open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Risk / reward in low sec.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Salic
Posted - 2011.01.28 01:39:00 - [1]
 

Since it seems like CCP have decided to put more focus on the customers preferring the PVP content of the game then the costumers that prefer PVE content. (Literally using the Mission runners as cannonfodder by placing level 5 missions much of the high end content in low sec only). Justifying it with arguments about the risk/reward factor. I believe long overdue that CCP starts implementing the same very high risks to the PVPers!

I do agree that there should be a connection between the risk factor and the reward factor. I do however believe that CCP need apply those risks more uniformly.

This is off cause from a mission runners point of view.
One of the biggest problems I see that a ship fitted for running missions are by no means what so ever a match for an PVP fitted ship. PVE ships are build to be able to withstand a given of damage for given time, while the raw damage power of a PVP ship is by far higher then what you meet in missions.
Pointe : worlds collide lvl4 guritas&serpentis (according to eveinfo.com) the serpentis pocked got a dps potential of 1985 dps, that’s about the same as 2 good tangus…
So when PVEer meets an PVPer his best choice of action is to open the marked tab and start buying replacements, while he being killed.

Solution :
My suggestion would be to increase the damage output in the missions(to somewhat resembling a players damage output) and adjust the tanking ability equally. This if a PVPer engages a PVEer there should be an actual chance that the PVEer could withstand the damage of the PVPer long to have a chance to break his tank.

Another issue I see is gate camps. Should the risk / reward stuff not apply to PVPers aswell?
Could someone tell me where the risk for a PVPer when during a gate camp? Ok a fleet could jump in and **** you, but then again you’re the camper and you have a choice to flee as they enter, but in reality you there for PVP and that should be what your hoping for. But if you run into a mission runner you reward is an 100% ensured pop (t2 modules and if your lucky even faction stuff) and the biggest risk you run are the sentry guns, which at best are a joke.

If I remember tight lowsec is still supposed to be “safe” around stations and gates. Yea, back in the days when everyone had t1 ships and t1 stuff….they could actually hurt…but now they are just CCPs version of a bad joke.

Suggestion :
Here I would suggest, upping the sentry damage considerably and add both scram and web to them.
Then the risk during a gate camp in low sec would resemble the risk for a mission runner trying to get to low sec.


And lastly when doing combat with NPC and a PVPer attacks. The PVPer is running very low risk and an an guaranteed kill, PVEer is already taking somewhere between low and heavy damage from the NPCs the PVPer just adds to that damage….

Solution : Make all NPCS in the local area engang the aggressor for trying to steal their kill.

I know that NON of the above will ever happen, PVPers will come in and flame like mad, because this would actually for once have an big impact on their game play, and whine about how it would make the live of the mission runners easier and all that.
But I really think that it is time for the risks for the PVPers to attack just about everything that moves in low sec needs to be increased, I think it would make the transition to low sec easier, but the PVPers would still be able to attack as much as they like, as long as they want to face the risks.

Salic.

Templar Dane
Amarr
Amarrian Retribution
Posted - 2011.01.28 02:31:00 - [2]
 

Originally by: Salic
that CCP starts implementing the same very high risks to the PVPers!



Just checking, Mr Troll, but I was wondering if you knew that players are more dangerous than NPCs? Hunting other players will always be more risky than shooting at red crosses, you're asking CCP to fix something that isn't broke.

Goloith
Posted - 2011.01.28 02:37:00 - [3]
 

So in other words you want your tears to taste differently?

Misanthra
Posted - 2011.01.28 03:17:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Misanthra on 28/01/2011 03:18:05
2 words...unprobable ships

Hide in plain site works wonders. YOu don't even have to be 1.08...that number is perfect skills with lg virtues. Rare is the pilot who has all of this (trust me, used to run for sisters of eve....virtues don't exactly sell nearly as fast +4 attribute implants even when you give discount prices lol).

Don't use drones. If caldari don't use furies without talons of either grade....you will need the omega implant, don't cheap out on that. Watch out for angels as well....they paint. Paint makes it real easy to find you.



DrDooma
Posted - 2011.01.28 04:51:00 - [5]
 

“My suggestion would be to increase the damage output in the missions(to somewhat resembling a players damage output) and adjust the tanking ability equally. “

I have no idea how you imagine this will work in your favour. If you get caught in PVE ship specifically setup to tank and deal specific dmg you are going to be at disadvantage. Coincidently, rigs actually do exactly what you suggested.

“Another issue I see is gate camps. Should the risk / reward stuff not apply to PVPers aswell?”

If you think its 100% safe, I suggest you stop mission running and start gate camping.


“If I remember tight lowsec is still supposed to be “safe” around stations and gates.”

You can dock or jump through.

uggestion :

“Here I would suggest, upping the sentry damage considerably and add both scram and web to them.
Then the risk during a gate camp in low sec would resemble the risk for a mission runner trying to get to low sec.”

Maybe but that’s not going to help you. You will still die if you don’t kill them or jump back through the gate.


“And lastly when doing combat with NPC and a PVPer attacks. The PVPer is running very low risk …

Solution : Make all NPCS in the local area engang the aggressor for trying to steal their kill. “

This does not make any sense. You killing NCPs, PVP player comes to their aid and you want them to shoot the person trying to save them? If you were being shot by another player and someone came to your aid would you shoot the person trying to help you?

Salic
Posted - 2011.01.28 08:44:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Salic on 28/01/2011 08:45:00
Like I said in my original post, this comes from a mission runners point of view! I do not have the big insight in PVP, and honestly i see PVP as waste of my time, since that’s not the part of the game that I enjoy. But since we are being forced into that aspect of the game, if we want to see any of the high end content, I mean that they should take our play style into account and change the game mechanics accordingly before they begin to force us.

So I wanted to start a discussion about what changes could be made, that would give the PVEers a fighting chance or the chance to run, without making them totally invaluable. And I came with a few suggestions (and some are lame I know). But still I’m trying to be constructive and would appreciate if anyone else would be that as well, if you think something I suggested is unrealistic or needs some tweaking write why you might think so.

Just coming in saying no I don’t think so with no reasoning, is of no use. So just don’t.

Originally by: DrDooma
If you think its 100% safe, I suggest you stop mission running and start gate camping.

Seen from a mission runners point of view. Nearly 100% of the PVP you will find, you have absolutely no chance what so ever. The only chance to do something that will actually be more then a slight annoyance for the aggressor, is trigger the self destruct and hope it goes off before he gets the kill…If we are to be forced into a PVP engagement that we really neither want nor like, shouldn’t we at least be given a fighting chance. (Its clearly that mr. Templar Dane don’t think we deserve it…)

Originally by: DrDooma
“If I remember right lowsec is still supposed to be “safe” around stations and gates.”
You can dock or jump through.


At a gate you can jumping, yes that is an option. You will be gambling your ship on there not being a gate camp on the other side, since your mission ship still has no fighting chance. And once trapped by a gate camp on the other side in a mission ship being webbed and scrambled your chances of traveling the 10-15 km back to jump back, are overwhelmingly low.

At a station you can dock again and wait out the camper, since you with your mission have no chance of removing him you self. (Terribly boring way to spend your playtime though) .

Originally by: DrDooma
“Here I would suggest, upping the sentry damage considerably and add both scram and web to them.
Then the risk during a gate camp in low sec would resemble the risk for a mission runner trying to get to low sec.”

Maybe but that’s not going to help you. You will still die if you don’t kill them or jump back through the gate.

If I wanted my precious ship saved, I would have suggested that they do add a crazy RR effect to sentries, that would be keeping my ship alive till I was through.

But maybe the idea behind this suggestion was more to add a real risk for the PVPer, in form of loosing his ship? This way it would not prevent him from attacking and killing, but would make him think if it was worth the risk.

Originally by: DrDooma
This does not make any sense. You killing NCPs, PVP player comes to their aid and you want them to shoot the person trying to save them? If you were being shot by another player and someone came to your aid would you shoot the person trying to help you?



Ok I agree my suggestion seems quiet lame, especially put in that perspective.
But that was the only way I could think of, that would change the current iwin situation the PVPer got, when he performed his ~1min of scanning, and head in to kill us. And/or removing the people that just come in a small cheap frigate to jam our logistics and when our ships begin to go boom or if his actually being hit by us he is getting the hell out

el alasar
Posted - 2011.01.28 09:57:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: el alasar on 28/01/2011 09:59:05
regarding salics analysis i agree. pve players in missions have no chance against pvp people coming in, which is not as is it supposed to be i think. i dont even start to shoot back anymore and just accept the fact i just missed looking at local and the scanner for a few seconds...

a very interesting idea was this one, and this might really make sense:

Originally by: Salic

Solution :
My suggestion would be to increase the damage output in the missions(to somewhat resembling a players damage output) and adjust the tanking ability equally.



it is sad that for pvp its just the rule of thumb to fit a large buffer and deal more damage to his buffer before you are popped. in pve you need a stable tank to sustain damage for a long time, which is the other extreme. to balance this it might really make sense to increase repper abilities and also increases mission npc damage output. this way the firepower of pvp ships is reduced in relation to the firepower the pve is tanking in mission.

also nice side effects from my point of view might be:
- see actually repper fittings in pvp
- make fights last longer

HeliosGal
Caldari
Posted - 2011.01.28 10:54:00 - [8]
 

scout and an unprobable tengu fit just go sit afk in low sec for us pirates its the most frustrating thing

Korg Leaf
Super Batungwaa Ninja Warriors
0ccupational Hazzard
Posted - 2011.01.28 11:19:00 - [9]
 

If gate guns start scramming it should be like player scrams and not pos scrams. Although I don't see what the problem is with having to dodge pvper's to run lvl 5's in low, that's your risk to get your reward, cause lets face it there is little risk in the actual missions themselves.
You shouldn't be attempting them solo anyway, I'm fairly sure they have always been intended to be a group mission.

el alasar
Posted - 2011.01.29 03:12:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: HeliosGal
scout and an unprobable tengu fit just go sit afk in low sec for us pirates its the most frustrating thing


i agree, but it doesnt make sense that a CRUISER must be used to run missions in lowsec to get peace. ever seen a non-probable BS? well, i guess new ships are coming eventually...


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only