EVE Search - Mission rejection mechanics

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

Mission rejection mechanics

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ankhesentapemkah	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:22:00 - [1] I personally think it is bad game design that mission types are so randomly handed out, in such a way that it frequently happens that people are locked out of the game for hours or even days because they repeatedly get a streak of missions they cannot or do not want to complete. Examples of situations: * Getting ice/gas cloud missions when not having the required skills/equipment * Getting a mining mission in general, or that takes two hours to complete 1.5 hours before downtime * Getting combat missions when asking for courier/mining missions * Getting vs. Faction missions I just switched agents and got hit by an extremely bad streak of vs.-missions from a L3 Ministry of War agent: My sweet privateer, a million little pieces, and another my sweet privateer. I went to a SOE agent next door and promptly got portal to war, and intercept the saboteurs (vs amarr), I want to play Eve and thus accepted the saboteur thing, and my Amarr standing went from 8.03 to 7.60 for destroying an Amarr cruiser or two (all kills within a 15 minute window, standing hit -2.4!). Anyway after doing a few more missions I'm now stuck on 'missing reporters' (vs caldari). Over the past 48 hours I spent over 24 waiting for rejection timers to run out. It is unacceptable and bad game design that people are being locked out of the game waiting for 4-hour timers to expire. With the introduction of the new missions with Empyrean Age, things have only become worse as 'my sweet privateer' and 'a million little pieces' etc are now being extremely common missions to get. Normally I'd say, stick to courier missions, but unfortunately not all corps/factions have courrier agents (SoE does not have any L3/L4 that are not in/next to lowsec). It's simply unacceptable that people paying subscription fees are basically being told they can't play now and should come back in 4 hours, repeatedly. Possible fixes (feel free to discuss): * Less vs. missions if your standing with the opposing faction is higher * charisma-based skills that reduce standing hits from kills * overall reduction in standing hits from kills * charisma-based skills to reduce negative derrived standing hits * reduction of certain mission types if the player has a history of turning them down * reduce 4-hour timer to something more reasonable, like 30 minutes * Opt-out of certain mission types, significantly reducing chances to get one (at the cost of also decreasing overall payout for all other missions?) * total overhaul of the way missions are granted (please discuss)
LaVista Vista	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:30:00 - [2] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah It's simply unacceptable that people paying subscription fees are basically being told they can't play now and should come back in 4 hours, repeatedly. Nobody tells you that you can't play. You can just take the penalty of being picky about what you want to do or you can go and do something else. There's plenty of things to do in EVE. So I'm not supporting this at all. It's a problem with the player, not the mechanics solely.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Worlds End Consortium	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:32:00 - [3] Honestly I really don't see a MAJOR overhaul on mission running being necessary. A slight adjustment on the percentages of getting various missions would help... but my only major complaint is its prue and total torture to raise up your EMPIRE standing as opposed to faction standing. Honestly if I kill an Amarrian ship... they get mad at me easily enough... but Minmatar should be happier just as much. The effect it has on your standings should cancel out each other... much like an accountants ledger... credits and debits. Seems to be quite heavily favoring the EASILY ****ed off type system but very hard to please. Not to be confused with CONCORD... that's understandable.... but for cryin out loud... its such a pain. Perhaps if your CONCORD sec rating should translate to an easier standings increase as it goes up over time? Obviously Pirates and those who grief aren't likely to give a damn about mission running so it kinda makes sense.
Shirley Serious Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:40:00 - [4] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah * Getting ice/gas cloud missions when not having the required skills/equipment The gas harvesting is the only one where there's an issue, as the skills required are specific. For example, in lvl1 missions, there's the occasional hacking or archaeology mission, and in all of the ones that my friends and I have encountered, the agent gives you a "Civilian Codebreaker" or "Civilian Analyser" which does not require the archaeology or hacking skills, and is sufficient to do the mission. Is a "Civilian Gas Harvester" that requires no skills too much to ask for the gas missions? Same for a "Civilian Ice Harvester", which is slower and worse than an ice harvester, but can be fitted to other ships than barges, and requires no skills. The rest of your issues, I do not see as a problem. Those are merely missions you do not WANT to do. Gas/Ice harvesting missions are ones which you are not ABLE to do.
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2009.01.24 20:54:00 - [5] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah It's simply unacceptable that people paying subscription fees are basically being told they can't play now and should come back in 4 hours, repeatedly. Like always your posts are filled with complete BS. The game is more than a single agent.
Ankhesentapemkah	Posted - 2009.01.24 21:47:00 - [6] Originally by: Drake Draconis Honestly I really don't see a MAJOR overhaul on mission running being necessary. A slight adjustment on the percentages of getting various missions would help... but my only major complaint is its prue and total torture to raise up your EMPIRE standing as opposed to faction standing. Honestly if I kill an Amarrian ship... they get mad at me easily enough... but Minmatar should be happier just as much. The effect it has on your standings should cancel out each other... much like an accountants ledger... credits and debits. Seems to be quite heavily favoring the EASILY **ed off type system but very hard to please. Not to be confused with CONCORD... that's understandable.... but for cryin out loud... its such a pain. Perhaps if your CONCORD sec rating should translate to an easier standings increase as it goes up over time? Obviously Pirates and those who grief aren't likely to give a damn about mission running so it kinda makes sense. This used to be the case (standings going up while others went down), but this was removed because it was exploitable (people failing missions on purpose to boost the opposing faction standing). Civ gas cloud harvester is an idea, but even with 3 normal gas cloud harvesters the higher level ones still take 1-2 hours of sitting idle to complete. Getting empire standing quicker for higher concord standing makes sense, but is a bit unrelated. The current issue is having to wait so long because there are many missions that have to be turned down, which got a lot worse thanks to the new faction missions from Empyrean Age. Originally by:** Esmenet The game is more than a single agent. Indeed, that's why I now have a mission log full of missions waiting in line to be turned down.
Tchell Dahhn Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2009.01.24 22:09:00 - [7] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Indeed, that's why I now have a mission log full of missions waiting in line to be turned down. You know, you could be out running Quests right now if you go back to WoW. (Heh - who would have thought that it would be Ankh that I really got to say that to with such feeling, eh? No really, that was fun. Was it good for you?)
Heroldyn	Posted - 2009.01.24 22:15:00 - [8]
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Worlds End Consortium	Posted - 2009.01.24 22:21:00 - [9] Originally by: Tchell Dahhn Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Indeed, that's why I now have a mission log full of missions waiting in line to be turned down. You know, you could be out running Quests right now if you go back to WoW. (Heh - who would have thought that it would be Ankh that I really got to say that to with such feeling, eh? No really, that was fun. Was it good for you?) If your not driving the car then who is? (And why are you in the back seat?) =============== CEO of Clan Shadow Cadre www.shadowcadre.com ===============
Venkul Mul	Posted - 2009.01.24 22:59:00 - [10] Edited by: Venkul Mul on 24/01/2009 23:05:49 Originally by: LaVista Vista Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah It's simply unacceptable that people paying subscription fees are basically being told they can't play now and should come back in 4 hours, repeatedly. Nobody tells you that you can't play. You can just take the penalty of being picky about what you want to do or you can go and do something else. There's plenty of things to do in EVE. So I'm not supporting this at all. It's a problem with the player, not the mechanics solely. There is a problem in the mechanism too: - a Caldari mission runner was (and I think is still) capable of switching between several high quality level 4 agents in the Motsu area, so lessening the penalty for his refusals; - a player running for SOE don't have that possibility; - a player running for the Amarr Gallente or Minmatar factions generally don't have that possibility as they have less level 4 kill missions agents scattered over a wider area (Eve Agents say 87 Amarr, 61 Gallente and 61 Minmatar against 118 Caldari); - for some weird reason the best area to run for Quafe is Domain, where you can find 3 high quality non-combat level 4 agents in a area of less than 6 jumps total. The original agents distribution was done randomly, but that created some weird distribution that still affect mission running players today. The high number of Caldari kill agents and the fact that they are mostly packed in a relatively small area (together with some ship really well suited for that) had generated the huge number of Caldari characters and the "Caldari are only good for PVE" concept. I don't subscribe most of the suggestion done by Ankhesentapemkah but some reflecting about the problem should be made. A new player could easily destroy his standing with one of the two empire sides in the first few months of playing before even realizing what he want to do and what he is doing to his staning.

Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.01.24 23:03:00 - [11] Originally by: Shirley Serious Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah * Getting ice/gas cloud missions when not having the required skills/equipment The gas harvesting is the only one where there's an issue, as the skills required are specific. For example, in lvl1 missions, there's the occasional hacking or archaeology mission, and in all of the ones that my friends and I have encountered, the agent gives you a "Civilian Codebreaker" or "Civilian Analyser" which does not require the archaeology or hacking skills, and is sufficient to do the mission. Is a "Civilian Gas Harvester" that requires no skills too much to ask for the gas missions? Same for a "Civilian Ice Harvester", which is slower and worse than an ice harvester, but can be fitted to other ships than barges, and requires no skills. The rest of your issues, I do not see as a problem. Those are merely missions you do not WANT to do. Gas/Ice harvesting missions are ones which you are not ABLE to do. The missions with the civilian codebreaker, analyzer and salvager are starting missions done to give new players an idea of what those modules do. Each string of missions can be done only once for character, this make them very different from normal missions.
Caleb Ayrania Gallente TarNec	Posted - 2009.01.24 23:13:00 - [12] Personally I would like some free choice of missions also.. I think it should be more balanced though.. Maybe the rewards should reflect the missions picked up in stead.. So those not being worked became more valuable and gave higher rewards and those picked to often lost value when overworked... If atleast the type of mission could be selected somehow.. I do see there might be a balance shift issue.. and mission "mining"... But its better to give a good gaming experience and then find the balance solution afterwards imho.. - Money is Love - Sometimes it just gets bend the wrong ways. Feed your Brain: Innovation Thread
Shirley Serious Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2009.01.24 23:17:00 - [13] Originally by: Venkul Mul The missions with the civilian codebreaker, analyzer and salvager are starting missions done to give new players an idea of what those modules do. Each string of missions can be done only once for character, this make them very different from normal missions. The 10-part tutorials? Yes, I know of those. I'm not referring to those ones though. There are some lvl1 missions that also give out the civilian codebreaker or analyser. "Vitoc Vector" is one of them, for Minmitar. Uses the civilian codebreaker. Yes. Yes, I am.
chatgris	Posted - 2009.01.24 23:55:00 - [14] The standings issue is one that is of interest to me, however I can see the other problems as well. I don't mind working to keep all my empire standings high, but I hate having to just twiddle my thumbs and wait. The whole NPC mechanic completely barring you from 50% of high sec is ridiculous, as it can lock you out of a LOT of possibilities in the future with player run corps.
Orion GUardian	Posted - 2009.01.25 19:17:00 - [15] I see this problem, too. And I even think it extends to a few more things: The range in which missions are given out. Its no problem in high sec, as it is just a time sink to do a few jumps for the mission location. But in low sec it is one of he real killers in mission profit. Gates are easily campable and such getting a mission 2 jumps away can inevitable lock you out of it, because getting past a gatecamp is too troublesome just for a mission [in most cases] Of course it is possible to work with it, its higher risk for higher reward anyway. and of course it is no "must" that a gate is camped. But as missioning agents get known the gates around low sec agents woul surey be camped a lot. In my opinion that is one reason that keeps a lot of PvE players out of lowsec, but thats a different topic. I like the "hitory"-solution, an agent is, in an ingame sense, a living person, why would he bother to offer you missions over and over again that you did never or rarely do? And why [if not to annoy you] would he give you a mission where you fight your friends? Why would he think you'd ruin your relationships just for a little money? Another solution might be, to give a player the possibility to chose a missions. Say the agent has 3-5 possible missions he can give you at once. You complete one of them and it gets replaced. [the other 4 remain the same to reduce exploitment]. It is possible that all 5 missions come up bad anyway but the chances are reduced. Perhaps the mission choices are replaced every 4 hours. Or the agent has a "global" set of missions he can give out that replenishes every 4 hours, too. [as he wants to have his missions completed anyway. so not doing Faction mission at all will just increase their chance of popping up until the 4 hours are over etc pp]
Hugh Ruka Exploratio et Industria Morispatia	Posted - 2009.01.25 19:34:00 - [16] I am quite split on this issue ... I'd support only the part where an agent should not give you missions which you don't have skills for. The 4 hour timers are a PITA, but they simply prevent people from chaining specific missions and are a necessary evil ...
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.01.25 20:53:00 - [17] Edited by: Kahega Amielden on 25/01/2009 20:54:18 Missions in general need an overhaul, but the complaints in the OP are just contrived Quote: * Getting ice/gas cloud missions when not having the required skills/equipment So? Then get them. It's good that one ship/fitting isn't enough for all mining missions. Maybe kill missions can be made this way in the future, yes? Quote: * Getting a mining mission in general, or that takes two hours to complete 1.5 hours before downtime They don't take 2 hours to complete I don't believe. Even if they do, do part of it until DT, then finish it after. Quote: * Getting combat missions when asking for courier/mining missions I actually partially agree with this, at least with mining missions. Quote: * Getting vs. Faction missions Those missions are there for a reason. No one else's fault but you're own that you insist on having huge standings with everyone. of your suggestions, the ones to introduce new charisma based skills and the ones to revamp missions overall have merit.
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.01.25 21:28:00 - [18] Quote: Possible fixes (feel free to discuss): * Less vs. missions if your standing with the opposing faction is higher Not necessarily the option. My standing with gallente is -2 and it wont go any lower; as long as I dont shoot them; but I get EA and such all the time. Quote: * charisma-based skills that reduce standing hits from kills Possibility; but MOAR SKILLS>???? Quote: * overall reduction in standing hits from kills Doesnt fit tbh. Quote: * charisma-based skills to reduce negative derrived standing hits To which exist. Quote: * reduction of certain mission types if the player has a history of turning them down I say that the certain faction missions which get declined constantly would become neutral ones relative to 4hr timer. The problem is... which ones exactly? Everyone is different. Quote: * reduce 4-hour timer to something more reasonable, like 30 minutes I say a more dynamic. 10 minutes for level 1, 20minutes for level 2, 30mins for lvl 3, and 1hr for lvl 4s. Quote: * Opt-out of certain mission types, significantly reducing chances to get one (at the cost of also decreasing overall payout for all other missions?) Would be fine in my opinion. Quote: * total overhaul of the way missions are granted (please discuss) This is my main point. Currently with the system. You pseduorandomly get missions. The next 10 missions are going to be what they are going to be. There's no harm in giving us the next 10 missions. We still decline 1 per every 4 hours; but you can choose which ones you will do. Therefore... there's no downtime... but you dont really get to cherry pick missions. Unless you have lots of downtime. Sure you can get 5 nice missions in those 10. But you will have 20 hours worth of downtime still to decline those others. Nothing changes.
Jason Edward	Posted - 2009.01.25 21:41:00 - [19] Quote: Nobody tells you that you can't play. You can just take the penalty of being picky about what you want to do or you can go and do something else. There's plenty of things to do in EVE. Except... taking penalty is far worse. Anyone who doesn't care about their standings... for example already have gotten 9.9 with 2 factions. Will do this... but declining and taking the penalty is just absurd otherwise. This behaviour only reinforces dodixie or motsu where you have multiple agents close together. Decline one, get screwed, move to the next agent, do missions, decline, keep going. You cant goto other places or else your next lvl 4 agent is too far off. Obviously another fix is to move level 4 agents around. Create 100 or more new lvl 4 agents around empire. All high sec obviously. Quote: So? Then get them. It's good that one ship/fitting isn't enough for all mining missions. Maybe kill missions can be made this way in the future, yes? absurd. Quote: They don't take 2 hours to complete I don't believe. Even if they do, do part of it until DT, then finish it after. You have obviously never done a mission before downtime lol. A few experienced players who know the exact average time it takes to do these missions actually get the opportunity to farm missions because of this. The newbs on the otherhand are hurt so badly. Quote: Those missions are there for a reason. No one else's fault but you're own that you insist on having huge standings with everyone. Absurd. It's basically impossible to have high standings with all. What we are trying to do is make it so we can do other things such as trading... and not get shot at by faction navies.
Kaya Divine	Posted - 2009.01.26 04:20:00 - [20] Edited by: Kaya Divine on 26/01/2009 04:21:26 Originally by: LaVista Vista Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah It's simply unacceptable that people paying subscription fees are basically being told they can't play now and should come back in 4 hours, repeatedly. Nobody tells you that you can't play. You can just take the penalty of being picky about what you want to do or you can go and do something else. There's plenty of things to do in EVE. So I'm not supporting this at all. It's a problem with the player, not the mechanics solely. Some people really enjoy to run missions. NOT to PVP, mine or chase rats. Sitting in station, and buying things can be extremely boring from time to time. you should understand that not all players are like you, some don`t like to mine or PvP. Personally I don`t care about my negative standing with Caldari and Amarr.But there are those who care. If they wish to prevent negative standing with those or others faction and are ready to receive reduced amounts of ISK and LP. Why not allow them that? This change will not harm anyone.

Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.01.26 05:35:00 - [21] I like how Jason Edwards disagrees with the entire thread but still checks the support box anyways. And then posts with his alt like we wouldn't notice, what a moron. Originally by: nkhesentapemkah It's simply unacceptable that people paying subscription fees are basically being told they can't play now and should come back in 4 hours, repeatedly. So are you also against GCC? I don't see how you cannot play for four hours yet still able undock and do literally anything in the game still. Running missions is the most boring part of EVE, if you cannot run missions and you are freaking out, you really should explore some more of what EVE has to offer. Have you actually rejected a mission? If you run level 4s, you will NOT NOTICE the standings drop from a rejected mission now and again. I just got -.0112 towards my faction for rejecting Pot and Kettle part2. OH NOES, -.0112! Instead of being anal retentive on your standings, just keep standings good enough so you can run missions. Going from 8.03 to 7.60? Who gives a flying **** if you can still run the missions. A single level 4 will probably get you most of the way back to 8.03. More missions should be versus factions, because good lord, that is what the EVE story is all about. Don't you think the game should follow the story? Pick a side, do missions for your favorite faction and deal with it. Like I have said before, most other sided MMORPGs make you pick a side at start and you cannot switch. You are given the freedom to pick a side or switch to keep standings. If you want everything without any penalties or downsides at all, then you should go play hello kitty online. -- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Bunyip	Posted - 2009.01.26 15:56:00 - [22] As a dedicated mission runner, I know the pain of waiting for a while until your 4-hour timer ticks down. However, I don't see a problem with the mechanic as is. I've had to wait for a while as the timer ticked down numerous times. Missions are just one of the things you can do in this game. When I'm waiting for my timer to finish, I sell my rat droppings, mine, or any one of a number of other things. Eve has many aspects to it, and each has disadvantages and advantages. I know missions need a good smack with a sledgehammer, but I don't feel that this is one of the horrible things with them. The devs have even stated that it was never intended to have positive standing with all 4 empire factions, so the mechanic is working. Sorry, but I cannot support this thread.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Worlds End Consortium	Posted - 2009.01.26 18:49:00 - [23] Quote: Instead of being anal retentive on your standings, just keep standings good enough so you can run missions. Going from 8.03 to 7.60? Who gives a flying **** if you can still run the missions. A single level 4 will probably get you most of the way back to 8.03. Uh no it doesn't. Which says one thing very clearly... you don't know what the hell your talking about. Trust me.... I know.... we're grinding status just to drop a POS.
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2009.01.27 09:51:00 - [24] Edited by: Vaal Erit on 27/01/2009 09:53:38 Originally by: Drake Draconis Quote: Instead of being anal retentive on your standings, just keep standings good enough so you can run missions. Going from 8.03 to 7.60? Who gives a flying **** if you can still run the missions. A single level 4 will probably get you most of the way back to 8.03. Uh no it doesn't. Which says one thing very clearly... you don't know what the hell your talking about. Trust me.... I know.... we're grinding status just to drop a POS. In your situation you probably want to run couriers so you can get storylines faster without long kill missions. All you care about is faction standing so running a mission that shoots caldari, who cares if you are planning setup a POS in minmatar space. For your situation, vs faction missions don't matter at all, just keep running missions. -- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Cyberman Mastermind	Posted - 2009.01.27 11:54:00 - [25] Complete overhaul. Or at least repair the mechanics, so we don't get the same mission twice in a row. My proposal: Once your standing with the corp/agent reaches a limit, you can chose a few options: ) not against faction X ) not of type Y etc... BUT - each option will cost you - the reward will be reduced accordingly. So for example, let's say I have a corp-standing of 5, so I can chose not to run missions against the empires. I no longer get missions against those, but my reward is reduced by 20%. Less risk ruining standings -> less reward. Simply outwaiting is a stupid mechanic. Oh, btw - to the one suggesting one should simply learn/buy Gas cloud harvesting: ever looked at the prices? Even if mining missions payed five times as much, I doubt it would be worth the effort.
Ted Grayham	Posted - 2009.01.27 12:46:00 - [26] Edited by: Ted Grayham on 27/01/2009 12:47:47 I support this. Being a game, you shouldn't be forced to do things that simply isn't fun. (ie. learning skills ...). I have no idea why, but it seems a lot of eve players have a history of shunning fixes that will make the game less grindy and boring in a lot of aspects. I like my games to be fun, and don't feel the need to be punished for wanting it to be fun. EDIT: One suggestion could be a generated list of "here are the things we've got going on atm.", and you could pick a mission based on difficulty, type and payout. This would both make sense, and we wouldn't have the somewhat awkward "cancelfest" simply a removal of the countdown would imply.
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Worlds End Consortium	Posted - 2009.01.27 15:21:00 - [27] Edited by: Drake Draconis on 27/01/2009 15:21:57 Originally by: Vaal Erit Edited by: Vaal Erit on 27/01/2009 09:56:44 Edited by: Vaal Erit on 27/01/2009 09:53:38 Originally by: Drake Draconis Quote: Instead of being anal retentive on your standings, just keep standings good enough so you can run missions. Going from 8.03 to 7.60? Who gives a flying **** if you can still run the missions. A single level 4 will probably get you most of the way back to 8.03. Uh no it doesn't. Which says one thing very clearly... you don't know what the hell your talking about. Trust me.... I know.... we're grinding status just to drop a POS. In your situation you probably want to run couriers so you can get storylines faster without long kill missions. All you care about is faction standing so running a mission that shoots caldari, who cares if you are planning setup a POS in minmatar space. For your situation, vs faction missions don't matter at all, just keep running missions. We are talking about standings just for mission running while you are talking about standings for a POS. Completely different topics. No they are not.... wake up and smell the standings. Standings are standings are standings. The POS requires faction standings just like any other particular area. I don't know where you get off thinking they are not identical in any form or fashion.... The only way to raise standings is to run missions... which is exactly what this topic is about. =============== CEO of Clan Shadow Cadre www.shadowcadre.com ===============
Ankhesentapemkah	Posted - 2009.01.27 20:21:00 - [28] Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 27/01/2009 20:27:12 Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 27/01/2009 20:25:02 Originally by: Kahega Amielden Missions in general need an overhaul, but the complaints in the OP are just contrived Quote: * Getting ice/gas cloud missions when not having the required skills/equipment So? Then get them. It's good that one ship/fitting isn't enough for all mining missions. Maybe kill missions can be made this way in the future, yes? Forgetting that for ice you need a whole mining barge??? And seen the prices on gas cloud harvesters? And did you know it takes 3 hours to mine a gas cloud with one harvester? Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: * Getting a mining mission in general, or that takes two hours to complete 1.5 hours before downtime They don't take 2 hours to complete I don't believe. Even if they do, do part of it until DT, then finish it after. Seems you've never done them before, as that doesn't work as the roid respawns and the mission won't complete until the roid is empty, even if you have enough ore. Originally by: Kahega Amielden Those missions are there for a reason. No one else's fault but you're own that you insist on having huge standings with everyone. There are already mechanics in place that makes it impossible to have huge standings with everyone, due to the fundamental mechanics behind standing changes, that makes you lose more than you gain as you get higher up. Originally by: Cyberman Mastermind Complete overhaul. Or at least repair the mechanics, so we don't get the same mission twice in a row. My proposal: Once your standing with the corp/agent reaches a limit, you can chose a few options: ) not against faction X ) not of type Y etc... BUT - each option will cost you - the reward will be reduced accordingly. So for example, let's say I have a corp-standing of 5, so I can chose not to run missions against the empires. I no longer get missions against those, but my reward is reduced by 20%. Less risk ruining standings -> less reward. Simply outwaiting is a stupid mechanic. Yes that's along the lines I envisioned it, basing it on standing is a nice addition. It's like the real world, where people that want to do dirty jobs get paid more than those that are picky. --- NEW MOVIE!
Zel Nughat Nughat Corp	Posted - 2009.01.30 22:50:00 - [29] 4 hours waiting for another mission it's just too much, please decrease that timer, or fix standings ffs
ToTheCore Federation of Freedom Fighters Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2009.01.30 23:55:00 - [30] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah SoE does not have any L3/L4 that are not in/next to lowsec So, what you're saying is that you don't want to do these missions badly enough to go to lowsec. If that's the case, you're no better than people whining about falcons who refuse to fit ECCM.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.