open All Channels
seplocked Missions & Complexes
blankseplocked Dynamic Agent Quality - Not coming to TQ
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6]

Author Topic

Maluvada Trenstor
Posted - 2011.03.29 01:36:00 - [151]
 

The dynamic agent quality would have been a great idea, ah well...

Agent divisions: How about removing the divisions completely and each agent can be asked for a specific type of missions?

Regarding security bonus: The security-bracket is the only thing, which should matter. For the agents at the border it would be awesome if it would be possible to ask for missions, which are only in high-sec. Or you could ask for missions in low-sec, which give a proper low-sec payout.

Theodoric Darkwind
Gallente
PonyWaffe
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.03.29 04:57:00 - [152]
 

Edited by: Theodoric Darkwind on 29/03/2011 04:59:29
Originally by: Nauplius
If this is actually true...

...stealth Amarr FW nerf?

As partial compensation for having one of the least desired LP of the four militia's as well as one of the harder solos, we did at least get the only (I think) Q20 agent in FW.

But now everyone will have them, meaning system security becomes the differentiator. And we only have one 0.1 system (hub moves from Huola to Kurniainen?). Unless enough missions are run to change the agent quality in that case maybe the Gallente/Caldari front gets an advantage over ours in that they have more systems and more low security systems to spread out over...


Amarr and minnie FW also have to deal with living next to Amamake, that alone makes your FW missions and doing anything in general more dangerous than the Gallente/Caldari front. Staying in one spot for more than about 15 min in metropolis lowsec and you stand a really good chance of being hotdropped by pirates.

Dek'athor
Posted - 2011.03.29 06:59:00 - [153]
 

Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Quick update:


The removal of agent quality is a recent decision as suggested earlier. Team BFF are still figuring the specifics out, so stay tuned for updates on that front.


Make the 1.0 security +20 quality agent pay out the same high LP as the 0.5 sec +20 quality agent. A adjustment to the order of 85-90% of current highest LP payout in highsec for their respective branches may be in order to maintain overall isk/LP influx (i.e. 0.5 security +20 L4 quality agent now pays 8500 LP with max skills for a difficult combat mission, make him pay out 7500 LP, make every other combat L4 agent pay out the same 7500 LP regardless of the security status of the system the agent is in)

Done.



Reasons:
1. Small to no change in economy. Currently people are crowding the 0.5-0.6 sec agents for the increased LP payout
2. After the proposed change, other sec high quality agents currently not being run (0.8-1.0 security) will see more action. Agent selection will no longer depend on system security.
3. Mission runner diffusion purpose: partially achieved! -> missioners will tend to crowd close-by multiple L4 agents and or existing trade hubs.
4. Carebear approval: granted!

Counter proposal to further distribute mission runners:

Make combat agents offer "ringed" missions:
Get mission in system 1. You need to kill stuff in system 2
In system 2 there is another combat agent, he wants you to kill stuff in system 3
(etc-etc-etc)
In system 3 there is yet another agent, he sends you back to kill stuff in system 1

In a high efficiency highly skilled missioning boat you'd clear a "ring" in 1-2 max 3 hours. It will create trade hubs all along the ring and will distribute missioners along it. "Rings" should have several branches possible to further increase this missioner spreading effect.

Kazacy
Caldari
Silent Overwatch
S I L E N T.
Posted - 2011.03.29 08:18:00 - [154]
 

From a ninja side if the lp will be reduced it means that salvage/loot will grow in value (for average lazy carebear) so it's ok. Also this can open another interesting posibility: if more ppl. will farm good lvl4 missions (such as blockade or ae) maybe i can ransom those missions Very Happy

Soldarius
Caldari
Peek-A-Boo Bombers
Posted - 2011.03.29 08:55:00 - [155]
 

Edited by: Soldarius on 29/03/2011 09:02:47
Originally by: Dek'athor
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Quick update:

The removal of agent quality is a recent decision as suggested earlier. Team BFF are still figuring the specifics out, so stay tuned for updates on that front.


Make the 1.0 security +20 quality agent pay out the same high LP as the 0.5 sec +20 quality agent. A adjustment to the order of 85-90% of current highest LP payout in highsec for their respective branches may be in order to maintain overall isk/LP influx (i.e. 0.5 security +20 L4 quality agent now pays 8500 LP with max skills for a difficult combat mission, make him pay out 7500 LP, make every other combat L4 agent pay out the same 7500 LP regardless of the security status of the system the agent is in)

Done.


Not done. Your reasoning is faulty. What incentive will missioners have to move to a new agent, thus alleviating over-crowding/mission-hubs, if all high-sec level 4 agents are the same? Nothing will change. Only new players will use the higher-sec level 4s, and that will just encourage them to stay in deep high-sec. May as well just anchor cans that read "Welcome to USSR."

The problem is not the security status bonus to mission rewards, but the agent level/quality system, which CCP Dropbear has indicated is going away.

Get rid of agent quality, implement mission quality. Every mission will have a minimum standing required to accept the mission. Each agent has a set number of missions available at any one time. Every time a mission is completed or failed, it gets replaced by a random quality mission of the correct type. (combat, etc.) If only the high-quality missions are being done, the list will soon be entirely populated by lower quality missions, and the agent will in effect start saying "Sorry, there's nothing better available right now. You'll have to do some busy-work until something better comes up."

At this point you can either run some lower quality missions hoping for a better mission to come up or you can relocate elsewhere while missioners of lower standings clear the lower quality missions.

A disproportionate number of high quality mission farmers would quickly drive the mission quality into the ground. Likewise, too many noobs or low standing toons would make them unusable. However, an agent with a healthy population of pilots of various standings will have a regular rotation of various quality missions, allowing for any agent to function at all levels for any players wishing to run missions. This will encourage more variety in players, more variety in the market, and a more dynamic PvE experience for everyone.

As for security status, I believe that it is appropriate for missions in lower sec status systems to offer better rewards. However, the difference between any 2 high-sec, lo-sec, or nul-sec systems should be minimal, if any. How about a 3-tiered system with substantial increases for low and nul-sec? 50% bonus for low, and 100% bonus for nul?

Before the carebears cry "nul-buff only benefits nul-sec BFF alliances!", nul-sec alliances have plenty to do without running missions in unimproved NPC sov space. But with the upcoming anomaly nerf, this may be just what is needed to replace the huge loss of personal income, stimulate neglected content, and continue to encourage player movement into nulsec.

Edited for clarity and grammar.

Headlong
Katzbalger Industries
Posted - 2011.03.29 09:42:00 - [156]
 

Originally by: Soldarius


As for security status, I believe that it is appropriate for missions in lower sec status systems to offer better rewards. However, the difference between any 2 high-sec, lo-sec, or nul-sec systems should be minimal, if any. How about a 3-tiered system with substantial increases for low and nul-sec? 50% bonus for low, and 100% bonus for nul?

Before the carebears cry "nul-buff only benefits nul-sec BFF alliances!", nul-sec alliances have plenty to do without running missions in unimproved NPC sov space. But with the upcoming anomaly nerf, this may be just what is needed to replace the huge loss of personal income, stimulate neglected content, and continue to encourage player movement into nulsec.

Edited for clarity and grammar.


That way the reward difference between low and nullsec would be too high, considering that nullsec missionrunner also benefit from having access to much more profitable factions. What is true is that the differences between running missions in 0.4 and 0.1 should be removed for example since the real level of security is the same anywhere in lowsec and more determined by the kind of players that live around you. I'm for one really interested how fast the quality will degrade and how far degradation is taken. If it hits too fast and too hard it will probably also spell the end of a the last lowsec bears, namely those who are running missions in those low sec hub. Because in the end high sec is the only place where players can switch their agent with ease.

Aderata Nonkin
Amarr
Posted - 2011.03.29 13:17:00 - [157]
 

6 pages and not a single person has provided essential arguments why this change is bad for the community/game.

Xercodo
Amarr
Xovoni Directorate
Posted - 2011.03.29 21:41:00 - [158]
 

After talking with some others about the removal of quality we came to the conclusion that they should make the standing effect rewards more with how it effect effective quality now

finally rewarding those of us with a 10.0 standing with a particular agent with something a bit more substantial

Taurin Herock
Posted - 2011.04.04 15:44:00 - [159]
 

Since it sounds like there will be no dynamic agent quality, the expected effect is that people will simply run missions for the most conveniently located agents. The new mission hubs will be determined by the distance to convenient market hubs, or trade routes.

My point is that if you are making this change in an effort to thin out the mission hubs and distribute high sec mission running activities more evenly over several systems, then simply removing agent quality is not likely to have the desired effect.

Maverick2011
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2011.04.04 16:25:00 - [160]
 

Originally by: Xercodo
After talking with some others about the removal of quality we came to the conclusion that they should make the standing effect rewards more with how it effect effective quality now

finally rewarding those of us with a 10.0 standing with a particular agent with something a bit more substantial



THIS. Yea we doing a gadzillion of missions for these agents and sometimes i think they are paying even LESS than the normal ones.

Liorah
Posted - 2011.04.05 13:32:00 - [161]
 

Originally by: Maverick2011
THIS. Yea we doing a gadzillion of missions for these agents and sometimes i think they are paying even LESS than the normal ones.

Combining this with the idea that agents give random missions, it would make sense that more of the "good" missions would generally be assigned to the most trusted and most loyal players.

Cyberus
Caldari
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.04.11 17:33:00 - [162]
 

Edited by: Cyberus on 11/04/2011 17:33:38
Originally by: Soldarius
Edited by: Soldarius on 29/03/2011 09:02:47
Originally by: Dek'athor
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Quick update:

[b]text


text


May as well just anchor cans that read "Welcome to USSR."



How you know USSR have been? Let me guess from news paper?

Victor BlueStone
Posted - 2011.04.12 02:30:00 - [163]
 

I think this dynamic agent quality proposal from CCP is a very bad idea. I hope CCP thinks VERY hard about it because it has consequences
and unintended side effects but that's a debate for another day.

As for the removal of agent quality, for me it's a nerf to mission rewards. If all agents are unrated then what will be the determining
factor on pay? Will system security be a factor? Location? Skills? What will be the base payout for a mission? This just enables CCP to
hide how agents will pay and give missions. I sense a RNG being implemented where I get a 0.01% chance to get AE while having a 99%
chance for something like "The Wildcat Strike" every time I visit any combat agent. I am not looking forward to this change. Sad

Kogh Ayon
Posted - 2011.04.12 03:06:00 - [164]
 

Edited by: Kogh Ayon on 12/04/2011 03:07:35
Originally by: Victor BlueStone
I think this dynamic agent quality proposal from CCP is a very bad idea. I hope CCP thinks VERY hard about it because it has consequences
and unintended side effects but that's a debate for another day.

As for the removal of agent quality, for me it's a nerf to mission rewards. If all agents are unrated then what will be the determining
factor on pay? Will system security be a factor? Location? Skills? What will be the base payout for a mission? This just enables CCP to
hide how agents will pay and give missions. I sense a RNG being implemented where I get a 0.01% chance to get AE while having a 99%
chance for something like "The Wildcat Strike" every time I visit any combat agent. I am not looking forward to this change. Sad

I'm really happy and looking forward to the dynamic agent quality change.It will makes high-sec more comtetitive and high-sec PVP war-dec,gankage alliance will form. Different mission hub will have different holing alliance.And then they may probably turn in to PVP alliances.

It's fairely a good idea I think CCP ought to consider it again.

Horizonist
Yulai Guard 2nd Fleet
Yulai Federation
Posted - 2011.04.12 08:08:00 - [165]
 

Originally by: Kogh Ayon
Edited by: Kogh Ayon on 12/04/2011 03:07:35
Originally by: Victor BlueStone
I think this dynamic agent quality proposal from CCP is a very bad idea. I hope CCP thinks VERY hard about it because it has consequences
and unintended side effects but that's a debate for another day.

As for the removal of agent quality, for me it's a nerf to mission rewards. If all agents are unrated then what will be the determining
factor on pay? Will system security be a factor? Location? Skills? What will be the base payout for a mission? This just enables CCP to
hide how agents will pay and give missions. I sense a RNG being implemented where I get a 0.01% chance to get AE while having a 99%
chance for something like "The Wildcat Strike" every time I visit any combat agent. I am not looking forward to this change. Sad

I'm really happy and looking forward to the dynamic agent quality change.It will makes high-sec more comtetitive and high-sec PVP war-dec,gankage alliance will form. Different mission hub will have different holing alliance.And then they may probably turn in to PVP alliances.

It's fairely a good idea I think CCP ought to consider it again.


It has been cancelled and is not happening. The only thing that will be removed, most likely, is agent quality.

Chesty McJubblies
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2011.04.12 17:24:00 - [166]
 

Bah, the repercussions might have been interesting.

Angus McSpork
Caldari
Posted - 2011.04.20 17:51:00 - [167]
 

Originally by: Xercodo
After talking with some others about the removal of quality we came to the conclusion that they should make the standing effect rewards more with how it effect effective quality now

finally rewarding those of us with a 10.0 standing with a particular agent with something a bit more substantial


This.

Perhaps let the 'dynamic agent quality' be on an individual player basis. It makes sense that the more missions I run for NPC X the more he'd like me and pay me.

The best part is that we already have the mechanic in place (agent standings to individual) so there shouldn't be any need to reinvent the wheel--perhaps just change the treads about a bit.

I'm sure mission hubs will still be mission hubs for the lazy (and therefor ninjas will still have targets) but it would also give the OPTION for motivated players to move out of Umokka and rework an agent standing with another L4 agent in a quieter area knowing that they'd get the better rewards in the end.

I'd rather have OPTIONS instead of being forced to (since a place like Umokka would crash overnight if the agent quality depletion mechanic was introduced)

Sea Sharp
Posted - 2011.04.20 19:57:00 - [168]
 

Damm. The answer was staring me in the face all along! Simply put more high quality level 4 agents around high-sec. Mission-hub lag solved... and pretty much as it used to be. No. I'm not going to go run missions in low sec because the quality is better. That isn't how it works.

Thanks for listening.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6]

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