open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked Bloggers #54, So my Agent called and has this offer...
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Pages: first : previous : ... 17 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 : last (25)

Author Topic

Posted - 2007.03.10 09:40:00 - [661]

The changes would accomplish the opposite of what Oveur intends: less people will go into low sec, and not more. Many use lvl 4 missions to afford their PvP activities. So, cut the lvl 4 income, and you cut the PvP activities.

Posted - 2007.03.12 06:13:00 - [662]

Originally by: Depko
Please developers, if you talk about economy, then use defined economy terms.
You can find "inflation" , "GDP" and other terms on e.g. wikipedia.
but what is a MONEY SINK ???

if you want to regulate inflation (which is an economy term) then try to use some legal economy tools and describe it with legal economy terms.

i think you understand destroying ships in pvp as a MONEY SINK.
and you somehow ended with the result, that pvp (destroying ships and fitting) results in lowering inflation.
the opposite is the true !!!
destroyind items you lower the supply on market (less items can be sold) and you rise the demand (new ships and items have to bought), resulting in higher inflation.
from monetary point of view, you lower the aggregate ammount of goods on marker while keeping the same sum of money in the system. which again results in inflation.


if you want to ruin mission runners and force them do do pvp, then dont hide un der false economy statemens.

it's pretty clear from the above that you don't understand economics. for example in pvp ships and modules go away but no isk are actually removed from the game.

there is a lovely discussion of economics in eve buried in the back files somewhere if you care to go hunting for it that will clearly explain much that seems to have you confused now.

Spix 'UK
Posted - 2007.03.12 19:12:00 - [663]

Edited by: Spix ''UK on 12/03/2007 19:08:47
O great.. more more nerfs.. for people who play EVE the PVE way... Great.. like I didnt like missions enuff.. ur goin to stop there isk.. ? What the ***** is it with CCP really.. more & more isk SINKS... its a joke.. to think I got 2 accounts for another year.. of this silly sinks u keep putting in .. eve was so much better back in july 2006 .. be4 you kept hitting missions with the nerf bat...

Tell me how are the players in the noob corps.. goin to gain isk.. on the corp level ? ..

Shalliseria Korvosi
Posted - 2007.03.13 04:01:00 - [664]

I disagree with quite a bit of what was said in the blog. Here we are, those of us who like our current mission running. Yes, it's not pvp, but so what, if I want to pvp, I'll run out to low sec and do it, if I want to mission run, I don't want to have to worry about some griefer coming in and messing up the mission or trying to kill me. But, that's become a possibility now anyways. So, I'm going to explain this, and yes, I'm annoyed, why? Let's review....

Level 3's used to be the top, then level 4's came out, we bounced, adapted and tried again, now we can take them, tho you can still lose your ship if you get over zealous.
Then, somewhere down the road, the powers that be didn't like how things were going.

So, they removed security status changes on killing mission rats.
Then, they reduced bounty's.
Then, they took out sisters of eve and interbus so we would be forced to lose our standings with very little effort and tremendous amounts of work to get them back, or stay with 2 empires for the rest of our lives. Yeah, you forced us on this one. Gave us bad effects and didn't really bother explaining it beforehand.
Then, missions got redone and bounty's were reduced, yet again.
Then, all missions are being moved to deadspace because it was easier to make a bunch of new missions and get them out to us..... right. When?
Then, it's, no more cans, now they're wrecks, slowing us down, fine, I can handle that.
Then its, say hello to the new probe system, by the way, unintended (yeah, as if) side effect, someone can come in and screw up your mission.
Now this.... you guys just keep on heaping it on us, we never had a say in the past about any of the changes, and we obviously don't have a say here either, so why act like we do?

Now, if I had an honest say in this, fine, here it is. Leave the 4's alone, give us new missions but don't change it again. It's fine! Work from there, create all new content for 5's and up, but leave the lower levels alone! A lot of us like the way it is now. And hey, while we're at it, give a lesser version of 5's in high sec, so we can SEE what the difference is and decide if we want to risk it all running into lower sec, where you're trying to force us anyways.

I won't even get started on what the most likely result of this change is, you'll find out like everything else. I still remember the flop with the ship insurance.

As for you thinking this will change what's happening on the market... hate to break it to you, but again, all you're doing is overthinking it, then making something far more complicated than it needs to be and not affecting what you wanted to affect. This is the way you guys have always done it, and you still haven't learned from past experiences that it doesn't work out the way you want it too. Here's a hint, you want to fix the market problem, talk to us, we've got tons of ideas you can use. Try that out. Wow, what a concept.

As for forcing us, I don't care how many times you look in the mirror and say, we're not forcing them to do anything, reality is always ugly. Plain simple fact is, you are putting the paths out and forcing us to either go with it, or go elsewhere. That's a force. So is the constant pushing towards low sec space, I'm really tired of that theme. I moved out there, yet you keep pushing.

I've lost too many friends because you guys are so busy wrecking something that works fine by changing it, and now, if you persist yet again, then I too shall be forced to find a more emjoyable game elsewhere. 4's are fine as they are, leave them alone, 4's are fine AS IS, just add more missions like you said you were going to way back when, and you'll have no problem with me. Otherwise, my accounts are going like so many others have gone, in the deleted pile.

But I'm not forcing you, I'm giving you options, it's your choice.... but I'm not forcing you.....

Warden Nightstar
Posted - 2007.03.13 05:34:00 - [665]

Edited by: Warden Nightstar on 13/03/2007 05:33:09
Edited by: Warden Nightstar on 13/03/2007 05:32:35
I'd like to suggest mainly fixing the existing Level 4 missions, instead of lowering their overall difficulty or assigning some to Level 5. There are some serious aggro bugs in some of them, or situations where you get pocket aggro and it's absolutely suicidal. For example, the Enemies Abound series. Most people I know will not touch it, because missions 1 and 5 are death traps. You should never have to deal with both massive numbers of scramblers and full pocket aggro unless you seriously screw up. If you handle the mission intelligently, and are properly prepared and have a well-developed character, you shouldn't die. With some of these, you still do.

Richard Aiel
Umbra Exitium
Order Of The Unforgiving
Posted - 2007.03.13 05:49:00 - [666]

All I gotta say about this newest idea...

Welcome to WoW.

Oh wait... no thats not right...

Posted - 2007.03.13 15:50:00 - [667]

Edited by: Zzazzt on 13/03/2007 15:48:21
I <3 this blog.

Really, truly love it.

The only issue I have with it is lvl5 agents in empire. Overpowered agents & soveriegnty are the two major gamebreakers in Eve atm. I feel that the fixes for them are so overdue that they need a big-assed nerfbat, not the odd tweak.

IMO, the level ladder should be as follows:

1: 1.0 - 0.8
2: 0.7 - 0.6
3: 0.5 - 0.4
4: 0.3 - 0.2
5: 0.2 - 0.0
6+: 0.0 only

Getting rich in empire via any route other than manufacturing and/or trading should *not* be possible.

Don't want to train capships? Buhu2u.

Don't want to leave hisec? Unlucky.

God forbid one should have to PLAY WITH SOMEONE ELSE in a MULTIPLAYER game....

It's high time people had their "Revelations" and started playing the game properly rather than the ridiculous carebear eve simulator gravy train that "Exodus" created.

Nice one Ov Cool

Dragon Lox
Posted - 2007.03.14 02:13:00 - [668]

plain and simple. leave the game alone.

Posted - 2007.03.14 13:09:00 - [669]

Edited by: DeathToHell on 14/03/2007 13:05:42
Originally by: Zzazzt
Edited by: Zzazzt on 13/03/2007 15:48:21God forbid one should have to PLAY WITH SOMEONE ELSE in a MULTIPLAYER game....

EvE is more than popping newbs in lo-sec !!

Not everyone wants to play the game how you play the game. FACT ! GET OVER IT.

You are gonna have to get used to the fact that people play the game how they enjoy it. Thats what they are paying for, thats what they should get.

Posted - 2007.03.14 14:52:00 - [670]

Edited by: Zzazzt on 14/03/2007 15:20:46
Originally by: DeathToHell
EvE is more than popping newbs in lo-sec !!

What's that got to do with lvl4+ missions?

Reading 4tw.

Originally by: DeathToHell
Not everyone wants to play the game how you play the game. FACT ! GET OVER IT.

CCP doesn't like any gameplay that has stupendous reward for virtually zero risk. They're also not too keen on 2-year old players sitting in their pimped CNRs doing missions in hisec who've never been outside their n00bcorp. FACT! GET OVER IT.

Originally by: DeathToHell
You are gonna have to get used to the fact that people play the game how they enjoy it. Thats what they are paying for, thats what they should get.

On the contrary: You are gonna have to get used to the fact that CCP will continue to make changes to the game that brings it more in line with it's vision, quite in spite of the mewlings of silly carebears.

The Pegasus Project
Posted - 2007.03.14 20:01:00 - [671]

Originally by: Zzazzt

On the contrary: You are gonna have to get used to the fact that CCP will continue to make changes to the game that brings it more in line with it's vision, quite in spite of the mewlings of silly carebears.

And in that event ccp will have to get used to the fact that it will lose those carebears (who make up a far larger percentage of the playerbase) untill eve-online is no longer profitable and cannot continue development.

If eve is to continue to grow and prosper, ccp MUST cater for ALL playstyles wether they like it or not.

Failure to do so will result in lost subscriptions and the demise of the game.

Kelso Bluebane
Un4seen Development
Posted - 2007.03.15 04:59:00 - [672]

A few observations :-

1. Introduction of 20 new missions would dilute the frequency of the high paying missions thus making their removal a pointless excercise

2. Mission runners in pimped out CNR's are most likely Alts of a PVP players

3. Its about time NPC trade goods were completely removed from the game as they are a far bigger 'cash cow' than any level 4 mission

4. GTC have ruined the status quo,though they help alot of people out

5. Carebears in carriers is a recipe for disaster, quote i saw somewhere. please confine there use to level 6 missions

6. Its quoted frequently there is a vision for the game, please make a firm decision on that vision. If it involves a pure PVP goal make the choice and just remove every agent above level 2. Instead add better spawns in low sec and 0.0. those who wish to leave will and the rest will adapt. ATM its just a lingering death. Alternatively leave stuff as it is and settle for sucessful game with a large playerbase that are relatively happy.

7. Find a way to decrease the cost of fitting a decent mission fit ship, to many items are still to expensive. An average carebear will not under any circumstances risk losing that much isk

8. Completely revamp missions away from spamming missles at a blob of ships to somewhere nearer an actual PVP fight

9. Revamp the test server and let folks try out carriers dreads etc (without the skills) its a massive commitment both time and isk wise. it might actually give them a reason to go to low sec and live

Captain Darling
Posted - 2007.03.15 08:10:00 - [673]

I think the blog states the obvious and short sighted goal of CCP - more PVP.

You have to ask why ; the answer - low cost development.

If you force people into "PVP" as in its traditional meaning then then the pressure for new and inventive content is relaxed somewhat. You just put people in a room,toss in some baseball bats and say "its ok to hit each other".

Simply put its cheaper for them.

As someone said at the beginning of this post; social engineering.Emphasis on Big Corps,Big Battles,Big Alliances no room for the little guy either solo or small corp without some alliance (and consequent responsibilities/drawbacks)

More and more stuff moved into 0.4 and below will not move people into that area, people who do not want confrontation in their gaming experience will just not play Eve.....

Of course there is always the chance that we don't play Eve AS MUCH but still keep paying our subsciption, mmmm who would that benefit ?

No additional server load but constant revenue.....


Posted - 2007.03.15 12:22:00 - [674]

First of all, EVE is a nice game as it is.

I welcome the idea of distributing rewards among the players who did the mission. The idea of missions for groups of players are also very good. Loyalty points stored per corporation will be very nice as well.

But throwing level 4+ missions into low security systems, will only make pirates and corporations, already living in low security, richer and richer.
Most of the times i was doing a mission in low sec, a pirate just scanned me and blew me to pieces while i was doing the mission. It would only be fair if a pirate who is using this strategy would get aggro from npc's as well. Because both players would need a mixed setup for pve- and pvp-combat.

If you worried about inflation then create harder missions in high security. Players start loosing ships that way and the insurance only covers the ship and not fitted modules. This will also help with your intention of players doing more missions as groups.

Low sec Alliances & Corporations already get the extra benefits of attribute boosters, faction loot, rare ore, moon mining, ded 4+ complexes.
Don't give them the level 4+ missions as well.

Stegnat Gless
Posted - 2007.03.16 00:01:00 - [675]

9 things I'd like to see for missions.
Some parallel the ideas in the dev blog, and others might address some of the problems.

1) Variation in mission difficulty and in-mission rewards (loot, bounties, mining) by system sec status.

So, if you're new to a mission level you can start off in very high sec with easier versions and lower rewards, then move to lower sec as you improve.

2) Mission offer rate for some missions varies by sec status of the system the agent is in. So, tougher, more 'lucrative' missions are more likely from lower-sec agents.

3) Two-Step missions with locked deadspace.
The first step is a mission to recover an encrypted data chip for return to the agent.
In the second step the agent has analysed the chip and extracted a password for a deadspace gate (or a shield around a deadspace gate). Anyone with the (randomly generated) password set as their Ship POS Shield password can access the gate and enter the deadspace to undertake the mission. Hence preventing interference once in the second step, but allowing gangs.

4) Multiple entry-point deadspace missions.
Basically several gate locations leading to the same deadspace pocket, with different experiences depending upon which you use. (e.g. Warp close to group A, immediate aggro; Warp close to group B, immediate aggro; mid-range, no aggro; long-range)
The gate locations could all be revealed by the agent, or just one (randomly?) with the others detectable by probes.
Extend to have multiple routes to the main objective - like Worlds Collide.

5) Mission environment state persists over DT.
Reduce mission farming opportunities. If a stage is cleared of NPCs, don't respawn the NPCs in that stage after DT. Maintain the size of asteroids in the stage.
(May need some alternative if an item needs to be retrieved, but gets accidentally lost)

6) Gang versions of missions
If you are in a gang, your agent has an alternative action, "We want something to do..." that gives a mission requiring a gang to complete. This could be implied by tougher NPCs, or explicit, with multiple objectives that have to be completed in different locations simultaneously.

7) Use of Mini-professions in missions (possibly meaning a non-solo mission)
e.g. Requiring the use of probes, hacking, salvaging etc.

8) Actively involved friendly NPCs.
Friendly NPCs in ships in the mission - e.g. Escort a cargo transport; Respond to a distress call and keep the NPC alive; Get an emissary to his meeting and back (maybe it goes well, maybe badly);
The NPC is AI controlled, or could be integrated into the Gang/Fleet system.

9) Wandering Agents.
Basically agents who aren't always found at a station, nor at a specific location in space. Specialists in espionage and covert missions, they can be difficult to track down, and move on regularly.
They give rewarding missions for those who make the effort, but they may need to be tracked down again
to claim the reward.
Mixes Exploration and Escalating Paths.

Sharp Dressed Man
Posted - 2007.03.16 10:22:00 - [676]

Always did like spacegames (elite frontier, Freelancer and stuff like that). It gives you the feeling to be free in that large universe.
More and more eve takes away some of that freedom.

I dont have a problem with l5 missions for fleet missions or low sec missions.
If you nerf and change l4 missions as they are now please also nerf:
0.0 belt ratting (3x 1.8m bs spawns is allmost 6m in 5 minutes)
0.0 mining. 50m per hour !!!
0.0 complex farmed 24/7
T2 corps dominating the market making billions from poor mission runners.

I dont farm missions i loot and salvage and i like it. dont change l4 missions.

Masada Akiva
Tribe Research and Development
Posted - 2007.03.16 20:20:00 - [677]

I'm not an expert in EVE economics, I'm just a paying player.

I like being able to log in and just play against the machine for some low stress fun. Occassionally, I like to fly in to low sec and play with the pirates. Unfortunately, the power curve is hugely steep between Empire and Low Sec space. I like the idea of more content for the whole game. I'm not excited about being forced in to the meat grinder to get at a PvE like mission. But then I'm far from that end goal anyway.

I think CCP needs to realize that Low Sec space is virtually impossible to play in for the first year of game play. That's a long time to keep a new player interested. I think all players who play long enough will gravitate to Low Sec as their skills and wallets grow so a great emphasis on moving them there isn't really necessary. I like a little attention given to the High Sec players enjoyment of the game.

Posted - 2007.03.19 02:35:00 - [678]

Edited by: Windryder on 19/03/2007 02:42:38
Originally by: Kaptein Trefot
Edited by: Kaptein Trefot on 21/02/2007 23:33:44
Edited by: Kaptein Trefot on 21/02/2007 23:23:04
There is a lot of carebears in this game and the only universal issue that angers carebears is an attempt to force your game-play upon them. There are a lot of high sec mission-runners and those ppl simply donít want to play the PvP game you are offering in low sec and 0.0.

If your 'idea' of how you intended this game to be is more important than your business, than this is the way to go. If you want the player-base in eve to grow, you should definitely rethink the consequences of these changes to high sec missions.

Force a playing style on a carebear and it will be the last time you see him.

My first reaction was "Great, more targets for the PvPers and less options for the Carebears."

So when do we get something specifically to benefit us? How about doubling the ME research slots in Empire? Or making the costs of them demand-based? Or making higher-technology items more available in Empire than in the wild-uncontrolled regions of 0.0? If I want something hi-tech I don't go foraging around in the battlefields of the Congo.

Next thing we'll see asteroid fields getting nerfed at 0.8 and above. It all just seems geared towards trying to push us into PvP space. Pretty soon all mining will have to be done in low-sec. Why not just take the quick route and do away with Concord instead of trying to clandestinely shuffle us into PvP space?

It seems like the lions share of new "features" and "improvements" are aimed towards making PvPers happier. What if you don't want to PvP? What if you want to roleplay? What if you don't have a ruthless streak? Should we leave? When do we get something so cool that people in 0.0 get jealous and would come to Empire but don't want to loose PvPing?

The two people who got me addicted to EVE (and who are ultimately responsible for getting no less than 10 active subscriptions added to the game) had this to say about the proposed level 4 missioning changes:

"Well at least there is a Warhammer 40K MMORG in the pipeline."


Hermits Rest
Posted - 2007.03.19 02:48:00 - [679]

Edited by: riprjak on 19/03/2007 02:59:39
Edited by: riprjak on 19/03/2007 02:49:35
Edited by: riprjak on 19/03/2007 02:46:24
Originally by: Verone

If people want to fight high end spawns, and get rich, they need to take the risk to do so.

Agreed; However, it costs a raven worth of insurance and about 430mil in fittings for that no risk.

The proposal to change missions (which I guardedly support) has the problem that it apparently suggests we go from no risk to risk which greatly outweighs reward.

So, *IF* I have to move to 0.4 space for decent missions; so be it.

*IF* said missions generate enough reward to replace the ship and fittings I will be losing to pvpers on a probably daily basis; I will go.
*IF* the reward is insufficient to the task of providing me the resources required to simply tread water; then I will leave.

I am good at PVE and want missions that are fun and logical; great. I have no idea how to even begin being successful at pvp and there is no way to learn other than repeatedly losing your ship... something I cant yet afford to do by farming *current* level 4s in safe space without nerfed loot/bounty/reward.

So I agree with your statement but not your logic, and like the proposed improvements in missions; but fear that they will make the game unplayable for me.

cest la vie.

Cmnd Smurf
Posted - 2007.03.19 07:16:00 - [680]

This looks like it benifits the Griefers to the detrimnet of the PVE'ers
Now not only can they just wardec a "nice & easy" corp using PVE to try and build some weath to move to 0.0, now if the grierfers can't come in to 0.5 CCP are all but forcing PVE's to go out in to <0.5.

When it costs 3 bill in isk to get the skills and hull for a tier 1 carrier, how do CCP expect any small groups to be able to achive this? between getting almost no rewards in >0.5 and the cost of constanly replacing ships in <0.5 to to priates busting into your missions, Small groups will not be able to build the weath needed to be able to grow to a point where they can consider 0.0 with out vasseling them selves to some allaince. where is the choice in that?

"We're not forcing anyone to do anything. You have the choice to do what you want in EVE"
your choices are to PVP, become a slave, or get nowhere.

I'll stay to see what it turns like, and I realy do hope its not as bad as it looks, but CCP should start thinking, the 40k MMO is comming, and if there is a real space alt to eve quite a few ppl will jump ship cause they are tired of getting bent over for the PVP combat ppl to have easy targets.

Merak Thrawn
Posted - 2007.03.20 13:44:00 - [681]

Edited by: Merak Thrawn on 20/03/2007 13:44:16
As a dedicated carebear mission runner that really enjoys the option of relaxing while playing and hanging out with mates and ones tiny little corp of supernice people (i don't want to be in big corps / alliances).

If they really nerf lvl 3's / 4's and the ISK in high sec, well... I'm in high sec because I don't like the way PvP works in EvE. If they want to force me to PvP and risk extremely expensive mission fitted battleships to make isk, well that's 2 accounts that won't be playing anymore.

I really do like that they are looking into missions and expanding that aspect of the game, but they're doing it the wrong way imho. They're fundamentally changing the game for the carebears, forcing people who have played for several years and have no desire to touch PvP. I respect that EvE is very pvp minded, but as it is now the carebears still have other options to enjoy the game. If they remove those options I just don't see EvE being what i'd like it to be for me. I like the fact that I can play it how i want to and still enjoy it, i don't like PvP in EvE and i don't like being forced somewhere to make a living.

Will have to see how it works out, but right now i'm very worried that these changes will be the end of my time in EvE.

The Tuskers
Posted - 2007.03.20 17:54:00 - [682]

Good changes overall, just one question?

If the new lvl 4 missions are made easier, meaining you can literally sleepwalk through them in a bs. What will happen in lvl 5? Baring in mind that those missions will allow capitalships won't that kinda obsolete BS'es as ships to run missions in, if i can just use a BC for lvl 4 missions?

Ex Coelis
The Bantam Menace
Posted - 2007.03.20 19:16:00 - [683]

Getting rich in empire via any route other than manufacturing and/or trading should *not* be possible.

Thank you for telling me how you want me to play the game.

Don't want to train capships? Buhu2u.

Thank you, again, for telling me how you want me to play the game.

Don't want to leave hisec? Unlucky.

Thank you, yet again, for telling me how you want me to play the game.

God forbid one should have to PLAY WITH SOMEONE ELSE in a MULTIPLAYER game....

You are simply wrong (or misinformed) if you think you can't play with others in anything other than lowsec/0.0.

The Suicide Kings
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2007.03.20 21:44:00 - [684]

Hrm. where to start.

More missions good.
More mission variety good.
Sharing rewards good.

More missions in low sec? I do all my missions in low sec thats good.

The only rough part on some of the very few low sec corp/alliances out if there favorite agents arent so hot anymore...and they have to move to a different low sec a rea to get to a good agent.

which will cause a bit of disruption and pain as people complain there prime realestate corp hanger at that sweet max level L4 agent is now fairly worthless..and they cant get a corp hanger at the location of that new L5 agent because he is in a already full station.

So that part will probably cause the most scramble and headache.

over all..change is good.

Posted - 2007.03.25 08:54:00 - [685]

Ok then my reaction

WHAT A LOAD OF BS (no not battleships!)

You're effectively trying to force mission runners into low sec and 0.0. Im currently not in an alliance, i dont feel i would have the time to join and participate in skirmishes. Been there done that, sat at a gate for 3 hours and saw a single interceptor (no thanks). So i wont be going to 0.0. Low sec systems, thats not happening either. How do i possibly fit for PVP and PVE !??! without nerfing my setup in either dept? Why would i risk my 1.5b isk ship against multiple pirates in the system next door to me? I wouldnt FACT.

What attracted me to Eve orignally was that you had a choice of doing what you liked and picking a career for yourself. Ive chosen mission running as i simply dont have the time or inclination to gate camp for days on end. Seeing as mission running isnt going to be very profitable unless you're willing to go into low sec or join an alliance for 0.0 you're going to **** up my income and therefore my enjoyment. Ive been back in Eve for about a month after a 1 year absence, i originally left because of a few things, mainly the bug of releasing a patch to fix 2 bugs and in the process create a ****load of lag for 2 weeks and 10 new bugs. IMO its fine as it is now, leave level4s alone, introduce your other levels and job done. Create more lvl4 agents so we dont have to do them in Saila (unplayable) and ill be your friend.

Either way when my 3 months renewal comes back around ill be seriously looking at whether i continue with eve ... AGAIN.

PS Thanks for making my CNR worth about 3 isk Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes

PPS I cant clarify how ANGRY i am with ppl trying to "make" me do things and make decisions for me. A bit like this **** goverment who try and force you to use public transport instead of cars by sticking road tax up. SMB !!

Special Projects Corp
Posted - 2007.03.26 14:50:00 - [686]

Originally by: Shorin
Originally by: Oveur
Love the feedback though, and keep it coming, but let's not spend too much time on the death of Level 4 and all high-sec mission running. It's changing, more varied with new tools, surely, but it's not the end of the world.

Let's not spend too much time discussing what many people seem to wish to discuss? Are you sure you really love the feedback? Level 4 missions are all I do and now I am supposed to drop the topic?

"Slowly involves the "PvE" player in more "PvP" EVE activity."

I don't know how to say this so you can understand. It is not the speed that matters. I do not, nor will I ever, wish to participate in PvP combat.

I don't use the isk I make in any form of PvP. It goes solely towards improving my ships. As hard as it is for some to understand, that is "fun" to me. The ships never participate in PvP. I do not funnel my isk to an alt that participates in PvP. The isk does not go to an alliance that participates in PvP. I am playing this game in no more a PvP fashion than any other MMORPG I have played. If the fear is inflation, then when I quit over this I'll promise not to give my stuff out to the first person who asks for it. I'll let it vanish in a cloud of pure deflationary extinction.

What's the point of debating this? You don't want me, a carebear PvE player, in the game any longer. That is clear. All we are debating is the "speed" at which you wish to transition me out of the game. You are trying to do anything you can to push me to play in a way I don't wish to play. No amount of carrots worked. No amount of stick will work either. What is also clear is the fact that I really should not complain. It said PvP on the box. It is your game to run the way you see fit.

I'm not trying to whine. Some will see it as that. It is just a series of observations and the ultimate effect of the proposed changes, as it pertains to me. I do not speak for anyone else. It is not my game. I am just one customer of many. Perhaps your changes will improve the game for those who remain. Perhaps it won't. I can't say. I can simply say that you better hope someone comes into replace me and those like me.

Can you sense how I am feeling? Can you sense that I am willing to speak my mind more than I have in the entire time I have been playing (since the first week this game was launched)? Why do you suppose that is? I'll tell you. I have enjoyed this game, but I have nothing to lose. I will quit over this, and that is the first time I have ever felt that way about a proposed change. You can look back through the posts and see that this is true. What proposed change is the problem?

"Slowly involves the "PvE" player in more "PvP" EVE activity."

Might just as well say...

Slowly involves the "PvE" player in ways he does not wish to play.

Why slowly? The carrot didn't work. The stick didn't work. Next comes the forcing. Can't bring it on too quickly or people will quit. Right? Well, can't bring it on slowly either unfortunately. If you believe nothing else I have written, you better believe that.

Look, I'm not trying to flame or upset people. Believe it or not, I'm not all that upset myself. I'm just giving you feedback on how this pertains to me and my account. You've made it clear that mission running in empire space has peaked for those who PvE. If the only challenges coming next are restricted to PvP areas, there is nothing left that the game can offer me. There will always be other games though. Such a shame it has come to this. I did nothing to hurt the experience of other players. I was a non-event. Not exactly a noble profession in a MMORPG, but for 3 years I have been a steady source of income for your company. Maybe, just maybe, you should have let it be.

I am not quite at this point but am very,very close. I am however willing to wait and see how you adjust the game.

Frater Adhuc Excessum
Posted - 2007.03.27 11:43:00 - [687]

For those of us who live off of mish bounties, this is a disaster. It took me the better part of 6 months to efficently run lev 3 mishes enough to actually make a decent buck. Now im reading that I need to find another profession. What about the miners, going to cut their yeilds? Probably not. So this is how we cut inflation huh... Screw the mish runner. Im sure we are to blame for the inflation issues, NOT. This is surely a kick in the pickle for a small corp like my own. Without mish income we are screwed. I beg of you to reconsilder this plan of action, as the folks it will hurt have based their gamplay on them. I will say this, If our income crashes, so will our purchases, and that will affect the market for everyone. So I have till summer to make money before I quit using the market. Great idea. Once we go down, so will everyone else.... Great plan Evil or Very Mad

Hasak Rain
Posted - 2007.04.08 10:42:00 - [688]

Originally by: 5amm
For those of us who live off of mish bounties, this is a disaster. It took me the better part of 6 months to efficently run lev 3 mishes enough to actually make a decent buck. Now im reading that I need to find another profession. What about the miners, going to cut their yeilds? Probably not. So this is how we cut inflation huh... Screw the mish runner. Im sure we are to blame for the inflation issues, NOT. This is surely a kick in the pickle for a small corp like my own. Without mish income we are screwed. I beg of you to reconsilder this plan of action, as the folks it will hurt have based their gamplay on them. I will say this, If our income crashes, so will our purchases, and that will affect the market for everyone. So I have till summer to make money before I quit using the market. Great idea. Once we go down, so will everyone else.... Great plan Evil or Very Mad

Actually, they have nerfed Miners too. Not really noticed or discussed much but all 1.0-0.5 Scordite roids now pop after a couple of cycles of a T2 strip miner. While this isn't really a big deal due to the large amounts on Scordite roids in a given belt, it does slow down mining as you now have to now manually cycle or else you are wasting time.

All the signs point towards CCP not wanting Empire dwellers to be able to earn a decent "in game living" so either move out or accept PvE table scraps.

All of this will definitely backfire on them eventually. There are just too many new games coming out that will give EvE competition.

This situation reminds me of DAOC right before WoW came out all over again. Mythic refused to listen to their customers and payed the price of losing a huge chunk {over half} of their player base when another decent option presented itself. To this day DAOC is on life support waiting for Warhammer to put it out of it's misery.

Jim Sharpe
Posted - 2007.04.09 02:01:00 - [689]

Let's cut to the chase:

People pay to play Eve.
Nobody is going to pay to do something they don't want to do.

Posted - 2007.04.09 17:39:00 - [690]

I dont like the idee doing a difficult lvl5 mission in low secure, everything else is already in low secure.
Heavy Complexen and better exploration, better rocks, better NPC's, now also the missions?
Give nothing to the players who have there fun in empire, is that the deal?
When lvl5 agent allow capital ships to do there missions it is fine but ....?

Pages: first : previous : ... 17 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 : last (25)

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


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only