be used, most likely in PVP and I see nothing wrong with that at all. You're right people would use them... they'd drop to 500mil or less and people would buy them. They certainly wouldnt be used pvp... 500mil is absolutely nuts. They would be used in lvl3s Except it'll take them 2-3 months to scratch up the isk to get 500mil. Quote: I don't have any problem with people running missions only in EVE if that's honestly what they find fun. Running missions gets you isk. You then use that isk to do what you find fun. Personally I think I want to eventually train for thanatos, buy a thanatos, fit it reasonably well. Get out to 0.0 for fun. But I cant fly a thanatos atm. It takes time.
Jason Edwards	Posted - 2008.10.28 10:01:00 - [59] Quote: However I also don't see why they feel they the need to make a certain amount of ISK when they very rarely need to replace anything bought. Says you? With some exceptions obviously. Many mission runners have never broke 1 billion. They play every day... hours everyday. Yet they dont ever seem to break 1 billion. I wonder why that is? Currently I'm at 1.3 billion. I must have sold the apocs I've built and rigs. I have a feeling my ammo hasnt been touched. Quote: You can fit a ship capable of running the hardest highest lvl mission in high sec for about 150m or less. Even if the lvl 4 mission rewards were cut in half this amount of ISK could be saved in a matter of weeks or months and now they are capable of accomplishing the hardest thing this type of player will do in their whole EVE career. Yep and we also cut any isk going to 0.0 people. Their products can sit on the market. Still recovering the loss of purchasing my ship. While the 0.0 moons are still cranking out exactly the same amount... but nobody is buying. So it's just piling up. Your wallet from all those losses for holding space starts to smart... and manufacturers stop building because their product is on the market at no markup and with no isk they cant buy fuel and minerals. So the miners cant earn as much and the market starts flooding. What people are supposed to just buy insurance on their ships and fly them into a belt to die? to earn isk? Quote: I've used lvl 4 missions as a form of PVP funding and probably will again in the future so my point of view isn't formed due to personal gain or convenience. Honestly I'd gain nothing directly by lvl 4s being nerfed Lots to lose though eh? Quote: but I think it would force people to make ISK to PVP in a PVP/contested oriented environmen Yet you just said that you were making no isk by doing that. And you want even more competition over the same resources in 0.0 or low sec? Wow interesting. Great way to destroy the game.
Joshua Calvert Caldari Safespot Industries	Posted - 2008.10.28 10:34:00 - [60] How popular are Level 5 missions? Note: there's a clue in the answer to the above question.

Jason Edwards	Posted - 2008.10.28 10:52:00 - [61] Just to further prove a point. Active pilots in system or docked. Notice how this small cross section of 0.0 literally has nobody in it. 100 system not being touched. How many unclaimed untouched systems there are. Every one of those grey dots is a system with no pos claiming sov. Seriously there's so much fighting over resources in 0.0 to claim sovereignty that you dont even use. Infact if you look at some recent fighting. An alliance went and took nearly an entire region. They took losses of 50-100billion in battleships and caps alone. All to get control over the dys and prem moons in there. Now they have to crank those moons out for a period of time... just to break even. Hoping they dont lose the space they just took. That's no fun. In that time... they likely will have conflict again and might be losing their space.
Jason Edwards	Posted - 2008.10.28 11:06:00 - [62] Originally by: Joshua Calvert How popular are Level 5 missions? Note: there's a clue in the answer to the above question. if they were... nerfing lvl 4s wouldnt be an issue.
Bimjo Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.10.28 15:54:00 - [63] Edited by: Bimjo on 28/10/2008 15:56:37 Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Jason Edwards you kidding? gist xl boosters are epic over t2. They easily are permarun with far better defense then t2. That's huge difference. Since a t2 xl booster is more than enough tank for any lvl 4 mission, you are basically paying 1 bill to be lazy and not manage cap. opinions are like a**holes,everyone has one (don't get offended, I am no different) So how about some facts instead of opinions ? Officer fitting(allowing perma tank) means if you get disconnected in Angel Ext., in the bonus room, when 40 ships are on you all at once,you can try to reconnect in the knowledge your ship is safe I don't know about you,but all I hear from PvPers,Fleet ops pilots and mission runners is "CCP refused my petition for ship loss due to lag/disconnection, because their records didn't support it,hence calling me a liar"
Shirley Serious Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.10.28 17:24:00 - [64] Problem with lvl4 missions is that they have to be able to be completed in a tech1 fit battleship. (or at least they should be - some recent missions don't look like that's possible). Battleships may not enter several lvl3 missions, (most of which are newer, seems like that's the way it's headed). Otherwise, everything thats tech1 or named that's battleship sized is pretty redundant, except as a source of minerals or for building tech2 or for LP store offers. Seriously, is a plain Tech1 fit battleship useful in 0.0 at all? Can it handle the rat spawns? Is it any use in pvp except in a dire emergency, where it's "grab whatever you have!" ? The trouble is that with a Tech2 fit, or faction/deadspace fit, a ship can complete missions a whole lot faster, due to putting out a lot more damage, and being able to tank more spawns, so aggro management isn't as time consuming as it is for Tech1. Some people, who know what they are doing, what missions to do, etc. can get to earning 30+ million isk per hour from lvl4 missions (occasionally by using an alt as support - still makes a lot more per hour per character). For a newer player in a Tech1/named fit, it's probably not much more than 4-5 million isk per hour from lvl4, because they're slower, might need to warp out, and probably have wrecks expire on them because they take so long to do them. Making game balancing changes based on the performances of extremes, isn't a good thing. Also, what's so bad about people who are what you might call "weekend pvpers"? i.e. people who do a few missions during the week, to fund some cheap ships to have some fun in at the weekend? They buy things (making industrialists happy) and get shot (making combat players happy), and can afford then to do this several times. Risk/reward works best when the person controlling the character has as little emotional involvement as possible. "Ohnoes, my ship!" is an emotional involvement. The people who the risk/reward mechanism works best for are isk-farmers. All those lowsec-couriers that you used to see? isk-farmers, the majority of them. Why? Because the risk/reward worked for them. Player pirates aren't interested in shooting them. So be careful with the risk/reward mechanisms.
Barrad Dex	Posted - 2008.10.28 17:33:00 - [65] Don't know how typical I am or not. But I do know I am a valued customer for CCP. I've played Eve for a little over a year with my husband. Between us we have 9 accounts and that's some alright money. Certainly not the most certainly not the least. We like to mine, scout, invent, manufacture, run missions, sell things etc. Until recently we were purely Empire. And we enjoyed the game, except the mission running needed a lot more variety pep, and decent writing. I can guarantee you that we did not make billions of isk in mission running level 4's. Or anything for that matter. We were in lovely corporations, little drama, great people, informative, friendly, sociable. We did ops together, we trained, we had goals, we chatted. Now we're in a 0.0 alliance. We are dipping our feet into it, a few POS's a little pvp training. And its fun. But so is High Sec. I want high sec because it makes sense economically and politically and role-play wise. (Healthy Societies do not exist very long in perpetual warfare without a stable area for social cohesion) and because its a good place to do low risk mining and enjoyable missionrunning and has resources and places to sell stuff. And I'm glad there is low sec and 0.0 for the different game that is there. Seems to me if you got rid of Empire you get rid of choke points, strategic lanes, larger markets for minerals, ships etc, you cut down on communications and exchanges. Getting rid of safety in high sec gets rid of a lot of reason to fight pvp in 0.0 when you look at the big picture (as opposed to your personal habits). Some people seem to forget that when there is a war on not everybody in the war can, should or wants to be on the front lines. War machines only happen when you have a much larger population behind it that isn't fighting. People mining, building, selling and investing. If high sec went away, so would I and 9 accounts. It doesn't have to be us vs them It doesn't have to be 0.0 vs Empire It doesn't have to be pvp vs carebears Half the game at any given time are in Empire for various reasons and various fun. The game is realistic in having that space and I believe that CCP is intelligent in giving people as many options as possible, unless of course they only want pure pvp (which, wouldn't be EVE then). I would not trade one for the other personally. I hope they keep improving high sec and mission running there and I hope they keep things interesting for 0.0 too. If they do both, they'll keep me.
Cyb3r Thr3at Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2008.10.28 18:27:00 - [66] Yea.. if there was no High sec id throw the towel in too! (& my 2 accounts)
K'uata Sayus	Posted - 2008.10.28 18:56:00 - [67] High-sec mission-runners, traders, carebears, whatever you want to name them pay for a whole bunch of CCP's salaries. Whine all you want PvPers, this is the fact of RL that will insure CCP moves in a cautious and conservative manner. EVERYONE SEEMS NORMAL UNTIL YOU GET TO KNOW THEM.
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.28 19:43:00 - [68] Originally by: K'uata Sayus High-sec mission-runners, traders, carebears, whatever you want to name them pay for a whole bunch of CCP's salaries. Whine all you want PvPers, this is the fact of RL that will insure CCP moves in a cautious and conservative manner. But now missions have caught the attention on The NerfbatÖ Whine all you want, missionbears, now you will have to do a little adapting for once.
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.28 19:45:00 - [69] Originally by: Jason Edwards Just to further prove a point. Active pilots in system or docked. Notice how this small cross section of 0.0 literally has nobody in it. 100 system not being touched. How many unclaimed untouched systems there are. Every one of those grey dots is a system with no pos claiming sov. Seriously there's so much fighting over resources in 0.0 to claim sovereignty that you dont even use. Infact if you look at some recent fighting. An alliance went and took nearly an entire region. They took losses of 50-100billion in battleships and caps alone. All to get control over the dys and prem moons in there. Now they have to crank those moons out for a period of time... just to break even. Hoping they dont lose the space they just took. That's no fun. In that time... they likely will have conflict again and might be losing their space. There's a pretty simple reason for this: Most of those unclaimed systems are worthless trash that yield considerably less income than running missions in hi-sec.
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.28 19:49:00 - [70] Originally by: Barrad Dex Edited by: Barrad Dex on 28/10/2008 17:37:19 It seems after reading the thread that people want to "nerf" lvl 4 missions to encourage people out of high sec and into 0.0 for whatever reasons, be it revenge (they feel others are safe and they are not [risk vs reward]), they envy or resent that style of play even though they could adopt it at any time but don't, or they want to abolish high security space and go with a complete pvp game style that has never been in place (but they feel it should). Don't know how typical I am or not. But I do know I am a valued customer for CCP. I've played Eve for a little over a year with my husband. Between us we have 9 accounts and that's some alright money. Certainly not the most certainly not the least. We like to mine, scout, invent, manufacture, run missions, sell things etc. Until recently we were purely Empire. And we enjoyed the game, except the mission running needed a lot more variety pep, and decent writing. I can guarantee you that we did not make billions of isk in mission running level 4's. Or anything for that matter. We were in lovely corporations, little drama, great people, informative, friendly, sociable. We did ops together, we trained, we had goals, we chatted. Now we're in a 0.0 alliance. We are dipping our feet into it, a few POS's a little pvp training. And its fun. But so is High Sec. I want high sec because it makes sense economically and politically and role-play wise. (Healthy Societies do not exist very long in perpetual warfare without a stable area for social cohesion) and because its a good place to do low risk mining and enjoyable missionrunning and has resources and places to sell stuff. And I'm glad there is low sec and 0.0 for the different game that is there. Seems to me if you got rid of Empire you get rid of choke points, strategic lanes, larger markets for minerals, ships etc, you cut down on communications and exchanges. Getting rid of safety in high sec gets rid of a lot of reason to fight pvp in 0.0 when you look at the big picture (as opposed to your personal habits). Some people seem to forget that when there is a war on not everybody in the war can, should or wants to be on the front lines. War machines only happen when you have a much larger population behind it that isn't fighting. People mining, building, selling and investing. If high sec went away, so would I and 9 accounts. It doesn't have to be us vs them It doesn't have to be 0.0 vs Empire It doesn't have to be pvp vs carebears Half the game at any given time are in Empire for various reasons and various fun. The game is realistic in having that space and I believe that CCP is intelligent in giving people as many options as possible, unless of course they only want pure pvp (which, wouldn't be EVE then). I would not trade one for the other personally. I hope they keep improving high sec and mission running there and I hope they keep things interesting for 0.0 too. If they do both, they'll keep me. No-one's saying that hi-sec shouldn't exist. They're saying that hi-sec shouldn't offer easy, risk-free rewards that exceed the rewards available - at considerable effort and expense - of vast swathes of 0.0

Grainsalt Ghosts In The Shell	Posted - 2008.10.28 19:51:00 - [71] Well I trashed my account a few days ago after trashing my other 2 .. I just can;t be bothered anymore.. Level 4's have been gradually nerfed anyway over the past year or so with loot table changes etc. TBH I am not really upset with the changes to Missiles, Battleship speed, 60 day codes and Possible further Level 4 ner***e .. I just can;t be bothered anymore, I don't have the time to spend in 0.0 and running level 4's anymore just does not full me with joy. I will probably come back to eve in a 6 months or so and check it out .. But TBH 4 1/2 years of EVE just getting more dull and more boring and more as if the races are exactly the same as each other bores me .. Yes you can have my stuff ... ---
Col Carter	Posted - 2008.10.28 19:56:00 - [72] Originally by: Barrad Dex Edited by: Barrad Dex on 28/10/2008 17:37:19 It doesn't have to be us vs them It doesn't have to be 0.0 vs Empire It doesn't have to be pvp vs carebears Still, EVE is just that. Us vs them. Killbears vs carebears. 0.0 vs empire, one could only hope that Faction Warfare will be done right some day so folks can kick that emperor out of amarr for real.
Poast Warrior Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.10.28 20:08:00 - [73] Originally by: Grainsalt Yes you can have my stuff ... Sweet, thanks!
Lexa Hellfury Maximum Yarrage	Posted - 2008.10.28 20:20:00 - [74] Edited by: Lexa Hellfury on 28/10/2008 20:22:32 Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Jason Edwards Just to further prove a point. Active pilots in system or docked. Notice how this small cross section of 0.0 literally has nobody in it. 100 system not being touched. How many unclaimed untouched systems there are. Every one of those grey dots is a system with no pos claiming sov. Seriously there's so much fighting over resources in 0.0 to claim sovereignty that you dont even use. Infact if you look at some recent fighting. An alliance went and took nearly an entire region. They took losses of 50-100billion in battleships and caps alone. All to get control over the dys and prem moons in there. Now they have to crank those moons out for a period of time... just to break even. Hoping they dont lose the space they just took. That's no fun. In that time... they likely will have conflict again and might be losing their space. There's a pretty simple reason for this: Most of those unclaimed systems are worthless trash that yield considerably less income than running missions in hi-sec. Yes, but put up a POS in one of those systems and see how fast the wrath of every alliance within 3 regions comes down on you. So basically CCP have alienated their hardcore playerbase (the 3-4 account group) with first the GTC nerf and then the ghost training nerf, and now they're going after the casual gamer? Welp...at least they're keeping it balanced I suppose
Omnoms Amarr IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.10.28 20:37:00 - [75] hmm, I'm growing more and more certain that I am weird for actually enjoying running lvl4s, the mindless grind is a pleasurable way to while away an evening. I am very much looking forwards to using my navy apoc which I anticipate is about 2 weeks off, and I am looking forwards very much to my paladin. To enable me to grind faster and achive some best in game items. The only real sadness is that battleships seem to be utterly outclassed at pvp compared to smaller ships and e-wat... but i suppose you cant have everything. I really do enjoy running missions.
Hyveres Caldari	Posted - 2008.10.28 20:55:00 - [76] Edited by: Hyveres on 28/10/2008 20:56:12 Omnoms : Battleships function as "Ships of the Line" for fleet and larger gang engagements. While not on top 1v1wise they are the mainstay of most fleets. Though dreads might be taking over that role :) if not now then sometime in the future as more people can fly them.
Omnoms Amarr IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.10.28 20:56:00 - [77] my battleships just seem to get continually jammed, scrammed and webbed. Falcon > Abaddon.
Core Researcher	Posted - 2008.10.28 20:58:00 - [78] Originally by: Gorefacer Originally by: Souvera Corvus Edited by: Souvera Corvus on 28/10/2008 04:18:50 Edited by: Souvera Corvus on 28/10/2008 04:17:29 Sovereign alliance space is just about as safe as it gets for some players and I think its a little laughable that they're preaching about some of the most inoffensive players in the game from the comfort of their over-upholstered armchair that's been paid for by 24/7 ratting and dyspro moon mining and we all know how hugely dangerous they are. You obviously have no idea how much organization and risk comes with conquering and holding good 0.0 space. If they have it so good, go take some space for yourself. I mean it's not dangerous at all right? Choose a spot and put down a POS and set it to claim SOV and tell me how easy you have it. The people that make this claim are usually those that get invited into a large 0.0 alliance and leech easy ISK off the efforts of those who created and held together the organization that took and continues to hold the space that's making those guys rich. ALL the ISK I rat in 0.0 goes into ships that I blow up in PVP defense or offense to assist my corp/alliance (and have fun of course). As a side note - anything to make it harder for ninja cloaking Raven ratters in hostile space to rat in relative security I'd probably be all for. The view that 0.0 space is safe in general is a fallacy and fails to account for variables not obvious to the possible perspective of an individual. He is right, you are wrong. 0.0 space held by large alliances is SAFE AS IT COMES. I dont give a flying **** how hard it was to take it Ive lived out there enough times to know. This argument re:L4s is also same old same old: move 4s to low sec people will IGNORE THEM, then if they dont manage to get the same kind of game running 3s they will leave. Dont fool youself into thinking a few might say "oo ill give low-sec a try," because they just wont.
Tykkis	Posted - 2008.10.28 23:12:00 - [79] risk vs reward does not work in eve lowsec. it's all risk for solo player going mission in lowsec because most players wanna be criminals. Nerfing hisec lvl4 missions would make ppl change to mining, production, science and trade whichever makes more than lvl4. None of that is considered spaceship combat. There are people in eve that never want to fight another player and instead produce and build EVE by missioning or other means. The pvp players just destroy and consume. No production means no pvp ships... get it? Making lowsec much more profitable than hisec missioning will only boost the corporations and alliances holding the lowsec space. There are alliances that try to keep lowsec safe and it's quite profitable allready. 0.0 space is actually very safe for the alliance miners and ratters and they make good isk from it. Thats because the alliance/corp makes it safe. So in conclusion, go make lowsec space safe for yourself to mission/rat/mine at :)
Blastil	Posted - 2008.10.28 23:59:00 - [80] Everyone seems to be latching on to the theory that L4 missions will be nerfed by making them go into lowsec. This is false. They may very well just be nerfed in terms of ISK/hour. As it stands, L4's are the reason why miners don't even bother to mine any more, they reprocess l4 mission loot. Hell, that's how I made my first million. Aditionally, Why is nerfing L4's a bad thing? So what, players won't be able to afford their pimped out rigged BS. BAWWWWWWW! BS were not supposed to be as common in the game as they are anyway! They were introduced back in the day where having one was about as rare as having a ****ing Mom or Titan. Casual players suffer the same way casual players in EVERY MMO suffer, in that end game content is typically limited to them. This is nothing new. Most WoW players can't stomach raiding for high-level gear, and they don't do things like Arena unless its just casual. EVE should be no different. Ships and wealth that are locked to them should remain locked, since they don't participate in the methods that contribute to getting there. For the same reason why Cap ships are restricted in highsec, is why l4 missions should be nerfed. The method by which they're nerfed doesn't matter, although I would like to see them sent to 0.4, making piracy more profitable to boot. Quit whining about not posessing content in the game, or not being able to acess certain parts of the game without leaving High Sec. That's how the game was MADE. tl;dr: We don't serve your kind here!

Shirley Serious Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.10.29 00:19:00 - [81] Originally by: Blastil I would like to see them sent to 0.4, making piracy more profitable to boot. Why would piracy be more profitable? Yes. Yes, I am.
Souvera Corvus Gallente SPORADIC MOVEMENT FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.10.29 00:38:00 - [82] All the amateur evoloutionaries who misquote Darwin and demand that people 'adapt or die' miss the irony present in their statement. Its them, who in continually asking for the nerfbat to be swung, who are in essence demanding that CCP change others gameplay to suit their own playstyles. Their failure and/or unwillingness to adapt is their hallmark. High-sec should be safer, its high-sec ffs. By definition it should be a place where people can learn how to play the damn game and play it in their own way. A place where immersioneers can get their kicks and where players who don't want to play pos-ping pong, blob-wars, lag battles or PvP chest-beaters can dip in and out when they want. L4's are nowhere near as profitable as 0.0 mining, ratting and exploration, if they were people would be battling over low-sec mission hubs not dyspro moons. You can make more money in 20 minutes ratting than the best high-sec L4 which takes twice as long to comeplete. Imagine ratting in a system deep in your alliance territory, now that's virtually risk-free. There's no question of game balance to address here it much more a question of people looking to boost low-sec so there are more PvE fits to take advantage of. Personally I mission when there's no-one else in corp chat and I like to go looking for people to shoot when there are and I've never felt that high-sec/low-sec L4's were a pernicious and destabalising influence on the purity of the great game that is EvE. I just wish CCP and others would leave well alone for 5 minutes so I can play the damn game I orginally signed up for.
Jmanis Catharg Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.10.29 00:49:00 - [83] Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 29/10/2008 00:51:30 Quote: There's a pretty simple reason for this: Most of those unclaimed systems are worthless trash that yield considerably less income than running missions in hi-sec. I once asked an alliance to let my corp (aka one-man five-alt corp) join up to throw up POS onto mud moons. In exchange, I'd offer them a cut of the profits I made off this and, provided things didn't interfere with the alliance operations too heavily, would pay (read offer incentives) to other corps within the alliance to defend my towers if they were threatened. Apparently "There's no way you could meet the demands of the alliance let alone the fees required 'to be a part of it' as an individual." As this individual, my cut would've been handing over around 400mil a month to the alliance, a billion if things went well. Welcome to why I have a huge beef with alliances in general. I hear people harp on about how "0.0 is so empty" and "CCP needs to force carebears into low and 0.0 space, too many people are hugging empire's umbilicle cord". Personally those alliances have to look at their own attitudes first. --- Originally by: CCP Mitnal I went to the forums for special powers and all I got was a dancing padlock and a banhammer.
Patri Andari Caldari	Posted - 2008.10.29 01:19:00 - [84] I will not "Emphasis" NOT send my max skilled NH alt into low sec to run lvl 4 missions. OKAY Piwats and Devs? I would rather run level 3 missions as he has max missile and social skills and a pimped fit. If lvl 4 mission are made exclusive to low sec, I will find the best lvl 3 agents in empire to run for while my miner alt mines more to make up the difference. If you move level 3 missions to low sec I will run level 2 mission in an assault missile Cerb or just quit the game! Stop trying to make me play the game the way you want or risk playing alone. reality bites Patri A fool usually thinks he is a genius
Kransthow The Scope	Posted - 2008.10.29 06:03:00 - [85] Originally by: Patri Andari I will not "Emphasis" NOT send my max skilled NH alt into low sec to run lvl 4 missions. Thats fine, we just want the risk we take to be justified with equivalent reward. I could care less if you bring you nighthawk into lowsec or not, it's just your safety should come with a premium.
Whineroy	Posted - 2008.10.29 06:41:00 - [86] Originally by: Kransthow Thats fine, we just want the risk we take to be justified with equivalent reward. I could care less if you bring you nighthawk into lowsec or not, it's just your safety should come with a premium. Now that you speak about risk and reward, where is the risk for gankbears (in PvP- setup ships) killing PvE- fitted missioning ships at lowsec ? Especially when bounty system is a bad joke and there is no reason for people to actively go hunting for gankbears. "Learn to fight, this is PvP game"... Indeed, that definitely applies to all the ganker nerds who refuse to go after targets that could fight back and instead keep whining how CCP should do this and that to force more people into PvP situations where they are at major disadvantage to start with. Risk and reward indeed... For both gankbears and missionbears alike, and not "risk for missionbear, reward for gankbear".
Esmenet	Posted - 2008.10.29 11:25:00 - [87] Originally by: Barrad Dex It doesn't have to be us vs them It doesn't have to be 0.0 vs Empire It doesn't have to be pvp vs carebears Its carebears that have decided that it has to be this way. They want to profit from pvp'ers and at the same time stay safely protected in a bubble far away from pvp'ers. And because of this, EVE pvp is sadly approaching the battlegrounds style of wow where it doesnt really matter anymore.
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.29 11:42:00 - [88] Originally by: Jmanis Catharg Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 29/10/2008 00:51:30 Quote: There's a pretty simple reason for this: Most of those unclaimed systems are worthless trash that yield considerably less income than running missions in hi-sec. I once asked an alliance to let my corp (aka one-man five-alt corp) join up to throw up POS onto mud moons. In exchange, I'd offer them a cut of the profits I made off this and, provided things didn't interfere with the alliance operations too heavily, would pay (read offer incentives) to other corps within the alliance to defend my towers if they were threatened. Apparently "There's no way you could meet the demands of the alliance let alone the fees required 'to be a part of it' as an individual." As this individual, my cut would've been handing over around 400mil a month to the alliance, a billion if things went well. Welcome to why I have a huge beef with alliances in general. I hear people harp on about how "0.0 is so empty" and "CCP needs to force carebears into low and 0.0 space, too many people are hugging empire's umbilicle cord". Personally those alliances have to look at their own attitudes first. Perhaps you're looking at this from the wrong perspective. You're asking this alliance to protect you in return for compensation, and rather than pay per incident, you wisely preferred an "insurance" style system. Now you say they wanted 400M/month - about 12.5M/day - for your whole operation, and you said that this made the proposal uneconomic for you. 12.5M/day was more than the space was worth to you. What clearer evidence can you possibly require that much of 0.0 is almost worthless?
Jowen Datloran Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.10.29 11:44:00 - [89] Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Barrad Dex It doesn't have to be us vs them It doesn't have to be 0.0 vs Empire It doesn't have to be pvp vs carebears Its carebears that have decided that it has to be this way. So it is them that are at fault, even though it is you who define it in them and us? ---------------- Mr. Science & Trade Institute
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.29 12:35:00 - [90] Originally by: Jowen Datloran Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Barrad Dex It doesn't have to be us vs them It doesn't have to be 0.0 vs Empire It doesn't have to be pvp vs carebears Its carebears that have decided that it has to be this way. So it is them that are at fault, even though it is you who define it in them and us? Um, go back a couple of months, and I think you'll see what he's talking about. Search for "pirate revenge thread"...

Fennicus Amarr Shoot To Thrill	Posted - 2008.10.29 13:03:00 - [91] Edited by: Fennicus on 29/10/2008 13:04:32 Are doing level 4's in lo-sec for the increased rewards worth the additional risk? No. Are level 4's currently far too easy? Yes. If there is a problem, it is that people complete level 4's far too quickly and easily at the moment. I would suggest that a new tier of missions be placed in between level 4's and 5's. The majority of the current level 4 missions could have their rewards decreased somewhat, and the current level 5's turned into level 6's with greater rewards. A new tier of harder "level 5" missions could then be introduced that people with T2+ fitted battleships or with a buddy can complete, with some agents remaining in hi-sec, for roughly the same rewards that are offered for level 4's currently. Admittedly this could be hard to balance, but you could aim for level 5 missions that take at least 2 hours to complete or have set DPS that you need to be able to tank for a certain amount of time, or some other mechanism.
Anisa Schardl	Posted - 2008.10.29 13:10:00 - [92] Edited by: Anisa Schardl on 29/10/2008 13:14:41 Originally by: Jason Edwards Just to further prove a point. Active pilots in system or docked. Notice how this small cross section of 0.0 literally has nobody in it. 100 system not being touched. How many unclaimed untouched systems there are. Every one of those grey dots is a system with no pos claiming sov. Seriously there's so much fighting over resources in 0.0 to claim sovereignty that you dont even use. Infact if you look at some recent fighting. An alliance went and took nearly an entire region. They took losses of 50-100billion in battleships and caps alone. All to get control over the dys and prem moons in there. Now they have to crank those moons out for a period of time... just to break even. Hoping they dont lose the space they just took. That's no fun. In that time... they likely will have conflict again and might be losing their space. You clearly have no idea at all about how 0.0 works, nor how ratting works in 0.0. I'm sure you'll argue with me, but I'll explain it anyway. Setting up a PoS inside some other alliance's region is a good way to waste a lot of ISK fast. The moment they detect your pos, they'll flatten it, unless you can defend it. Doesn't matter if the space is profitable or not, they don't want you getting a toehold in their region. PoS provides a safe place to jump ships in, a safe place for roaming gangs to run to, etc. You would not hold the pos unless you could provide enough force to defend it. This brings me to the actual danger in 0.0, which is roaming gangs. Unless every entrance to your region is permanently gatecamped (which isn't the case), there's nothing you can do to stop a fast roaming gang from poking around your area. The goal of most of these gangs is to move quickly, get into some of the good ratting/mining areas, hopefully blow up a few ships, and get out before the defense forces can respond. Most of the time, am I safe ratting in 0.0? You betcha, I haven't lost a ship in weeks. Others have, though. The most common tactic for attacking a ratting system is to send all your interceptors/scouts through the gate and disperse them to the belts as fast as you can. An inty can be through the gate and at a belt in 15 seconds if he's good. Guess what that means for the ratters. If you takes your eyes off of local for the wrong 15 seconds, you are dead. Roaming gangs I've been in have caught multiple ratters who were too slow to respond. On top of this, some frigates warp scramble. What if you're engaged with them when a roaming gang comes through the gate? Dead. But lets say you were paying attention and make it out to your PoS or safespot and cloak. Only a fool would rat with neuts/hostiles in system. Which means, effectively, you can do nothing until they leave. They probably won't stay more than a few minutes, but they're still shutting the whole system down. There are a lot of things the 0.0 ratter or miner can do to minimize risk. Scouts in adjacent systems, anchor bubbles on gates, fit warp stabilizers, etc. Lot of things you can do to mitigate risk. But you can't eliminate it. You can with highsec activities. Now, I have no opinion on highsec changes. They don't affect me, and I really don't care how much ISK someone else is making in highsec. I can make more in 0.0 normally. However, your assumptions about 0.0 are, frankly, completely wrong. Is it safe 95% of the time? You betcha. And if you're not paying attention when that other 5% rolls around, you'll lose your ship, and probably your pod as well. I think what CCP is trying to do is establish a baseline for how much ISK you can make in highsec. Some activities (lvl 4's for example), scale up as you get better ships. Faster completion-> more isk/hour than was intended. Can't do this with a Hulk, once you reach perfect mine, that's it.
Evan Batarr	Posted - 2008.10.29 13:19:00 - [93] Originally by: Cobra Ball I can't speak for all mission runners but for people like me, this really puts a dent into what i really want to do - PVP You see, as much as i dislike running level 4, I find its a pretty good way (not the best, but not the worst either) to make enough money to replace my PVP losses. I tried the other professions and i just don't enjoy them. After a day at work, its easier for me to run some mission than sit at a computer trading in jita, or mining for hours on end. So for the average person like me, the less isk that i make, the less i can PVP. And trust me, i am not a very good PVPer, so i do lose a lot of ships. I think in the long run, this can be a problem for them game. After all, this game ultimately revolves around PVP. The less people want to do that, the less likely they are to log in. If that happens, then industrialist won't have anyone to sell their ships to, and miners will have no one to sell their minerals to. And no, you can't have my stuff. I am not going to freak out like some people seem to from every tidbit a dev post on EVE-O. Just my two cents. This!! I live in 0.0 and while I agree that you can make more money ratting in 0.0 I often run LV4s to make the money to afford PVP (and I PVP a lot). Reasons: I'm often not in a mood to play THAT concentrated (always watch local etc.). Many 0.0 systems have only few ratting systems being worthwile - and those are crowded. So to be honest - I don't think LV4s need a nerf (or only a small one) but 0.0 needs a BOOST!
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.29 13:46:00 - [94] Originally by: Evan Batarr Originally by: Cobra Ball I can't speak for all mission runners but for people like me, this really puts a dent into what i really want to do - PVP You see, as much as i dislike running level 4, I find its a pretty good way (not the best, but not the worst either) to make enough money to replace my PVP losses. I tried the other professions and i just don't enjoy them. After a day at work, its easier for me to run some mission than sit at a computer trading in jita, or mining for hours on end. So for the average person like me, the less isk that i make, the less i can PVP. And trust me, i am not a very good PVPer, so i do lose a lot of ships. I think in the long run, this can be a problem for them game. After all, this game ultimately revolves around PVP. The less people want to do that, the less likely they are to log in. If that happens, then industrialist won't have anyone to sell their ships to, and miners will have no one to sell their minerals to. And no, you can't have my stuff. I am not going to freak out like some people seem to from every tidbit a dev post on EVE-O. Just my two cents. This!! I live in 0.0 and while I agree that you can make more money ratting in 0.0 I often run LV4s to make the money to afford PVP (and I PVP a lot). Reasons: I'm often not in a mood to play THAT concentrated (always watch local etc.). Many 0.0 systems have only few ratting systems being worthwile - and those are crowded. So to be honest - I don't think LV4s need a nerf (or only a small one) but 0.0 needs a BOOST! I wholly agree that 0.0 - useful 0.0 - needs to be hugely expanded. In fact if 0.0 was made big enough, and the new areas were far enough away (ie: on the far side of what is currently the outermost edge of 0.0) then I wouldn't really care what happened in empire. Turn it all into pink ponies for all it would concern me. There was a considerable discussion of this in a thread I started called something like "Let's work this out". There is also an extended debate on hi-sec missioning in the "how much is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth?" thread.
Esmenet	Posted - 2008.10.29 14:57:00 - [95] Edited by: Esmenet on 29/10/2008 14:58:47 Originally by: Jowen Datloran Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Barrad Dex It doesn't have to be us vs them It doesn't have to be 0.0 vs Empire It doesn't have to be pvp vs carebears Its carebears that have decided that it has to be this way. So it is them that are at fault, even though it is you who define it in them and us? Yes because its carebears that wants to separate EVE into a PVE and a PVP zone. The definition is slightly older than my post, as you should know if you have read the forums.
Arakidias Murky Inc. Power Of 3	Posted - 2008.10.29 16:28:00 - [96] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Evan Batarr Originally by: Cobra Ball I can't speak for all mission runners but for people like me, this really puts a dent into what i really want to do - PVP You see, as much as i dislike running level 4, I find its a pretty good way (not the best, but not the worst either) to make enough money to replace my PVP losses. I tried the other professions and i just don't enjoy them. After a day at work, its easier for me to run some mission than sit at a computer trading in jita, or mining for hours on end. So for the average person like me, the less isk that i make, the less i can PVP. And trust me, i am not a very good PVPer, so i do lose a lot of ships. I think in the long run, this can be a problem for them game. After all, this game ultimately revolves around PVP. The less people want to do that, the less likely they are to log in. If that happens, then industrialist won't have anyone to sell their ships to, and miners will have no one to sell their minerals to. And no, you can't have my stuff. I am not going to freak out like some people seem to from every tidbit a dev post on EVE-O. Just my two cents. This!! I live in 0.0 and while I agree that you can make more money ratting in 0.0 I often run LV4s to make the money to afford PVP (and I PVP a lot). Reasons: I'm often not in a mood to play THAT concentrated (always watch local etc.). Many 0.0 systems have only few ratting systems being worthwile - and those are crowded. So to be honest - I don't think LV4s need a nerf (or only a small one) but 0.0 needs a BOOST! I wholly agree that 0.0 - useful 0.0 - needs to be hugely expanded. In fact if 0.0 was made big enough, and the new areas were far enough away (ie: on the far side of what is currently the outermost edge of 0.0) then I wouldn't really care what happened in empire. Turn it all into pink ponies for all it would concern me. There was a considerable discussion of this in a thread I started called something like "Let's work this out". There is also an extended debate on hi-sec missioning in the "how much is a hi-sec level 4 agent worth?" thread. The problem is that CCP feels, and has stated repeatedly, that there is still enough room in 0.0, because most of the systems are empty etc. Somehow they don't realise that 75% of 0.0 is crap in terms of income, atleast when compared to highsec.
Hertford Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.29 16:49:00 - [97] Originally by: Arakidias The problem is that CCP feels, and has stated repeatedly, that there is still enough room in 0.0, because most of the systems are empty etc. Somehow they don't realise that 75% of 0.0 is crap in terms of income, atleast when compared to highsec. Indeed. Why try to make money in a -0.07 truesec system 8 jumps from the nearest station (and all the logistical nightmares that ensues) when there's Motsu?
Lili Lu Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships	Posted - 2008.10.29 18:09:00 - [98] Edited by: Lili Lu on 29/10/2008 18:10:16 Anisa Shardl's post above is spot on. Actually, you guys if you haven't should read the change to local thread. If local were replaced with a sov based intel system in 0.0, it might open those unused systems up to colonization. Right now large 0.0 alliances effectively control more space than the infrastructure they've invested. Why? Because its way too easy to spot squatters in unused areas and squash them. A change to how intel is gathered and maintained might force alliances to consoidate their holdings, which would leave more area open for other folks. Anyway, worth pondering.
Hertford Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.29 18:13:00 - [99] Edited by: Hertford on 29/10/2008 18:14:15 Originally by: Lili Lu Edited by: Lili Lu on 29/10/2008 18:10:16 Anisa Shardl's post above is spot on. Actually, you guys if you haven't should read the change to local thread. If local were replaced with a sov based intel system in 0.0, it might open those unused systems up to colonization. Right now large 0.0 alliances effectively control more space than the infrastructure they've invested. Why? Because its way too easy to spot squatters in unused areas and squash them. A change to how intel is gathered and maintained might force alliances to consoidate their holdings, which would leave more area open for other folks. Anyway, worth pondering. Those empty, unused 0.0 systems are empty and unused for a good reason. And it's nothing to do with big alliances claiming them.
Kirana Si House of Lubrication	Posted - 2008.10.29 19:03:00 - [100] Edited by: Kirana Si on 29/10/2008 19:04:14 This thread is full of epic lulz just because I see here so many people whine, forceing CCP not long ago to nerf highsec ganking and speed. And now, as CCP will nerf lvl4s all cry foul play, I quit. The others are the so called "casual" players saying: I can log in just once a week and so I will risk free insta fun whawhawha Before you all emoragequit please make sure you contract all your lvl4 pimp gear to me, ktnxbye

Jmanis Catharg Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.10.29 21:41:00 - [101] Quote: Perhaps you're looking at this from the wrong perspective. You're asking this alliance to protect you in return for compensation, and rather than pay per incident, you wisely preferred an "insurance" style system. Now you say they wanted 400M/month - about 12.5M/day - for your whole operation, and you said that this made the proposal uneconomic for you. 12.5M/day was more than the space was worth to you. What clearer evidence can you possibly require that much of 0.0 is almost worthless? Yeah, damn straight that's what I want to offer, because 12.5M a day is better than the *0 isk* they're recieving now. The amount of systems I've gone into with nothing but a sovereignity POS in it is ridiculous. If all the systems had people in them 'renting' for 50 million a day under the same conditions, I'd stand corrected. But these spaces are empty, doing nothing for the alliance, and nothing for anyone. Hell, I don't even want "sole 'ownership'" of the system, I just want some mud moons, anyone else can come and go as they please. I've run into 'ownership' agreements in high-sought systems with hot mining, ratting and moons, that's fine. But it doesn't work when you don't have a market for it. The alliance doesn't even have to do anything, just recieve money because they rekon the space is "theirs" through no other fact except they reside in the nearby systems and plonked a POS which says "ours" on the system info. But basically you're telling me that 12.5 million a month from one man in a system nobody wants isn't enough,, when the next best offer you'll get anyway is nothing. Even trit gets 2-3 isk per unit. --- Originally by: CCP Mitnal I went to the forums for special powers and all I got was a dancing padlock and a banhammer.
Mara Rinn Minmatar	Posted - 2008.10.29 21:41:00 - [102] I run level 4s in my playtime to raise the ISK to pay for GTC to fund someone else's PvP habit. That's the challenge I've set myself. I've had to buy a subscription for a couple of months due to GTC prices going up just as I was getting interested in life outside the game, but I'm back on track now. This game is fun because there is a real challenge that I can actually beat. If level 4 missions get nerfed, I'll have to resort to mining and flooding the market with hisec minerals. Then noone will be making money, since there'll be no profit in mining, T1 manufacture, or mission-running. Then everyone with a PvP habit to support will be complaining that it's so hard to make money! Nanonerf was necessary because battleships were flying faster than missiles. There's something wrong with that picture. There's not enough ISK in the marketplace - the falling prices of commodities are testament to that.
Gamer4liff Caldari Metalworks THE INTERSTELLAR FOUNDRY	Posted - 2008.10.29 22:30:00 - [103] Risk Vs. Reward is a myth. It's usually risk(financial or otherwise) vs effort vs reward. You can't simplify everything into Risk Vs. Reward, you have to consiter how much time is spent.
Mara Rinn Minmatar	Posted - 2008.10.30 11:17:00 - [104] Originally by: Fennicus Are doing level 4's in lo-sec for the increased rewards worth the additional risk? No. That's why you go to level 5 missions in losec, with a bunch of friends. You can have 10 people there - three actually running the mission, seven providing safety-in-numbers - and still be better off economically than level 4s in hisec. Quote: Are level 4's currently far too easy? Yes. Damn straight they are too easy. The best way to make them harder is to have NPCs that use webbers, warp scramblers, cap neuts, targetting disruptors, tracking disruptors - basically everything that PvP fit players would be using. There are some missions where some ships use offensive devices besides guns. Usually they are scramming frigates or neuting battleships. I'd really like level 4 missions to have more of the dangerous stuff, to add a bit of excitement to the mission. Quote: If there is a problem, it is that people complete level 4's far too quickly and easily at the moment. The problem for me is that I know the formula to beat every level 4 mission. I'm no longer wondering if I'll make it out alive, it's just a matter how how long it will take. NPCs with stronger tanks do not make the missions more exciting. NPCs with web, scram, neuts and blasters do make the missions more exciting. Level 5 missions are an appropriate carrot to entice people like me into losec, but I need to find a few like-minded friends before I'll brave the hisec-losec borders. Every time I've been into losec I've ended up getting blown up. I do agree that EVE should not be tuned for solo play. I do agree that level 4 missions are too easy for the rewards they provide. Unfortunately due to mudflation, level 4 missions that were very difficult when first released are now cakewalks due to T2 ships & fittings, and documentation of exactly what to expect. Imagine if you didn't know what faction you'd be facing in your next level 4 mission? Suddenly the difficulty level is tripled. What if the NPC T2 battlecruisers all mounted neuts and used warp scrambling drones? Suddenly you can't just blow up the scrammers with your cruise missiles! I agree that level 4 missions should be a means of introducing people to cooperative play. They should be prepping people for the level 5 missions, and for fleet operation in general.
Andrue Amarr	Posted - 2008.10.30 11:55:00 - [105] Edited by: Andrue on 30/10/2008 12:04:59 Originally by: Kirana Si Edited by: Kirana Si on 29/10/2008 19:04:14 This thread is full of epic lulz just because I see here so many people whine, forceing CCP not long ago to nerf highsec ganking and speed. And now, as CCP will nerf lvl4s all cry foul play, I quit. The others are the so called "casual" players saying: I can log in just once a week and so I will risk free insta fun whawhawha Before you all emoragequit please make sure you contract all your lvl4 pimp gear to me, ktnxbye Or perhaps you could learn to read? CCP are not nerfing L4 missions. They have repeatedly stated that they won't do that. Zulupark expressed a personal opinion and added that CCP had not looked into it: Originally by: Zulupark High-sec nerfed: Personally I'd like to see more lvl4 agents move more to low-sec, but that's just my personal opinion. This is a very delicate system and any kind of interference with it needs careful consideration. So far we haven't looked at it in any seriousness. The typo is unfortunate (or maybe deliberate) but either way it is premature to claim that CCP are nerfing L4s. The only conclusion we can draw is that CCP are aware of an imbalance (well, duh!) and one particular developer expressed the personal opinion that doing something with L4 agents might help. Note the last sentence:So far we haven't looked at it in any seriousness.. IOW:They have probably talked about it in the kitchen while waiting for the kettle to boil or perhaps batted a few ideas between cubicles for ten minutes. -- (Sarcastic mission running veteran, 4+ years) [Brackley, UK] My budgie can say "ploppy bottom". You have been warned.
Doonoo Boonoo Amarr	Posted - 2008.10.30 12:37:00 - [106] No proof that lvl 4s are being nerfed. Just the same 50 hour a week players who have multiple accounts and have billions of Isk in their wallets complaining about Risk v Reward. Funny.
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2008.10.30 13:12:00 - [107] Originally by: ThorBank Originally by: Gorefacer The confusion for many is why would a gist xl booster be a goal for an EVE player in itself. Well thats pretty simple. For some people, me included, its just plain fun to perfect something :) I only do missions to finance my pvp but i like pimpin my missionrunner, too. Its just fun to see how much better the ship perfoms after you put in more isk. Its not about solving missions but the speed you do em with. Its fun to see you¦re beloved ship take the whole stage and blow everything to little wrecks within no time. (At least, thats what i like about missions and missionrunner ships.) So for some people its a long goal term to get more and more of these pimped ships, just for the sake of it. No I wouldnt fly such a ship into lowsec or 0.0. Theres no point in it since as you said, a 150m ship can basicly do the same in a longer time. But: if the lvls 4 moved to low sec, for many people the reason to get such pimped ships will simply vanish. With no long-term goal, theres no point in playin. PvP is fun, but without the perfectonistic approach you can take on missionrunners, eve would loose a lot of its attractivness for many people. (note: this is not supposed to be a whine, i only wanted to explain what is interesting for one part of the player base. if missions get nerfed and its no use to pimp such ships anymore, there will be another way to gain money....yepp even if its lvl 3. in a command ship. ;) ) The fact that mission running ISK is generated to fund PVP makes sense to me. If the module let's you run the mission faster you make more ISK/hr and can fly better ships more often in PVP. Would the perfecting of that mission runner still hold your interest if the ISK made from those missions didn't go to PVP? If so, that's cool, just not something I'm able to visualize myself I guess. For those that do just pimp out ships for the sake of it, wouldn't lowering lvl 4 rewards just give them LONGER term goals and lengthen the time it takes to achieve them or am I missing something? "You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2008.10.30 13:33:00 - [108] Originally by: Jason Edwards Technically speaking a great deal of 0.0 is pretty much unclaimed. Rarely have people in it... and if it wasnt for absolutely nuts nano gangs... 0.0 would be significantly safer. Even in the current setup... you can pretty much find yourself a hole in 0.0 plop up a pos and start doing your thing. Most 0.0 systems that allow ISK making above what you can make in high sec doing lvl 4 missions are at least somewhat occupied. It's the hub and gateway systems that are fought over usually - the other empty systems are usually contained within the borders of space that is conquered and held normally speaking. As a bad RL analogy (they all are) - much of the United Stated is empty and unoccupied but that doesn't mean it's "unclaimed" or available to anyone. Even if you can find a piece of 0.0 and "plop" down a POS, if it's "worth" anything at all you run the risk of having a bigger organization come and tear down what you've built. That *risk* isn't present in empire so how is 0.0 safe compared to empire? Quote: Actually either it's that alliance's fault for being stupid or you are. Big alliances get paid by other groups billions per month to grab a hold of some safe unused space in their space. The fee covers any claim of "leeching" Didn't quite follow what your saying here. Any bold SOV 0.0 presence will draw attention, enemies and wars. SOV wars means cap battles. Add up all the man hours spent PVPing, planning and running logistics/industry + plus all the ISK damage lost in fights and that is roughly the "cost" of the space you own in 0.0. Not every alliance and organization's situation is the same, but if your in SOV 0.0 and there is a nice chunk of space that's regularly blue, I can bet you a lot of effort and ISK went into making it that way. Just because you weren't the one spending the time or the ISK doesn't mean that it wasn't spent by others to provide the "safe" situation you describe. "You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2008.10.30 13:54:00 - [109] Originally by: Jason Edwards In my experience good alliances cover 100% of subcapital combat pvp and 33% of capital pvp. So any isk you earn in 0.0 literally stays with you. The alliance itself earns isk from the moons and such it holds. The corps earn isk through bounties/tax or through purchasing and refining the drone alloys. 0.0 is profitable for everyone unless you're in a terrible situation. Maybe during OPs, what about small gang roams and gatecamps you may do on a nightly basis? An alliance can't be expected to replace every PVP loss incurred by every member they have at any time. At least not any I've ever heard of. Also those sub-capital free replacements are not made by every alliance. And some alliances that do practice this won't for long if a war starts to turn south. Sometimes the ISK an alliance generates in 0.0 covers all their losses and then some, but this isn't always the case for every alliance. Quote: Because you arent the cloaking raven and you want the ability to destroy them. Get a clue. Of course. And I have ninja ratted in hostile space before. I've also ninja explored for ISK as well. Get a clue. Quote: If I were to crank open eve right now and check how many active pilots in system or docked and count the systems in 0.0 with NOBODY. How many do you think there are? How about low sec? Betcha it'll be much harder. Infact when I was in low sec you pretty much 3-5 people in all systems. Though that was caldari space. Amarr space I suspect to be more dead. Your point is? Quote: As I said... those pics I posted were lvl 4 mission runners... who were successful. My point is that changing level 4s would eliminate these people if risk is increased. OR if reward is drastically dropped the the succesful lvl 4 runners cant fit their ships and also have to do the "shoop da whoop" fit. Nobody buys anything coming from 0.0 Suddenly the value of 0.0 decreases signficantly and then as you said... you barely break even... you will afterwards be very very poor. The real point though is that if you change lvl 4s... nobody buys those gist xl boosters... and then you are royally screwed in 0.0 So all the ISK generated from 0.0 is in the form of faction and officer gear? I've never gotten an officer spawn and have made only a very small % of my ISK off faction spawns in 0.0. How am I royally screwed if something I'll probably never have sells for a lot of ISK instead of an insane amount? Quote: The confusion for many is why would a tech2 xl booster be a goal for an EVE player in itself. After it's attained the player can now do what he did before. Is it that now they have the module itself? Why doesnt he just use a named xl booster... it works... hell that raven doesnt even have a tank at all. Perhaps all lvl 4 mission runners have to fit their ships like that. A t2 xl booster isn't a goal for many (anyone) in itself. That was my whole point. It helps run the mission to make ISK for other things. I think my comment confused you, who said anything about what people "have" to fit. Quote: You're right people would use them... they'd drop to 500mil or less and people would buy them. They certainly wouldnt be used pvp... 500mil is absolutely nuts. They would be used in lvl3s Except it'll take them 2-3 months to scratch up the isk to get 500mil. Running missions gets you isk. You then use that isk to do what you find fun. Personally I think I want to eventually train for thanatos, buy a thanatos, fit it reasonably well. Get out to 0.0 for fun. But I cant fly a thanatos atm. It takes time. Some people claim to enjoy running missions and never buy a Thanatos (or whatever) and head to 0.0. They claim the mission running IS their fun. It was those people that that comment was pointed at. If faction/officer gear dropped in price you'd see it more often in PVP. Even with the insane prices you already see some use it in PVP anyway. "You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2008.10.30 14:15:00 - [110] Originally by: Jason Edwards Says you? With some exceptions obviously. Many mission runners have never broke 1 billion. They play every day... hours everyday. Yet they dont ever seem to break 1 billion. I wonder why that is? Currently I'm at 1.3 billion. I must have sold the apocs I've built and rigs. I have a feeling my ammo hasnt been touched. Even a poor lvl 4 mission runner can make 15m/hr and never lose their ship. Take the ISK spent on all your ships that have died your whole EVE career and add that to your wallet balance, also take all the time PVPing and convert that into ISK based on how much ISK/hr you can make running lvl 4s, now how much ISK do you have? Originally by: Gorefacer You can fit a ship capable of running the hardest highest lvl mission in high sec for about 150m or less. Even if the lvl 4 mission rewards were cut in half this amount of ISK could be saved in a matter of weeks or months and now they are capable of accomplishing the hardest thing this type of player will do in their whole EVE career. Quote: Yep and we also cut any isk going to 0.0 people. Their products can sit on the market. Still recovering the loss of purchasing my ship. While the 0.0 moons are still cranking out exactly the same amount... but nobody is buying. So it's just piling up. Your wallet from all those losses for holding space starts to smart... and manufacturers stop building because their product is on the market at no markup and with no isk they cant buy fuel and minerals. So the miners cant earn as much and the market starts flooding. What people are supposed to just buy insurance on their ships and fly them into a belt to die? to earn isk? What are you talking about? Your postulating that if lvl 4 mission rewards were cut somewhat all of a sudden there would be no ISK making done in 0.0 and that the demand for ships would disappear and that nobody could fill sell orders for anything on the market? Your making no sense. There might be slight market adjustments because dedicated mission runners would take longer to afford a small percent of the 0.0 items they normally buy. I'd bet money the situation wouldn't play out in the apocalyptic way your describing. People would still make ISK, and still blow ships up and use ammo and set up POSs etc etc and still have to buy stuff from the market to replace all that. Originally by: Gorefacer I've used lvl 4 missions as a form of PVP funding and probably will again in the future so my point of view isn't formed due to personal gain or convenience. Honestly I'd gain nothing directly by lvl 4s being nerfed Quote: Lots to lose though eh? About as much as most out there I'd say. Quote: but I think it would force people to make ISK to PVP in a PVP/contested oriented environmen Quote: Yet you just said that you were making no isk by doing that. And you want even more competition over the same resources in 0.0 or low sec? Wow interesting. Great way to destroy the game. I never said that at all. In fact I have an alt that makes good ISK just by staying docked in Jita and playing the market. I could also train mining skills with that character and make ISK that way (0.0 or hi sec). Or do it salvaging or inventing or production.... Also if it had to be 0.0 as you seem to assume I meant by "PVP oriented" I could just adjust my ratting to PVPing ratio, BANG now I'm in the plus for ISK, shocking huh? The only reason I'm not making ISK in 0.0 is because the second I have enough to replace my lost ship I'm buying a new one and flying it until it's popped. I like PVP more than PVE so it's a personal preference thing. "You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus

Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2008.10.30 14:22:00 - [111] Originally by: Bimjo Edited by: Bimjo on 28/10/2008 15:56:37 Originally by: Esmenet Originally by: Jason Edwards you kidding? gist xl boosters are epic over t2. They easily are permarun with far better defense then t2. That's huge difference. Since a t2 xl booster is more than enough tank for any lvl 4 mission, you are basically paying 1 bill to be lazy and not manage cap. opinions are like a**holes,everyone has one (don't get offended, I am no different) So how about some facts instead of opinions ? Officer fitting(allowing perma tank) means if you get disconnected in Angel Ext., in the bonus room, when 40 ships are on you all at once,you can try to reconnect in the knowledge your ship is safe I don't know about you,but all I hear from PvPers,Fleet ops pilots and mission runners is "CCP refused my petition for ship loss due to lag/disconnection, because their records didn't support it,hence calling me a liar" Actually due to disconnects killing my mission running ships I now run a t2 perma tank Raven. It has only 2x BCUs and I have to fit appropriate hardners for mission and watch which triggers I hit, but with it I've done every lvl 4 mission there is multiple times. Because of the perma fit I've survived quite a few lag spikes and crashes, if for whatever reason the ship was lost - it'd be relatively cheap to replace. Not saying that officer stuff isn't "worth" it for dedicated mission runners, just that t2 is sufficient to get the job done. And that's a personally tested fact. "You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2008.10.30 14:27:00 - [112] Originally by: Shirley Serious Problem with lvl4 missions is that they have to be able to be completed in a tech1 fit battleship. (or at least they should be - some recent missions don't look like that's possible). Battleships may not enter several lvl3 missions, (most of which are newer, seems like that's the way it's headed). Otherwise, everything thats tech1 or named that's battleship sized is pretty redundant, except as a source of minerals or for building tech2 or for LP store offers. Seriously, is a plain Tech1 fit battleship useful in 0.0 at all? Can it handle the rat spawns? Is it any use in pvp except in a dire emergency, where it's "grab whatever you have!" ? The trouble is that with a Tech2 fit, or faction/deadspace fit, a ship can complete missions a whole lot faster, due to putting out a lot more damage, and being able to tank more spawns, so aggro management isn't as time consuming as it is for Tech1. Some people, who know what they are doing, what missions to do, etc. can get to earning 30+ million isk per hour from lvl4 missions (occasionally by using an alt as support - still makes a lot more per hour per character). For a newer player in a Tech1/named fit, it's probably not much more than 4-5 million isk per hour from lvl4, because they're slower, might need to warp out, and probably have wrecks expire on them because they take so long to do them. Making game balancing changes based on the performances of extremes, isn't a good thing. Also, what's so bad about people who are what you might call "weekend pvpers"? i.e. people who do a few missions during the week, to fund some cheap ships to have some fun in at the weekend? They buy things (making industrialists happy) and get shot (making combat players happy), and can afford then to do this several times. Risk/reward works best when the person controlling the character has as little emotional involvement as possible. "Ohnoes, my ship!" is an emotional involvement. The people who the risk/reward mechanism works best for are isk-farmers. All those lowsec-couriers that you used to see? isk-farmers, the majority of them. Why? Because the risk/reward worked for them. Player pirates aren't interested in shooting them. So be careful with the risk/reward mechanisms. T1/named BS fitting can be very useful in 0.0 and PVP fits in general. Often times the named can be fit more easily than t2 or the t1 and named are the only ones available where your at and you can't be bothered to make an empire run for t2. Also they'll be used by people before they train the t2 skills. Not sure if that answers your question. "You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus
Lrrp Minmatar The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.10.30 14:29:00 - [113] Here's what I find really amusing. CCP wants to nerf lvl 4's to force people out into low sec or null sec. At one time a lot of mission runners were in low sec running missions (myself included). Any one remember what CCP did to drive them out of low sec? At one time it was impossible to scan mission runners out. Then we started hearing a organised babble by the pirate crowd on how "unfair" it was that they (pirates) couldn't attack the mission runner when he was in mission. It wasn't enough they (pirates) could set up gate ganks or attack peeps at the station, they wanted the I win button by being able to get a gang togeather and attack the lone ship out in mission. And they got their way. I and many others said to heck with that and went back to high sec. CCP does seem to have a curious way of getting people out of high sec eh? The real question here is, "Why does it matter to anyone if someone is making isk running missions in high sec?" What sweat is it off your cajones that they do? One forgets there are any number of lvl 4 agents in low sec and null sec right now. Are people flocking out to them? Want peeps to mission out there? Just make it so missions cannot be scanned out. Easy huh?
Tippia Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.10.30 14:35:00 - [114] Originally by: Lrrp The real question here is, "Why does it matter to anyone if someone is making isk running missions in high sec?" What sweat is it off your cajones that they do? They compete on the market for ships and modules, driving prices up through increased demand and through their ready access to ISK.
Myra2007 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.10.30 14:38:00 - [115] Originally by: Lrrp One forgets there are any number of lvl 4 agents in low sec and null sec right now. Are people flocking out to them? Want peeps to mission out there? Just make it so missions cannot be scanned out. Easy huh? Sure. How about we also introduce concord to lowsec to set this straight? I mean its so easy, ain't it?
Gorefacer Caldari Resurrection Skunk-Works	Posted - 2008.10.30 14:44:00 - [116] Originally by: Core Researcher He is right, you are wrong. 0.0 space held by large alliances is SAFE AS IT COMES. I dont give a flying ** how hard it was to take it Ive lived out there enough times to know. This argument re:L4s is also same old same old: move 4s to low sec people will IGNORE THEM, then if they dont manage to get the same kind of game running 3s they will leave. Dont fool youself into thinking a few might say "oo ill give low-sec a try," because they just wont. Well that's the point. You don't give a ** how hard or how much effort went into making the space safe, all you know is it's safe for you, for no effort. Just because your missing the big picture doesn't mean that I'm wrong. Maybe lvl 4s should stay the way they are now for sake of game subscriptions. Doesn't necessarily mean that it makes for a better game in theory. If the reality is that the game will flop if lvl 4s are changed in any way, by all means keep them the same. This has no effect on whether or not they are adequately adjusted for risk vs reward. I can't conclusively say that adjusting lvl 4 missions would end the game as we know it. Neither can you really. All that's left is to debate the theory on what is the "right" balance. You have your opinion and I have mine. Pulling the game subscription card isn't really a valid argument for why lvl 4 missions are risk vs reward balanced. In my opinion at least. "You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus
Lrrp Minmatar The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.10.30 14:47:00 - [117] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Lrrp The real question here is, "Why does it matter to anyone if someone is making isk running missions in high sec?" What sweat is it off your cajones that they do? They compete on the market for ships and modules, driving prices up through increased demand and through their ready access to ISK. Are you seriously daft? Most mission runners use the same ship month in and month out, never having to buy a thing for it. OTOH, mission runners put on market a lot of the named loot they find. So how is that driving prices up? PVP'ers are the ones losing ships. They are the ones buying things and driving up prices. Look at how many ships and mods were lost in EO over the weekend. 700+ Do you thing pilots replacing those ships are going to cause market prices to drop?
Lrrp Minmatar The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.10.30 14:48:00 - [118] Edited by: Lrrp on 30/10/2008 14:53:57 Originally by: Myra2007 Originally by: Lrrp One forgets there are any number of lvl 4 agents in low sec and null sec right now. Are people flocking out to them? Want peeps to mission out there? Just make it so missions cannot be scanned out. Easy huh? Sure. How about we also introduce concord to lowsec to set this straight? I mean its so easy, ain't it? Well using your rather pathetic logic, lets do the reverse and make all of EVE null space.
Shirley Serious Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.10.30 15:15:00 - [119] Originally by: Gorefacer Originally by: Shirley Serious my post T1/named BS fitting can be very useful in 0.0 and PVP fits in general. Often times the named can be fit more easily than t2 or the t1 and named are the only ones available where your at and you can't be bothered to make an empire run for t2. Also they'll be used by people before they train the t2 skills. Not sure if that answers your question. It does a bit, yeah. Good to know that plain tech1 fit ships are still of some use. Ships and modules forum though seems to suggest that if it's not all tech2 fit, then your ship is a liability, not an asset. Yes. Yes, I am.
Core Scientist	Posted - 2008.10.30 15:30:00 - [120] Originally by: Lrrp The real question here is, "Why does it matter to anyone if someone is making isk running missions in high sec?" What sweat is it off your cajones that they do? And there it is. So anti-L4s, what IS the problem?

Dmian Gallente Gallenterrorisme	Posted - 2008.10.30 15:41:00 - [121] Low-sec is the playground of no-risk carebear pirates. ---- Eve Alpha - The font of Eve - Get it here
Jimi Tetro Vanquish Inc	Posted - 2008.10.30 15:41:00 - [122] As a player who uses L4's to recover my PVP losses I have to agree they are overpowered and need nerfing. They provide more income per hour that most of 0.0 unless you have spent hours setting up a system chain with belts full of 3x 1.5+ bs's. Initially I would prefer they move +quality l4's to low sec and leave -quality in High sec, with the long term view of moving them all to low-sec. Why would exclusive high sec mission runners care? If you only do missions for fun, then you could carry on with L3's as after a month or 2 of missioning you would have all the isk you need as you never lose a ship.
Tippia Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.10.30 15:44:00 - [123] Edited by: Tippia on 30/10/2008 15:45:11 Originally by: Lrrp Are you seriously daft? No, are you? Quote: Most mission runners use the same ship month in and month out, never having to buy a thing for it. Source? You are apparently ignorant to the number of PvPers who use mission-running as a sideline to pay for their PvP habits. Quote: Do you thing pilots replacing those ships are going to cause market prices to drop? Which ships? Their PvE ships? No. Their PvP ships? Certainly.
Lrrp Minmatar The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.10.30 15:51:00 - [124] Originally by: Jimi Tetro As a player who uses L4's to recover my PVP losses I have to agree they are overpowered and need nerfing. I suspect you don't really run them. Why would any sane person want to nerf a source of income? Originally by: Jimi Tetro They provide more income per hour that most of 0.0 unless you have spent hours setting up a system chain with belts full of 3x 1.5+ bs's. Depends on systems. While in fountain I could rat and make 18 to 25 mil per hour in a freaking Drake. Try making that solo in lvl 4's hour after hour. Originally by: Jimi Tetro Why would exclusive high sec mission runners care? If you only do missions for fun, then you could carry on with L3's as after a month or 2 of missioning you would have all the isk you need as you never lose a ship. Suspicion meter needle in the red. Very screwed logic here. If, after doing lvl 4's, why do you think much easier mission are going to be fun? When one pvp's, one "NEVER" has enough isk.
Tippia Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.10.30 15:59:00 - [125] Originally by: Lrrp Originally by: Jimi Tetro As a player who uses L4's to recover my PVP losses I have to agree they are overpowered and need nerfing. I suspect you don't really run them. Why would any sane person want to nerf a source of income? Your suspicions are wrong. I run L4s to fund my PvP habits, and I feel the same as Jimi. As to why: because it feels far too easy to be good for the game. There's no reason why something that simple should pay that well. Quote: Depends on systems. While in fountain I could rat and make 18 to 25 mil per hour in a freaking Drake. Try making that solo in lvl 4's hour after hour. The same can be done with L4s, without having to work for the access to a good system — there is no "depends" for L4s. Quote: If, after doing lvl 4's, why do you think much easier mission are going to be fun? L4s are no harder than L3s — they just require different equipment. If you want to make your L3 missions "hard", and thus make them fun, you can just underfit for them. "Easy" and "fun" are completely malleable and subjective concepts.
Lrrp Minmatar The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.10.30 16:03:00 - [126] Originally by: Tippia Source? You are apparently ignorant to the number of PvPers who use mission-running as a sideline to pay for their PvP habits. I'm was talking about pilots who don't pvp as you seemed to imply it was the mission runner exclusively that was driving up the market by buying mods for their pve ships. I am glad to see you concur it is in fact the pvp aspect that drives up market cost. Whatever the source a pvp'er derives income from, the income generating source itself cannot be held liable for market swings. Originally by: Tippia Which ships? Their PvE ships? No. Their PvP ships? Certainly. Also, given the number of mission runners, they can drive the prices up with their PvE fits just through sheer numbers. Exactly. We both are in agreement then that pvp is the cause for a market swing up.
Lili Lu Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships	Posted - 2008.10.30 16:57:00 - [127] OMG why nerf level 4s? Just buff low sec and 0.0 belt ratting
Vietone Gallente Mercury Industries	Posted - 2008.10.30 19:48:00 - [128] Honestly, I dont see why people care if lvl4 missions are being in high sec.Not every player wants to bother with PvP which pretty much sums up what happens in low sec. If low sec was worth it, more people would go into low sec. Some people like grinding missions, getting lots of ISK and buying better ships. Whats wrong with that? It doesnt hurt anyone in low sec. You still get to PvP with people who want to PvP. Moving lvl4 missions exclusively to low sec will pretty much reduce lvl4 missions to almost nothing. Doing LvL3 missions is hardly an alternative. Instead of grinding for a month to get that new ship, you would be grinding for 3-4 months. People would leave the game because its no longer worth the effort to get a better ship. If eve was all about PvP, then they would only have high sec systems 2-3 jumps from starter stations and going more than that would be low sec and null sec. Some people like PvP, some people dont. They should make changes to improve the rewards for PvP instead of gimping players who don't. For example, I always thought it would be nice to be able to steal players ship once they reach a certain amount of damage. For example, lets say you gate camp and a nice hauler comes by, instead of blowing it to pieces, how about when the ship gets down to 20% structure, since the ship is pretty much a sitting duck anyway, there should be a module to be able to hack the ship and force the pilot to eject. Then someone else who would probably be in a cheap disposable ship like a shuttle can jump into it and fly it away, keeping all cargo intact. There are better ways to improve the game. But making the game worse for people should not be a first option.
Tippia Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2008.10.30 20:52:00 - [129] Edited by: Tippia on 30/10/2008 20:55:28 Originally by: Lrrp Exactly. We both are in agreement then that pvp is the cause for a market swing up. No. Read it again. Originally by: Vietone Some people like grinding missions, getting lots of ISK and buying better ships. Whats wrong with that? It doesnt hurt anyone in low sec. What's wrong is that it does hurt others. Those "lots of ISK" you accrue has an effect on the market for everyone. Anything and everything you do in this game has an effect on other players.
Cece Cline	Posted - 2008.10.31 12:22:00 - [130] Originally by: Tippia Originally by: Vietone Some people like grinding missions, getting lots of ISK and buying better ships. Whats wrong with that? It doesnt hurt anyone in low sec. What's wrong is that it does hurt others. Those "lots of ISK" you accrue has an effect on the market for everyone. Anything and everything you do in this game has an effect on other players. Yeah I bet it hurts when low sec ratters get more money from their items. Nerf lvl4 payouts, increase officer drops in low sec! I want to buy a gist-x booster for 150m because that's what they are gonna cost. Estamel's full shield hardener set for 100m, mmmm, mucho gusto!

Ryoji Tanakama Caldari Firestar Drive Yards	Posted - 2008.10.31 12:42:00 - [131] Edited by: Ryoji Tanakama on 31/10/2008 12:42:21 There we go, the same naive notion yet again. People do not do level 4s because they are worth the most isk. They do level 4s because they are the optimal isk available for no significant risk. Nerfing level 4s will simply not move anyone into lowsec. Boosting lowsec missions will not move anyone into lowsec. You can't game engineer with carrots if you don't understand the game.
Roshan longshot Gallente Ordos Humanitas	Posted - 2008.10.31 13:16:00 - [132] Originally by: Jason Edwards Quote: More lvl4 agents: I've said somewhere above that we want to normalize the risk-reward ratio of level 4's, so this would fall under that hat. This is why you shouldn't touch level 4s. Think of the newbs! Rokh Level 4 runner. Maelstrom Level 4 Runner. Raven Level 4 Runner. All scanned within very short period. My other good reason is outlined here. Hey instead of wasting space with yet another 'anti level four mission' post...apply to CCP and fix it from within the company...They are looking for a good few people to fill their ranks...oh wait a sec.
Janu Hull Caldari Terra Incognita Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.10.31 13:27:00 - [133] Originally by: Clair Bear But would you fly a multi-billion ISK pimped out pwnmobile for ratting like you can for highsec missions? I do already, its called a Chimera. In the event of an emergency, my ego may be used as a floatation device.
Vigilant Gallente Vigilant's Vigilante's	Posted - 2008.10.31 13:46:00 - [134] Cold hard facts; We have high security people who have zero intention of ever going to low/nul security for any period of time. CCP must cater to that group of people or risk loosing "even" more accounts than they have with some of recent decisions. It is a buisness first and foremost to CCP, and they will do what it takes to try to make all players happy. This keeps Eve afloat and their playerbase happier. They know any hardcore nerf to level 4's will only hurt their bottomline period. So why would CCP do this ? They will not...too much time and money has been spent to make missions better to please those who don't and won't PvP ever. This is the reality some of us, I think, we fail to grasp.
Cpt Branko Surge.	Posted - 2008.10.31 14:07:00 - [135] Originally by: Vigilant Cold hard facts; Half of the people running missions in high-sec do it to fund their PVP ships, so they can go back to PVP-ing for the lols in ships they shouldn't be able to afford The other part are carebears. They can go L3s, or do L4s at massively reduced income, since they don't NEED the ISK. They're having fun mission running. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Misanth RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE	Posted - 2008.10.31 14:25:00 - [136] Edited by: Misanth on 31/10/2008 14:28:46 Bah, TL;DR, it got alot longer than I planned. Lrrp, Tippia, you are both right, but in different aspects. * It is indeed bad if people make too much isk and never spend it. It kills the value of money and ruin the economy in total. Tippia is right here. * Lrrp is right that you make more isk ratting in 0.0. Don't look at the "18-25" he posted, he said "Drake" as well. I've been hardcore ratting in periods and I know for a fact I can pull in 50mil+ an hour, not counting faction/officer spawns. Drake ratting vs Drake lv4. Compare to Golem ratting vs Golem lv4's. Same balance, rat > lv4. - As a sidenote, you'd make even more isk/hour if you were a dedicated player, with some experience/skills and know how to use trading, inventing or manfacturing. Or if you are a guy running X accounts solo-mining ops in 0.0. * Risk vs reward? Here's a bit greyscale. People claim lv4 is of "no risk". That's simply false. Suicide ganking and salvage thieving is both very viable strats to kill off lv4-runners even in high sec. The problem here, is mainly because it's too much effort suicide ganking people, and partly because you can't wardec people in the NPC corp. In either case, the lv4 hisec agents arn't at fault, the players and the system are. On a personal note; I am running lv4 to fund my PvP habits, just like you both claim you do. Why am I doing it? Because I'm lazy, that's the only reason. I can browse these forums (writing this while running a lv4 for example) and do housekeeping while doing it. I can't do that while ratting, trading. Industrialism involves alot of logistics, which is mind-numbingly boring (just like ratting). In light of that, I see only one issue with lv4's, and that's not the money you make, or the low risk. It's the mentality. Partly from potential suicide gankers, partly from players like me, partly from players who look at numbers but don't see the wide picture. You know players that dump prices below reasonable amounts, because they fail to see the correct value on things? Like someone mining/using R&D and then inventing stuff, and selling a t2 item 'below market value' because they feel they got their datacores/ores "free"? That's exactly what's happening with lv4's. People say X mil an hour/lv4 is too much. Yet they fail to see that all other professions make more. Ratting have several issues atm. First you are at risk all time, so you have to pay attention. Secondly it's a mess hauling loot since usually you'll have stations far away. Thirdly it's a mess hauling ammo. Fourthly you might have hostiles in system, effectively shutting you down. Fifth is related to 2+3, you need logistics to be really effective here. Lv4 earn you less than ratting in bounty, drops, and salvage. But you save the logistic time, you don't have to check local, and you can do other things same time. Mentality is the problem. And people running lv4 23/7 without spending the isk, they get too fat and money drops in value. Isk farmers. Not level 4 in itself. Making lv4 worse for isk farming will force regular players to do other things, while the 23/7 iskfarmers will stick to hisec agents, just like they farm veldspar/ice nonstop. The day lv4 is made worse, I'll just start rat in 0.0 again. Over time I'll make more money, I'll read these forums less, and I'll be mindnumbingly bored again. LP store items will be controlled by the iskfarmers who can put up with the low reward. And it's still just as hard to suicide kill them as it is today. I'm not sure that's the right way to approach the problem. It should be more incentives to move to low-sec and 0.0 instead. Make crap 0.0 regions get higher quality for one. Better rats in low sec. Perhaps look into inserting more NPC stations to improve logistics for non-Sov-holders. That'd definately pull me back to ratting rather than lv4's, I'd have to spend less time making isk = more PvP = good.
Vigilant Gallente Vigilant's Vigilante's	Posted - 2008.10.31 14:34:00 - [137] PvP is one persons fun and missions is anothers, yep I agree. After reading this thread last night I ran a few level 4's myself. I found them fun, but just another to make isk tbh. I have played for so long now, its all grinding minus PvP. And to be totally honest, I am not a die hard PvPer, but I have in the past (this account and others I own). If, big if,I was to run level 4's all the time I would only do it to buy BPO's, and its just as easy for me and my corporation to grind rock/ice for it. Risk vs. Reward comes up a lot in these threads but there is very little risk to a person in some back water 0.0 belt ganking rats in his own alliance space. So should we nerf rats and drops too? Where does stop? Maybe we should make all of Eve 0.0 and fight in tech 1 frigs ? Cause after a few months of combat that is all that would be left. Not to mention, population on the server would be nothing. CCP has to cater to both PvPer and Carebear alike, and null security and missions is how the accomplish this.
Bloody Rabbit Jita Miners	Posted - 2008.10.31 14:39:00 - [138] Originally by: Hertford Those empty, unused 0.0 systems are empty and unused for a good reason. And it's nothing to do with big alliances claiming them. One of the problems I see is that alliances are ok with people within their alliance setting up POS. But corps are not ok with letting people setup POS because of the access controls that the people needs to set one up. So that means only the trusted members can set up a POS so out of a group of 100 maybe only 20 have the roles needed to setup a POS. So the newer members who want to rat/mine in a backwater system that isn't used can't because there is no POS and their corp won't let them setup a POS. Now from flying in the drone regions, I was one of the first to find RA/Solar setting up POS. Only because they landed in the system that I lived in. For the safty of alliances we need to setup the POS systems so that people can spread out so there are many people who want to but aren't allowed because of the current corp system.
Bloody Rabbit Jita Miners	Posted - 2008.10.31 14:47:00 - [139] Originally by: Cpt Branko Half of the people running missions in high-sec do it to fund their PVP ships, so they can go back to PVP-ing for the lols in ships they shouldn't be able to afford But you don't want me to fly T1 ships, so I fly throw away T2 ships fitted with T2 mods. I also fly in 0.0 with +4 implants so I do need a way to make isk. I couldn't imagine 0.0 fleet battles without T2 ships; bubbles, E-war, scouts. A T1 fleet can't even hold ground against a fleet mixed with T2 ships. Now to get others in the alliances to see if this way.
CALUGARU Repo Industries Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2008.10.31 14:50:00 - [140] CCP, please do not kill lvl 4 missions. the lvl 4 missioners won't have any cash to pay when ransomed :< ______________ The new Orca:

Vigilant Gallente Vigilant's Vigilante's	Posted - 2008.10.31 14:56:00 - [141] Originally by: CALUGARU CCP, please do not kill lvl 4 missions. the lvl 4 missioners won't have any cash to pay when ransomed :< OMG LOL... That was perfect in such a over done conversation. Thanks m8
Misanth RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE	Posted - 2008.10.31 15:04:00 - [142] Originally by: Bloody Rabbit snip That's related to what I write about logistics being an issue for ratting. Ratting is still > lv4, but the loot/salvage is a big income source there and the logistics to pull it to Empire is the issue. While for lv4 that's a non-issue. I honestl don't know how to solve this in a good fashion, but getting cheaper/easier means to set up POS without them being considered 'too hostile' would be one. Adding NPC stations in 0.0 would be another. And honestly 0.0 as a general need a quality overhaul. The good areas are good, alot better than lv4's, but the poor ones isn't much better than running a lv3-mission. Pulling them up on par with the better quality areas would do alot to pull out players from high to nullsec.
ramzahn Caldari	Posted - 2008.10.31 15:11:00 - [143] Originally by: Jimi Tetro ... rat and make 18 to 25 mil per hour ... Originally by: Tippia The same can be done with L4 ... You must be joking, verily you must. But maybe you meant not the bounties or agent rewards in itself but those magnificent L4 loot module drops.
Dramaticus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.31 16:06:00 - [144] Originally by: ramzahn Originally by: Jimi Tetro ... rat and make 18 to 25 mil per hour ... Originally by: Tippia The same can be done with L4 ... You must be joking, verily you must. But maybe you meant not the bounties or agent rewards in itself but those magnificent L4 loot module drops. ~3000 Caldari navy LP from a mission that takes me ~30 minutes at a value of ~3500 isk per LP yeah I can make 18-25m an hour doing L4s. what should be done is to reverse NPC 0.0 and conq 0.0 sec status. make all conq 0.0 a relative true-sec of -1.0 and all NPC 0.0 whatever. Please don't use RL pictuers of players in Sig without permission. - WeatherMan
Malcanis RuffRyders Eradication Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.31 16:14:00 - [145] Originally by: ramzahn Originally by: Jimi Tetro ... rat and make 18 to 25 mil per hour ... Originally by: Tippia The same can be done with L4 ... You must be joking, verily you must. But maybe you meant not the bounties or agent rewards in itself but those magnificent L4 loot module drops. There's nothing hard about making 18-25M/hr doing level 4s.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.10.31 16:15:00 - [146] Originally by: Ryoji Tanakama Edited by: Ryoji Tanakama on 31/10/2008 12:42:21 There we go, the same naive notion yet again. People do not do level 4s because they are worth the most isk. They do level 4s because they are the optimal isk available for no significant risk. Nerfing level 4s will simply not move anyone into lowsec. Boosting lowsec missions will not move anyone into lowsec. You can't game engineer with carrots if you don't understand the game. Disagree on some part. Huge changes on BOOSTIGN low sec coudl move SOME people there. True, won't ove many. But if you make it so that you can EASILy make more than in high sec, after havign discounted the isk loss from pirate attacks. Then yes some smart people would move to low sec. Even high sec is not safe as long as peopel are not in noob corps. The only thing that needs nerfign are noob corps! If every player with more than 6 months had to be in a player corp then there woudl be ZERO reason to complain. Want to kill him? wardec him. Simple. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
SSgt Sniper Gallente MAIDS	Posted - 2008.10.31 16:24:00 - [147] Originally by: Le Skunk Edited by: Le Skunk on 27/10/2008 17:10:37 Originally by: Mecinia Lua If you move all the level 4s to low sec, then they'll move to level 3s. And the risk/reward balance with other professions in EVE will be balanced. Which is kind of what people have been crying out for. Quote: The problem is in time they could not support themselves in game with level 3s. What the hell do they need to buy. Certainly not a new raven. Or new fittings. As they never blow up. Some missiles? SKUNK Trust me, they do from time to time have to replace ships, probably more often than you think. ------- CEO of Maids. No I didn't pick the name. I've grown rather fond of it though.Poor PR in progress!
Maximus Veridia Minmatar Deathguard Legion United Corporations Against Macros	Posted - 2008.10.31 17:07:00 - [148] I read through these, and now understand why the "nerfs" are in place to begin with. Bored low sec players are always wanting to mess with the carebears like me. I pay my money just like some of you do. But i actually pay every month for 2 characters, and yet i really don't have a desire to go back to the low sec - 0.0 space hell. I don't want to lose my ships, i don't want to take on the 25 ship gate camp, with my drake, I don't want to take on the 10 billion sp players all the time. I just want to be left alone to run my missions, and make my crap. I run level 4's in a hac, it's my main ship. I don't need anything nerfed, i just would like some faction gear, but if i need to go to low-sec to even have a chance at it, because it's in 1 system that the a$$holes already know about and have made their hunting grounds, then forget it, it's not that important. I've lost all desire to get into capital ships, because they have been nerfed, so all i have left with eve is running these missions, and trying to figure out invention. So from my humble little 30 bucks a month opinion, stop messing with the "mechanics" of the game and start getting some game features in, like the PVP tournament, that would be fun. Otherwise please don't nerf anything else.
Lurana Lay Gallente	Posted - 2008.10.31 17:57:00 - [149] Posting in a "we're unhappy so nerf someone else" thread. Or a "we need moar targets in LowSuck" thread. Missions have been nerfed out the ass many times. ANOTHER mission nerf is on test right now, it's called the so-called nano nerf.
ramzahn Caldari	Posted - 2008.10.31 19:03:00 - [150] Edited by: ramzahn on 31/10/2008 19:03:19 Originally by: Dramaticus ~3000 Caldari navy LP from a mission that takes me ~30 minutes at a value of ~3500 isk per LP yeah I can make 18-25m an hour doing L4s. Are we really talking about the average L4 mission runner here, using average quality agents (non-motsu) and operating average easily replaceable setups, not pimped ships stuffed with faction gear?



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [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.